Intro
Human chimera research is a controversial field of science that involves the introduction of human embryonic stem (hES) cells or human neural stem cells into nonhuman animals, thus creating a human-animal interspecific chimera. With the promise of significantly enhancing health and possibly curing some of the most deadly diseases, humankind has mitigated diverse ethical issues associated with stem cell research. However, the use of human stem cells to create chimeras has generated unusual ethical dilemmas, in particular, whether or not it violates human dignity. In Dr. Inmaculada de Melo-Martin’s article “Chimeras and Human Dignity,” she questions whether human dignity is a useful criterion to evaluate chimera work or other biotechnologies. …show more content…
In the end, de Melo-Martin concludes that existing arguments for and against the claim that chimeras threaten or violate human dignity are not compelling. Dr. Françoise Baylis and Dr. Jason Scott Robert agree with some of the concepts de Melo-Martin argues in their article, “Part-Human Chimeras: Worrying the Facts, Probing the Ethics.” For instance, they admit that the conflicting ideals of what constitutes human dignity and how the creation of chimeras threatens this concept makes it difficult to make a conclusive argument. However, Baylis and Robert argue against the claim that creating human chimeras is immoral based on the species integrity argument. Despite the validity of their claims, however, I maintain that arguments made by proponents and critics are irrelevant since they do not agree on how certain aspect of humanity is threatened by human chimera research. From the arguments presented by either side, it is still uncertain as to whether human dignity is a useful criterion to evaluate chimera work or other …show more content…
Human chimera research has provoked countless moral debates because it is believed that such research runs the risk of transferring bodily components, such as brain structures, that are intimately connected to human dignity-associated capacities to nonhuman animals. De Melo-Martin states that “concern is centered on the possibility that such research might create nonhuman animals with highly developed cognitive and psychological characteristics and capabilities that are usually associated with human beings” (de Melo-Martin, 2008, 1). She elaborates further by explaining that human chimera research is seen as a violation to human dignity because by creating such entities, researchers would enclose a human mind within an animal's body and they would be incapable of exercising any human-dignity-associated capacities they might possess, due to physical limitations. Thus, experimenting on such entities without their consent, which researchers are unlikely to request of the chimera, is a paradigmatic case of treating someone merely as a means to an end and a violation of human dignity. On the other hand, however, others argue that it is incorrect to assume that in order to exercise the capacities identified as conferring human dignity depends on the physical body that one has. Moreover, critics argue that it’s incorrect to assume that the risk of chimeras developing