Biomedical Ethics discussion about Stem Cell Research

Josh L.Ac. · Aug 2, 2006

Wow, that's a long clip. I'm going to put it on my PDA and listen to it on the way to school.

I would say that, before listening to the clip, that I am opposed to embryonic stem cell research for the same reason I am opposed to abortion - I think that logically it is killing a human being.

If I were to look at it from the viewpoint of utility, I think the current evidence would suggest we should fund adult stem cell research since it has had better results so far. If somebody has evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it, although I no longer make decisioons purely from the viewpoint of utility anymore.

My apologies if this is addressed in the audio clip. I'll listen to it tommorrow if my I can transfer it to my frackin Axim.

tvccrn, ASN, RN · Aug 2, 2006

I'm at work and can't listen at the moment, but paln to once I get home.

I have one question. Now keep in mind that I haven't learn a lot about stem cell research, but I seem to remember a mention of the fact that cord cells and placental cells can be used in this research. If so, then there doesn't have to be an abortion to obtain the cells.

gr8rnpjt, RN · Aug 2, 2006

There is just one thing I don't get. Why do we THROW OUT thousands of units of stem-cell rich cord blood every day? Why can't the researchers use all of the stem cells from umbilical cords that are WASTED every day? If we could just find a way to harvest the umbilical cord blood like we save the placentas from the hundreds of thousands of deliveries we do every day, I am sure we would have enough stem cells for all this research. So why don't we do that and leave the poor little embryonic cells alone?

HM2VikingRN, RN · Aug 12, 2006

Cspan had a televised forum the other day from the Center for American Progress about stem cell research. I posted a link to it on Nursing News....

HM2VikingRN, RN · Aug 12, 2006

I'm at work and can't listen at the moment, but paln to once I get home.
I have one question. Now keep in mind that I haven't learn a lot about stem cell research, but I seem to remember a mention of the fact that cord cells and placental cells can be used in this research. If so, then there doesn't have to be an abortion to obtain the cells.

I am studying the ethics of this type of research. I am not at all convinced that this research involves abortion especially if the embryos used are derived from (in) fertility treatments, have been freely designated by the patients for research and/or will be destroyed.

I think this is a very complex topic that needs to be discussed in good faith so I post these links so hopefully, people can take the time to listen with an open mind.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Aug 12, 2006

Recently discussed in depth:

https://allnurses.com/forums/f112/bush-veto-stem-cell-research-what-culture-life-168895.html

The above thread started out as a nursing thread but was moved to a premium forum due to its political content.

My advice: if you want to keep THIS thread in the nursing forums, leave the politics out. Politics, by definition, are premium forums on this site.

~faith,

Timothy.

buddiage · Aug 12, 2006

This month's issue of Time magazine had stem cell on the front cover. I picked it up at the airport. Good food for thought. Not into the politics of it (I'm now disgruntled with all of them :0)

HM2VikingRN, RN · Aug 13, 2006

From Mother Jones:

While researching a book on assisted reproduction and its impact, I interviewed California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a reliably anti-abortion Republican member of the House. Rohrabacher was one of some 50 Republicans who defied the president by voting in favor of federal funding for stem cell research using surplus ivf embryos. For Rohrabacher it was not abstract: He and his wife, Rhonda, went through ivf treatment and have triplets as a result.

Going through that process, Rohrabacher told me, fundamentally changed his thinking about life and its origins. “For a long time I’ve been pro-life, and I still consider myself to be pro-life,” he reflected, sitting on the front porch of his Huntington Beach bungalow, which, inside, had been taken over by the demands of triplet care. “I have done a lot of soul-searching but also a lot of rethinking about reality, and what’s going on here, and I have come to the conclusion that I’m…first, I’m still pro-life. But I always said that life begins at conception. But…I was always predicating that on the idea that life begins at conception when conception begins in a woman’s body.”

Now, Rohrabacher realizes, conception can take place outside the human body. That, for him, is a meaningful difference. The crux of the matter: Is the embryo in the womb, or is it in a lab? “I don’t think that the potential for human life exists in a human embryo until it’s implanted in a human body. So you are not destroying a human life by basically not using a fertilized egg. These are not potential human lives until they are implanted in a body. Left alone, they will not become a human being. When they are implanted in a female body, they have a chance to become a human being, so I still would be opposed to abortion.”

Interesting thought from a prolife legislator.

judy ann · Aug 13, 2006

:no: I am so confused. Why is it not acceptable to use the embryos that will otherwise be distroyed! Would it not be more acceptable to use them (with the parent's permission) than to just toss them out?

Why is it acceptable to crush the skull of a 20 week fetus and suck his body out. Is this not taking a life of an unborn baby?

What makes these situations so very different?

HM2VikingRN, RN · Aug 13, 2006

I am so confused. Why is it not acceptable to use the embryos that will otherwise be distroyed! Would it not be more acceptable to use them (with the parent's permission) than to just toss them out?

From Mother Jones

(To be precise, the technical term is “pre-embryo,” or “conceptus”; a fertilized egg is not considered an embryo until about two weeks of development, and ivf embryos are frozen well before this point.)

If you follow this link to the Mother Jones article I think that you will see that many of the patient's are unsure about what to do with the preembryo's created during their fertility treatments.

I believe that having an empathic non-judgemental listener is a key part to helping patient's make decisions. There are something like 500,000 pre-embryos (Conceptus). How can we best help people if we don't have a clear informed consent process to help people make decisions in accordance with their conscience? (Only about 3% of the patient's have expressed a desire to donate their preembryo's for research according to another article.) The sad thing is that many of the pre-embryo's have been abandoned with no clear instructions for disposition.) How should we allow patient's to express their wishes for use of the extra pre-embryo's? How will we as a society and professionals show respect for the wishes of individual patients as to the desired use of their preembryo?

Lets all be respectful of each other and try to talk over some of these ideas and be constructive in our ideas for solutions. :idea:

HM2VikingRN, RN · Aug 13, 2006

From Mother Jones:

Meanwhile, more viable lines of scientific inquiry are being killed in their infancy--for example, those 3 percent of frozen embryos already slated for research could create up to 275 new stem cell lines--and Tipton's callers are left with nowhere to turn.