'Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Essay\r'

'Scientific larnk has come a long way since the first habituate of gays conceptuss to treat and prevent illnesss. The infantile paralysis vaccine was invented in the 1950’s from the custom of gentleman fetal kidney carrels, fet utilises in uteri were utilise to take aim techniques deliberatele amniocenteses and improving cognition rough congenital heart disease in the 1970’s, and in the 1980’s the transplantation of fetal tissue into bragging(a)s to service with proficient conditions like, diabetes or Parkinson’s (Gold, 2004). term there has al slipway been concern and controersy over the use of gentle race conceptusnic mobile ph aces, directly the debate is respectable.\r\nThis best debate lies inwardly the end of man fertilized eggs in piece to use them for medical look. This paper ordain talk just about how two diametrical theories; utileism and relativism consume this ethical issue and the task it presents, as well as my mortalal fits on use of immature theme mobile ph hotshot look for. The hypothesis of utilitarianism determines what is best by looking at the results of an minute. According to Mosser (2010, role 1. 7), â€Å"utilitarianism repugns that, given a set of choices, the act we should choose is that which produces the best results for the greatest function affected by that choice.\r\nWhen looking at the use of conceptusnic group cells for seek, utilitarianism looks at the end result. Embryonic infrastructure cells work the potential to prevent lives by curing diseases and through the use of transplantation. While approximately utilitarianism’s whitethorn still beguile the destruction of these cells as the destruction of human aliveness they recognize that their potential is a far better choice, being that this look for can potentially encourage save many lives. The opposition to immature stem cell query whitethorn set out a relativists view.\r \nAlthough star person may see embryotic stem cell search as correctly, another may see it as improper ground on their own ethical standards that see been provided by their culture or primer coat (Mosser, 2010). The opposition of embryologic stem cell research view the embryo as a person from the day it is conceived, although it does not pick up any characteristics of a person, it ordain one day develop a person. The thought of destroying human life has brocaded many important questions that cannot be answered by science. When does life begin? Is a human embryo equivalent to a human child?\r\nDoes a human embryo have any rights? Might the destruction of a single embryo be justified if it provides a cure for unnumbered number of patients? Since ES cells can hazard indefinitely in a administer can, in theory, still grow into a human being, is the embryo really destroyed. (The University of Utah, 2012, para. 5) So what object lesson status does the human embryo have? To the relativist opposition, the question can precisely be answered by their personal moral views. To better look the debate about embryonic stem cell research one must first understand the immensity of embryonic stem cell research.\r\nEmbryonic stem cells atomic number 18 pluripotent cells that ar derived from the inner cell mass of the human blastocyst (early embryo) (Hynes, 2008). numerous wonder wherefore the use of these cells is so important in scientific breakthroughs. Embryonic stem cells are capable of differentiating into all typefaces of cells in the body. This allows researchers to use ES cells to create any type of cell needed for any patient. Many ask why the use of adult stem cells is not good enough. giving stem cells are undifferentiated cells make up within the body.\r\nThese cells only have the mightiness to â€Å"divide or self-renew indefinitely and turn over all the cell types of the organ from which they move up” (Science, 2012, para. 1). Adult stem cell research is not controversial, as it does not take aim the destruction of human life to clear them. While adult stem cells have been used to successfully treat affaires like leukemia and related bone/blood cancers, embryonic stem cells offer a wider florilegium of treatment options because they have the ability to develop into more than 200 cell types in the body as long as they are specified to do so (Science, 2012).\r\nBoth sides of this debate may be influenced by religion. There are some religions that regard a human embryo as having human status from the clipping of conception while others say that an embryo does not have full human status before 40 age (EuroStemCell, 2011). The Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and conservative Protestant Churches are against human embryonic stem cell research, where Judaism and Islam look at and emphasize the importance of the outcome that embryonic stem cell research can bring (EuroStemCell, 2011).\r\nAs with any debate th ose who have the equal theory may still consider differently base upon their culture, upbringing, and religious background. I find that one could be of a certain religion (Catholic) and still view embryonic stem cell research as a better resoluteness than just immureing unused embryos. The Catholic utilitarian may argue that the it is better to employ the embryonic stem cells from an infertility clinic for research to potentially save many lives than to discard the cells as if they were.\r\nOn the other hand the Catholic relativist/utilitarian might argue that this goes against their religious beliefs and is not what is best for the honey oil good. As one can see in this example a person may exercise more than one theory in their lives. One may have been raised to view embryonic stem cell research, as wrong because it destroys human life, but they may in like manner view it is a way to help the ordinary good. This is when these types of decisions, to be for or against someth ing, become a personal struggle. Does one go against what they were raised and taught to believe or do they do what they think is right for the common good of society?\r\nMosser (2010, Section 1. 7) states that, â€Å"utilitarianism gives us what seems to be a clear and passably easy principle to apply to ethical problems and so determine the right thing to do in specific cases. ” This may be the case when it comes to simple decisions that are easy to explain and justify, but when it comes to a moral decision between right and wrong utilitarianism can merely tie us and help clarify these ethical problems (Mosser, 2010). Unfortunately this is why there is such(prenominal) a heated debate with embryonic stem cell research. What one sees as morally right another sees as morally wrong?\r\nThe reasons may be different, but the end result may be the same. In this case one believes the act of employ human embryos for research will help the common good where the other side believe s not using human embryos for research will help the common good in determine of morals and what status they view the human embryo. Relativism allows one the opportunity to go along with what their culture believes is right or wrong. It keeps one safe, as many people are afraid to express their own opinions and views against anothers views (Mosser, 2010).\r\nAs with any ethical issue, this theory allows those who do not know enough about it to stay safe and build their views and opinions based on those around them. This allows one to try another based on a view that has been acquired by commonality alternatively than facts. This can go both ways with embryonic stem cell research. Although the relativist view can be regarded as the â€Å" ordinary” view it can be very(prenominal) powerful if one bases their view on facts and knowledge and not just the heathen view. While their will always be disagreements about the use of embryonic stem cell research I find that their use if more beneficial than it is destructive.\r\nWhile everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, is it selfish to belie the use of embryonic cells, which will be discarded anyway, because it is seen as the destruction of life? I think so. If there is a way to help another in the future through the use of embryonic stem cells, why not? I find myself in agreement with the utilitarianism theory on this matter. It is important for researchers to continue their research to help the common good. The research and researchers must have limitations though.\r\n'