Abstract
It is commonly assumed that persons who hold abortions to be generally impermissible must, for the same reasons, be opposed to embryonic stem cell research [ESR]. Yet a settled position against abortion does not necessarily direct one to reject that research. The difference in potentiality between the embryos used in ESR and embryos discussed in the abortion debate can make ESR acceptable even if one holds that abortion is impermissible. With regard to their potentiality, in vitro embryos are here argued to be more morally similar to clonable somatic cells than they are to in vivo embryos. This creates an important moral distinction between embryos in vivo and in vitro. Attempts to refute this moral distinction, raised in the recent debate in this journal between Alfonso Gómez-Lobo and Mary Mahowald, are also addressed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Davis D. S. (2002) Stem Cells, Cloning, and Abortion: Making Careful Distinctions. American Journal of Bioethics 2(1):47–49
Doerflinger R. M. (1999) The Ethics of Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Catholic Viewpoint. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9(2):137–150
FitzPatrick, W. J. “Totipotency and the Moral Status of Embryos: New Problems for an Old Argument.” Journal of Social Philosophy Vol. 35 No. 1, Spring 2004, 108–122
Gómez-Lobo A. (2005) On Potentiality and Respect for Embryos: A Reply to Mary Mahowald. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26:105–110
Gómez-Lobo A. (2004) Does Respect for Embryos Entail Respect for Gametes?. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25(3):199–208
Gómez-Lobo A. (2004) On the Ethical Evaluation of Stem Cell Research: Remarks on a Paper by N. Knoepffler. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14(1):75–80
Hare R. M. (1993) Essays on Bioethics. Oxford University Press, New York
Hare R. M. (1975) Abortion and the Golden Rule. Philosophy and Public Affairs 4(3):201–222
Jacquette D. (2001) Two Kinds of Potentiality: A Critique of McGinn on the Ethics of Abortion. Journal of Applied Philosophy 18(1) :79–85
Knoepffler N. (2004) Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Evaluation of Policy Options. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14(1):55–74
Lee P. (2004) A Christian Philosopher’s View of Recent Directions in the Abortion Debate. Christian Bioethics 10(1):7–31
Mahowald M. B. (2005) Another View of Potentiality and Human Embryos. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26(3):111–113
Mahowald M. B. (2004) Respect for embryos and the potentiality argument. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25(3):209–214
Marquis D. (1989) Why Abortion is Immoral. Journal of Philosophy 86:183–202
Norcross A. (1990) Killing, abortion, and contraception: A reply to Marquis. The Journal of Philosophy 287:268–77
Silver L. (1998) Remaking Eden: how genetic engineering and cloning will transform the American family. Avon Books, New York
Singer Peter, Helga Kuhse, Stephen Buckle, Karen Dawson, Pascal Kasimba, (eds) (1990) Embryo Experimentation. Cambridge University Press, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hanson, S.S. “More on Respect for Embryos and Potentiality: Does Respect for Embryos Entail Respect for In Vitro Embryos?”. Theor Med Bioeth 27, 215–226 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-006-9001-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-006-9001-1