Embryo Research and Ethical Theory
Recommend on Google+
Embryo Research is the resultant of doing something useful with spare embryos which are fertilised to maximise chances of pregnancy through IVF
BENEFITS OF EMBRYO RESEARCH
The benefits of embryo research come mainly from stem cell usage – it is hoped that stem cells can be stimulated to develop any tissue or organ of the human body. A cure for Alzheimers and Parkinsons may be possible in the near future as a result of embryo research.
ISSUES
The main issues that arise with embryo research are personhood; whether or not an embryo can be considered as a person with rights, and the right to life; the extent to which an embryo has the right to life and the morality of discarding it for research.
APPLYING ETHICAL THEORY TO EMBRYO RESEARCH
In this module you will be required to apply an understanding of Kantian Ethics, Utilitarianism, Relativism, Virtue Ethics, Natural Law and Christian Ethics to the issues raised by embryo research; namely personhood and the right to life. You should look to the notes on ethical theory in the first section of this module and the foundation module (2760) and apply them to the issues of IVF and embryo research, taking the following points into consideration:
CHRISTIAN ETHICS
The division of the Christian church has lead to the development of three main traditions, each turning to a different source for moral teaching:
1. Authority – Roman Catholic (the encyclicals or papal teachings and the belief that the pope is infallible)
2. Bible – Protestant (belief that the bible is the literal word of God)
3. Conscience – Orthodox (belief that the conscience is the literal voice of God)
ROMAN CATHOLIC ANGLICAN
Absolutist in its approach – refuse to support an evil action whatever the situation. Life begins at conception when you are ‘ensouled’. A foetus is not a potential person but a person with potential. Relativist in its approach – considers the situation for the embryo and the beneficiaries of the research. Embryo research could be the lesser of two evils if it provides a cure for degenerative diseases.
The Rubella Vaccine in October 1994:
The introduction of the Rubella Vaccine in October 94 was rejected by two Roman Catholic schools on the basis that it was developed from a dead foetus (an intrinsic wrong). The Methodist Church however takes a more teleological approach to Christian Ethics (hence it’s links with Situation Ethics) and might accept the vaccination on the basis that the good produced from immunisation against Rubella outweighs the evil derived from researching embryos – the greater end justifies the evil means.
BIBLICAL ETHICS
The sanctity of life is a key theme running throughout the bible:
• God created Humans in his image
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image
• Humans are purposefully called into existence
Genesis 1:28
God blessed them and said to them, be fruitful and increase in number
• Human life has intrinsic value because it has been made in God’s image
Genesis 9:6
‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made them.’
• Life is divinely and uniquely ordained from conception
Psalm 139:13
For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb
? From this we can deduce that humans have intrinsic as opposed to instrumental value because they were purposely and uniquely designed in the loving image of their creator and therefore should not be treated as a means to an end but as ends in themselves (Kant).
Using a foetus for the welfare of another human being is treating a potential human life with extrinsic, instrumental value. If an embryo can be considered a person with the right to life, then embryo research goes against all of the Christian teaching on the sanctity of life and the intrinsic worth of individuals.
SITUATION ETHICS (RELATIVIST, TELEOLOGICAL)
Situation Ethics is based on the single maxim of agape love. An action is deemed right if it results in love, wrong if it results in selfishness – its morality is dependent on the situation.
• Embryo research is the most loving thing to do with spare embryos when the only other option is to destroy them
• Embryo research is loving because it cures degenerative diseases such as Alzheimers
• However, it could be argued that the creation of embryos for the sole purpose of research goes against Christian idea of agape. This suggests that research carried out on spare embryos from IVF treatment is morally permissible as it results in a greater agape since the embryos would be destroyed anyway. However, creating embryos for the direct purpose of stem cell research is difficult to justify even from a situational approach.
NATURAL LAW (ABSOLUTE, DEONTOLOGICAL)
Aquinas postulated that humans have the ability to reason which leads to a knowledge of five primary precepts. From these five primary precepts, secondary precepts can be deduced:
Self-Preservation
Self-preservation is one of Aquinas’ primary precepts. From this one could deduce the secondary precept: ‘no embryo research’ because life should be preserved. However, it could also be argued that the research can be justified if it preserves the life of others by curing diseases such as Alzheimers and Parkinsons.
SOLE GOOD
Aquinas’ Natural Law is routed in Aristotelian thought. Aristotle said that everything has potentiality and actuality. The sole good is to turn potentiality into actuality. Surely then an embryo should be given the opportunity to turn its potential to become a human being into actuality.
ACT UTILITARIANISM (RELATIVIST, TELEOLOGICAL)
Bentham maintained that his hedonic calculations should only be applied to those who can suffer. Embryos and this early stage in development do not have the capacity to feel pain, and thus cannot be measured by Bentham’s Hedonic Calculus.
However, the benefits of embryo research are justifiable in Utilitarian terms. The intensity of pain caused by diseases is great, the duration of which is lifelong (e.g. Parkinsons, Alzheimers). The pleasure derived form the provision of cures for degenerative diseases thus outweigh the costs of embryo research.
RULE UTILITARIANISM (ABSOLUTIST, TELEOLOGICAL)
Rule Utilitarianism starts with general principles from which specific acts can be prohibited without exception to the rule. It follows rules that promote the greatest happiness, for example the rule:
Human life should be preserved
This rule can be seen as promoting the greatest net utility. But does this apply to an embryo in an early stage of development? Again, this raises the issue of personhood (see notes on abortion). If the embryo is accepted as a form of human life then it should be preserved, but it may not be considered a person with rights at this early stage.
KANTIAN ETHICS (ABSOLUTE, DEONTOLOGICAL)
Applying Kant’s Categorical Imperative to embryo research:
1) The Universal Law
All moral statements should be both universalisable (applied to all people in a situations) and willed to be universalised. If they are not universalisable then they are contradictions in the Law of Nature, and if they cannot be willed to be universalised they are contradictions in the Law of the Will.
“So act that the maxim of your will could always hold at the same time as a principle establishing universal law”
• The maxim ‘use spare embryos for stem cell research’ is universalisable and is not a contradiction in the Law of Nature. However the maxim ‘create embryos for stem cell research’ is not universalisable because there would be no embryo’s left to develop into humans – the human race would face extinction. This is a contradiction in the Law of Nature.
• Embryo research may not be willed to be universalised, thus it could be seen to be a contradiction in the Law of the Will.
2) Treat humans as ends in themselves
People should always be treated as ends in themselves and not as a means to an end
• This imperative depends on your view of personhood and whether or not an embryo can be considered person entitled to treatment as an end in itself. Kant did not make his view on this clear and did not deal with potentiality (the potential of a foetus to become a human).
Kant distinguished between three types of beings:
1) People – rational Agents
2) People with partial rights – people who lack rights e.g. children, mentally disabled
3) Things – animals, plants etc (things can be treated as a means to an end)
Kant did not make it clear where he classified embryos. If they are classified as things, Kant might justify embryo research on the basis that embryos can be treated as a means to an end.
VIRTUE ETHICS (AGENT-CENTRED)
About the person rather than the action – it asks the question ‘what would a moral person do’ rather than ‘what is the moral course of action’ and is therefore very difficult to apply to medical ethics.
Compassion is one of Aristotle’s twelve moral virtues:
? Compassion could be shown to the embryos that are being used for the good of others
? Compassion could also be shown to the people who are suffering from degenerative diseases such as Alzheimers
? However, those who possess the degenerative diseases could be seen to be demonstrating compassion for the embryos by preventing the continuation of embryo research. Thus it could be argued both ways.
blog comments powered by Disqus
RELIGIOUS STUDIES TEACHER RESOURCE NEWSLETTER
Sign up for tutor2u's free Religious Studies Teacher Resource Newsletter
