A companion essay deals with the
research use of existing stem cells.
What happens to "spare" stem cells?
There are about 360 fertility labs in the U.S. that conduct in-vitro
fertilization procedures. They typically extract
about 24 ova from each woman client, and fertilize them with a male donor's
sperm -- typically her husband's. Two to four of the resultant embryos are
then selected and implanted in her womb in the hopes that one will develop
and continue a pregnancy to term. Some clinics discard the excess embryos or
use them for training purposes. Most clinics deep-freeze the other 20 or so
embryos in liquid nitrogen. Some may be used in the future if no pregnancy
resulted, and a repeated attempt at impregnation is desired. A few are
donated by the couple that "owns" them to another infertile couple. But this
is rare, because most clients dislike the idea of having what is in effect
their child living in another family. Most become spare, permanently
unneeded, frozen embryos .
Past estimates of the number of frozen embryos in the U.S. vary from
100,000 to 188,000. However "experts said that was little more than a
guess, and even if it was accurate at one time, it is long out of date now.
Plans for what would be the first careful national accounting are being
prepared now by the reproductive medicine society." 1
Some clinics keep the embryos alive in liquid nitrogen indefinitely -- or
at least until an operator error or equipment malfunction kills them.
One source says that about 25% of frozen and thawed embryos do not survive
between the first and second impregnation procedure. This loss rate appears
to be related to the quality of the freezing and thawing processes, not to
the length of time they have remained frozen. If an embryo survives the
freezing process, it will probably remain viable for decades. Some have
speculated a lifetime of hundreds of years if kept frozen. Experiments on
mouse embryos showed no loss in their ability to produce pups after having
been frozen for 25 years. Human embryos would probably behave similarly.
13
Other clinics simply discard or destroy the spare embryos. Some embryos
are simply flushed down a sink drain. Some are transferred to a medical
waste bin where they are later incinerated. Some simply expose the embryos
to the air and let them die; this normally takes four days or less.
One source speculates that hundreds of thousands of unused embryos have
been destroyed in fertility clinics. 1 This compares to
the few dozen of embryos which have had their stem cells removed and used to
create stem cell lines in the lab. Surprisingly, nobody seems to care or
object. Even pro-life groups appear to be silent on this matter.
The ethics of extracting stem cells from embryos:
There are no major ethical concerns about the extraction of
adult stem
cells, from umbilical cords, skin, bone marrow, etc., as long as the donor
gives permission. However, at this time, the only way to obtain the most
potentially useful stem cells is believed to be from human
embryos. First, surplus embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures
in fertility clinics are thawed. The inner cell mass of an embryo is extracted. Stem cells
are all that remain. The embryo is killed in the process. This raises the same ethical
questions and conflicts that are often heard when the
ethics of abortion are discussed:
An ova, spermatozoon, pre-embryo, embryo, fetus, and newborn are all
forms of human life. They are clearly alive and contain human DNA. Everyone
agrees that a newborn baby is not only human life but a human person.
Pro-lifers and pro-choicers differ in their belief of when human life
becomes a human person, and thus should have its life protected.
Many pro-lifer believe that not only does human personhood start at
or shortly after conception, but that the pre-embryo receives a soul.
Pro-choicers generally believe that human personhood is achieved
later in gestation.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research(ESCR) is opposed by many pro-lifers, mainly Roman Catholics and
conservative Protestants. They feel that the embryos from which the stem
cells are often extracted are human persons. Since the embryos are killed when
the stem cells are removed, most pro-lifers view the extraction procedure as
murder and a form of experimentation on human bodies. As Gregory Koukl,
president of Stand to Reason writes: "Whether it's right or not to
take that life depends entirely on what it is we're killing. Let me put it as
clearly as I know how. If the zygote or embryo or fetus is not a human being, no
justification for either abortion of ESCR is necessary. However, if it is a
human being, no justification for taking his or her life is adequate. This
single, succinct ethic is adequate to cover contingencies on both sides of the
question." 14 In the case of
ESCR, it is a zygote which is killed in the process of extracting its stem
cells, not an embryo or fetus. It is, at this point, a mass of individuated
cells; they haven't developed into bone, skin, heart, liver and any of the other
216 cell types in the human body. If cell individuation has already occurred, then they zygote would no
longer have any usefulness in ESCR.
Lawyers and medical ethicists in favor of embryo stem cell research:
Lawyers from the NIH, and others, argue that stem cells are incapable of growing into a
complete person. They may be coaxed to develop into
nerve cells or heart cells. But, at most, they can become an organ, not a complete living
person. They cannot be considered a form of human life, even within the definition of
pro-life supporters. This exempts stem cell research from the Congressional ban on embryo
research. Those regulations were created to prevent experiments with embryos that had the
potential to develop to the fetal and newborn stages. The rules simply do not apply to
stem cells.
Stem cells can propagate themselves so that researchers can use cells that are many
generations removed from their origin. Stem cells can be replicated and
may be useable in an large number of
studies.
Stem cells have an enormous promise to benefit mankind -- to save
lives and cure or treat diseases. This generates a very strong moral
imperative to explore their potential.
Almost all spare embryos in fertility clinics will eventually die,
due to operator error or equipment malfunction. Spare embryos are also
routinely destroyed by flushing them down a drain, by incinerating
them, or by thawing them out and allowing them to die. They might as
well have their stem cells extracted so that they can be of some use
to humanity.
Lawyers and medical ethicists opposed to embryo stem cell research:
If one traced the history of a embryo stem cell back however many generations needed to get to
its origin, one would find that an embryo was murdered. Since the extraction of the
initial stem cells was a violation of NIH policy, any subsequent experimentation using
those cells or their descendants is not only immoral but also in violation of government
regulations. 2
Those taking a pro-life stance generally believe that an embryo is a human being
with a soul. Thus,
the act of extracting stem cells from an embryo is murder. Stem cell research has been likened to lampshades made of human skin
during the Nazi holocaust. They may be very attractive and useful
lampshades; but a person was murdered during their construction.
Linda Bevington, director of research for the Center for Bioethics and
Human Dignity has stated: "A lot of proponents of the stem-cell research are saying
these embryos are extras, and they'll never be implanted, and they're
doomed/destined for destruction anyway, so we might as well just take
their cells and create some therapies and some good. However, it is possible to adopt those embryos. It's often
termed 'rescue surrogacy,' and so those embryos aren't necessarily
destined for destruction. They can be implanted, and a healthy baby
can be born." 3 A few embryos are "adopted"
in this way in the U.S. every month. But many more frozen embryos are
being created each month, and there are hundreds of thousands in
storage.
Robert George, a professor of moral and political philosophy at
Princeton notes that embryos possess the epigenetic primordia
for internally directed growth and maturation as distinct,
self-integrating, human organisms. Because of this, he regards an
embryo as being already—and not merely potentially—a living
member of the human species. 4
This essay continues below
Sponsored link:
A sampling of opposition from pro-life groups:
Pro-life groups and individuals view a fertilized ova and embryos as full
human beings with a soul. Thus when stem cells are extracted from a surplus
embryo, and the latter dies, they believe that a murder has occurred. It does not
matter whether the stem cell extraction is done by a government researcher, or
is done by an employee of a private company and sold to the government. Either
way, a human person has been murdered in order to supply the cells. Many pro-life groups also oppose the use
of already-existing stem cells, because if one were to trace back far enough in time,
the ancestors of the present-day stem cells came from an embryo that was
murdered. Many groups also oppose the regulations of some fertility clinics
which call for the routine destruction of surplus embryos.
An article by Lutherans for Life used terms like "killing one innocent
human being," "dismembering a living being," "extinguishing the
torch of the smallest in our tribe," "killing embryonic children," "killing
unborn children." Next to the article was a photograph of a embryo that
appears to be seven or eight weeks old. The image is deceptive. Embryos from which stem cells are
extracted are less than 14 days old. 6
Some recent comments by pro-life group include:
Right to Life Committee: (Undated): Spokesperson Douglas Johnson said
that any embryo destruction of use of stem cells involves the murder of "non-consensual
human subjects." 12
Roman Catholic Church (USA): 2000-MAR-3: The U.S. Conference of
Catholic Bishops wrote a letter to each senator urging them to stop stem
cell research. They asked that the Stem Cell Research Act, S. 2015, be defeated.
The bill had been sponsored by Senators Arlen Specter, (R-PA), and Tom Harkin,
(D-IA). It would allow federal researchers to extract stem cells from surplus
embryos. Referring to the stem cell harvesting procedure, Cardinal William H.
Keeler said it "kills the unborn child." He noted that "NIH's own
Human Embryo Research Panel and President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory
Commission (NBAC) have both conceded that the early human embryo deserves
respect as a 'form of human life.' " He wrote that "no government should
requisition innocent human beings for deadly experiments on the grounds that
they are 'unwanted' or unpopular." Cardinal Keeler concluded by saying that
S. 2015 would "demean human dignity by promoting the destruction of human
life." 8
A group of pro-life organizations: 2001-MAR-8: Several pro-life
organizations and individuals sued the federal government in an attempt to stop
their future funding of stem cell research programs. The plaintiffs included:
Nightlight Christian Adoptions: They argue that if stem cell
research proceeds, then there won't be enough spare embryos left over
for Nightlight's clients. The latter are couples who want to become
pregnant by using a surplus, frozen embryos. There are at least 110,000
"spare" embryos stored in fertility clinics. We have been unable to find
the total number of parents who want to become pregnant with other
couple's embryos. One clinic has 40 embryos available for adoption;
another has successfully implanted 11 embryos which have led to live
births.
An Indiana professor who is concerned that funding of
programs involving stem cells harvested from embryos will hurt funding
of adult stem cell research experiments.
Human Life Advocates wants to stop the National Institutes of
Health from "violating the existing ban against the destruction of human
embryos directly or indirectly using taxpayer money." Their apparent
concern is that a private organization may harvest stem cells from
embryos and sell them to a group doing government funded research. 9
Roman Catholic Church (Canada): 2001-JUN: The Canadian Conference
of Bishops issued a paper on stem cells. They expressed concern that
research would encourage the production of spare embryos in fertility clinics
and "will only aggravate the link between the process of in vitro
fertilization and the destruction of human embryos." 10
Alliance for Life Ontario: 2001-JUL-6: Jakki Jeffs, Executive Director
of Alliance for Life Ontario wrote a letter to the editor of the Toronto
Star. She writes that if stem cell research resumes, that "for the first time
in U.S. history, federal funding would be used for research that deliberately
and intentionally destroys the human subject." 11
Conservative former presidential candidate and staunch pro-lifer
Gary Bauer, called stem cell research "morally bankrupt."
5
References used in the above essay:
Carl T. Hall, "The forgotten embryo: Fertility clinics must store or
destroy the surplus that is part of the process." SF Gate News, at:
http://www.sfgate.com/
Jakki Jeffs, "An alternative exists to embryonic stem cell research,"
Toronto Star, 2001-JUL-6
"Debate over stem cell research, cloning lead to 'strange bedfellows:'
Religious views, attitudes about life and abortion influence options,"
AANEWS, 2001-JUL-7
Private Email from a scientist who has personally frozen over 15,000
mouse and human embryos.
Gregory Koukl, "Call to Action," Solid Ground newsletter,
2004-SEP/OCT.
Page Translator: