Political Interventions in U.S. Human Embryo Research: An Ethical Assessment

Klimanskaya I. Chung Y. Becker S. Lu S. J. Lanza R. , “Human Embryonic Stem Cell Lines Derived from Single Blastomeres,” Nature 444 (November 23, 2006): 481–485.

Doerflinger later gathered his criticisms and published them as “The Problem of Deception in Embryonic Stem Cell Research,” Cell Proliferation 41, Supp. 1 (2007): 65–70. It is outside my purpose here to reply to Doerflinger's many criticisms of the ACT study. At the time of this hearing, the principle criticism picked up by Senator Specter and others focused on the destruction of embryos in the experiment.

Public Law 104–99 Jan. 26, 1996 110 STAT. 34, Sec. 128.

President's Council on Bioethics, Alternative Sources of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells: A White Paper (Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office, 2005).

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW), Ethics Advisory Board (EAB), “Report and Conclusions: HEW Support of Research Involving Human In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer,” Federal Register 44, no. 118 (June 19, 1979): 35033–35058, at 35057.

Id., at 35058.

Id., at 35056.

Id., at 35057.

Edwards R. Steptoe P. , A Matter of Life (New York: William Morrow, 1980): At 92–94.

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Infertility: Medical and Social Choices, OTA-BA-358 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1988), available at <http://www.princeton.edu/∼ota/ns20/alpha_f.html> (last visited March 27, 2010).

Committee on Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, National Research Council, Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2005): At 30, available at <http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11278> (last visited March 19, 2010).

Green R. M. , The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex of Controversy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001).

Varmus H. , The Art and Politics of Science (New York: W.W. Norton, 2009): at 206.

Editorial, “Embryos: Drawing the Line,” Washington Post, October 2, 1994, at C06.

Lanza R. P. , “The Ethical Validity of Using Nuclear Transfer In Human Transplantation,” JAMA 284, no. 24 (December 27, 2000): 3175–3179.

Rabb H. S. , General Counsel of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS), “Memo to Harold Varmus Rendering Legal Opinion Regarding Federal Funding for Research Involving Human Pluripotent Stem Cells,” January 15, 1999.

National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Issues in Human Stem Cell Research, Volume 1, Report and Recommendations, Rockville, MD, September 1999, at iv, 57–59, available at <http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/stemcell.pdf> (last visited April 3, 2010).

National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services “Stem Cell Information: Frequently Asked Questions,” available at <http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs> (last visited March 19, 2010).

“President's Statement on Funding Stem Cell Research,” New York Times, August 9, 2001.

It appears that Bush relied heavily on the advice of bioethicists, such as the Hasting Center's Daniel Callahan, who opposed federal support of hESC research. See Mooney C. , “Irrationalist in Chief: The Real Problem with Leon Kass,” The American Prospect (September 24, 2001-October 8, 2001): At Section: Gazette , at 10.

Rawls J. , Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).

Id., at 224.

Id., at 253.

Id., at 247.

National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Issues in Human Stem Cell Research, Volume 3, Religious Perspectives, Rockville, MD, September 1999, at iv, 57–59, available at <http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/stemcell3.pdf> (last visited April 3, 2010).

Devolder K. Harris J. , “The Ambiguity of the Embryo: Ethical Inconsistency in the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate,” Metaphilosophy 38, nos. 2–3 (April 2007): 153–169, at 161.

See Englert Y. , “The Fate of Supernumerary Embryos: What Do Parents Think about It?” in Hildt E. Mieth D. , eds., In Vitro Fertilization in the 1990s: Toward a Medical, Social, and Ethical Evaluation (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999): at 227–232.

Bioethicist Dena Davis contends that this apparent inconsistency is explained by the fact that deeper issues of cultural values, not regard for the embryo per se, are shaping our debates in this area. Thus IVF is seen as “pro-family” whereas embryo destruction in research is assimilated to more utilitarian concerns or aspects of the abortion debate. See her article entitled “The Puzzle of IVF,” Houston Journal of Health Law & Policy 6 (2006): 275–296.

Saul S. , “The Gift of Life, and Its Price,” New York Times, October 10, 2009.

See Rawls , supra note 21, at 243f., n. 32.

Rawls J. , The Law of Peoples with “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited” (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999): At 169, n. 80.

Thus Dworkin R. B. observes that the majority argument in Roe v. Wade recognizing a woman's unfettered right of access to abortion during the first trimester only makes sense on the basis of what he regards as the decision's unargued presumption that the fetus “is not a person entitled to constitutional protection.” See his Limits: The Role of Law in Bioethical Decision Making (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996): At 48f.

In her survey of state legislation on embryo research, Lori B. Andrews reported that nine states have banned embryo research entirely. See her paper entitled “State Regulation of Embryo Stem Cell Research,” in National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Issues in Human Stem Cell Research, Volume 2, Commissioned Papers, Rockville, MD, September 1999, at A1-A13, at A-4, available at <http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/stemcell3.pdf> (last visited April 3, 2010).

Doerflinger R. , “The Ethics of Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Catholic Viewpoint,” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9, no. 2 (1999): 137–150.

Stolberg S. G. , “Obama Lifts Bush Limits on Stem Cell Research,” New York Times, March 9, 2009.

Cyranoski D. , “5 Things To Know Before Jumping on the iPS Bandwagon,” Nature 452, no. 27 (March 2008): 406–408.