Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 195–203

Stem Cell Research on Embryonic Persons Is Just

Original Research

Abstract

I argue that embryonic stem cell research is fair to the embryo, even on the assumption that the embryo has attained full personhood and an attendant right to life at conception. This is because the only feasible alternatives open to the embryo are to exist briefly in an unconscious state and be killed or to not exist at all. Hence, one is neither depriving the embryo of an enduring life it would otherwise have had nor is one causing the embryo pain. I also argue that a rational agent in a situation relevantly similar to that of the embryo would consent to such research, and I use this insight to ground two justice-based arguments in favor of this research.

Keywords

Stem cell Embryo Justice Fairness Personhood 

References

  1. Beckwith, F.J. 1993. Politically correct death: Answering the case for abortion rights. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.Google Scholar
  2. Bortolotti, L., and J. Harris. 2005. Stem cell research, personhood and sentience. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 10(Supplement 1): 68–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chalmers, D. 1996. The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Churchland, P.M. 1984. Matter and consciousness: A contemporary introduction to the philosophy of mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Fantl, J., and McGrath, M. 2009. Knowledge in an uncertain world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fodor, J.A. 1987. Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. George, R.P., and C. Tollefson. 2008. Embryo: A defense of human life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  8. Harris, J. 2003. Stem cells, sex, and procreation. Cambridge Quarterly Journal of Health Care Ethics 12(4): 353–371.Google Scholar
  9. Kant, I. 1996. The metaphysics of morals. ed. and trans. M. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kass, L. 2002. Life, liberty and the defense of dignity: The challenge for bioethics. San Francisco: Encounter Books.Google Scholar
  11. Lewis, D.K. 1966. An argument for the identity theory. The Journal of Philosophy 63(1): 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manninen, B.A. 2008. Are human embryos Kantian persons? Kantian considerations in favor of embryonic stem cell research. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 3: 4. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-3-4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pontifical Academy for Life. 2000. Production and the scientific and therapeutic use of human embryonic stem cells. In Text of the opinion: Ethical aspects of human stem cell research and uses, European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies, 176–183.Google Scholar
  14. Rachels, J. 1975. Active and passive euthanasia. The New England Journal of Medicine 292(2): 78–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rae, S. 1995. Moral choices: An introduction to ethics. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.Google Scholar
  16. Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Singer, P. 1987. Creating embryos. In Ethical issues at the outset of life, ed. W.B. Weil Jr. and M. Benjamin, 43–62. Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Tendler, M.D. 1999. Testimony. In Ethical issues in human stem cell research. Volume III. Religious perspectives, ed. National Bioethics Advisory Commission, H-1–H-5. Rockville, MD: NBAC.Google Scholar
  19. Warren, M.A. 1973. On the moral and legal status of abortion. The Monist 57(1): 43–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Humanities Department (E-202)LaGuardia Community CollegeLong Island CityUSA

Personalised recommendations