Stem Cell Research as it relates to Utilitarianism
Saturday, May 10th, 2008Krista Priley Part 1
The History of UtilitananismThe history can be traced all the way to 5th century BC. That is where ethics from the philosopher Aristippus of Cyrene who was the founder of the Cyrenaic school. Then 100 years later Epicurus was the founder of an ethic of retirement, and thier followers of ancient Greek. There then were doctrines of universalism from the rival ethical school of stoicism and Christianity. In the 17th century a moral philosopher by the name Bishop Richard was the 1st utilitarian philosopher. A generation later a man by the name Francis Hutcheson, had a British “moral sense” which made a clear view of Utilitarian. He stated that “procures the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers” but proposed a form of “moral arithmetic” for calculating the best consequences. In 18th century a skeptic
Scotland’s philosopher and historian by the name David Hume attempted to analyze the origin of the virtues in terms of their contribution to utility. Which writings from Joseph Priestley and Claude-Adrien Helvetius were made about cesare beccaria. Then a biblical scholar and philosopher by the name John Gay stated that God’s goodness he inferred that God willed that men promote human happiness. In the 19th century a spokesman for women suffrage by the name of John Stuart Mills argued for freedom of speech, expression, and for the noninterference of government or society in individual behavior that did not harm anyone else. In the late 19th century Sidwick wrote his “Methods of Ethics” which became one of the foremost ethical theories. Then in the early 20th century G.E. Moore argued a set of ideals extended beyond hedonism. Which lead to alternations to the “Act” of utilitarianism which analyses the “Rule” of Utilitarianism were made by Stephen Toulmin, Nowell Smith, J.O. Urmson which was analysis by John Rawls. Last the “Act” of Utilitarianism was defended by JJC Smart.
Amber O’Conner Part 2
Stem cell research is a fast growing technology that has the potential to save many lives and change the way we view medicine, but it is also a very controversial issue. Although this research has been in the spotlight since it evolved, many do not know the issues and circumstances surrounding it. Some people do not even know exactly what stem cell research is, or what it entails, so I will begin by explaining this.
‘Stem cell research is a relatively new technology that takes primitive human cells and develops them into most any of the 220 varieties of cells in the human body, including blood cells and brain cells. Some scientists and researchers have great hope for stem cell research and its ability to uncover treatments and possibly even cures for some of the worst diseases including heart disease, diabetes, and neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s’.(Wisegeek.com) It is not the treatments or cures that causes the debate, but rather where they came from.
There are a few different types of stem cell research, the first, of which is the least controversial and is performed on human adults. These cells are taken from bone marrow or harvested from tissue samples. This is the most difficult way to obtain the samples. Another way to obtain stem cells is from the umbilical cord of a baby. These stem cells can later be used by the baby or a close relative if they develop a disease and need them to survive. The third and most controversial way to obtain stem cells is from embryos. These embryos are usually those left over from IVF (in vitro fertilization), but they can also be created solely for the purpose of research. Although stem cell research is legal and practiced all over the world, the question of debate is: should be legal? If so, what restrictions should apply?
As I said before, much of the controversy lies on the fact that embryos are used for this research. It is still up for debate whether or not embryos are alive or not. Many people believe that embryos are living beings and that they shouldn’t be killed for the purpose of research. Others, including many scientists, claim that embryos are not living because they lack organs and are only made up of tissue. Most of the embryos used for research would have been disposed of, so doesn’t it make the most sense to put them to good use? Many people don’t think so, which brings up the issue of hypothetical cloning that they believe will eventually happen as a result of this research. Another reason that many are against stem cell research is the fear that the embryos will be created and sold on the black market.
Although there are many people who are against this research, there are equal amounts of people in favor of it. They believe that this research will aid in discovering treatments and cures for many terrible diseases. Many of these people do not believe that embryos are alive, in which case they should be used to save lives. It would do no one any good to dispose of these embryos.
I believe that Stem cell research is an astonishing discovery and can lead to tremendous results, if the ethics of this study is upheld. What guidelines or criteria would ensure that this research remain legal, but also ethical?
Andrea Butenhoff Part 3
Standpoints on Stem Cell research:
Scientists are absolutely for stem cell research and the government funding for the research. Typically scientists believe that it is very beneficial, today and for our future. Most scientists, even throughout other countries would like to receive more funding for the research, as well as research centers. In the past few years the U.S, as well as other countries such as China and
Japan are getting together and holding conferences and discussion just for stem cell research.
The U.S. Roman Catholic oppose to Stem Cell research because it is “Immoral, illegal and unnecessary”, quoted from one of the Bishops. This religion believes that life begins at conception, and as we know, stem cells are really a 1 week old embryo, which would be the start of a human life. Today most religions are against abortions and believe that it is wrong; to most stem cell research is like an abortion. Some also say that if the stem cells had the moral status of a human, than they would not be able to be used for research needs. One church, the Presbyterian Church USA approves of the stem cell research and thinks that the stem cell research has good goals.
Scientists are absolutely for stem cell research and the government funding for the research. Typically scientists believe that it is very beneficial, today and for our future.
They too believe that there are benefits coming for the research mainly because the stem cells can grow into any tissue in our bodies, and be sort of a repair system.
Currently the
U.S. does fund stem cell research. There are federal funded programs for the stem cell research, and there are many different thoughts on the funding. It is found that in political parties the republicans typically go against it because of the abortion issue, as the democrats go for stem cell research because they are all for medical research funding and such. Stem cell funding is also growing around the U.S in different states that are hoping and trying to expand their research.
“As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist” I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines ” where the life and death decision has already been made”, This allows us to explore the promise and potential of stem cell research” without crossing a fundamental moral line by providing taxpayer funding that would sanction or encourage further destruction of human embryos that have at least the potential for life.” – George W. BushQuote found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-1.htmlIn
Germany, the study of stem cell research is expected to keep growing. The research is known there but it is not as big as in the
U.S., and there too are ethical problems that arise with the subject.
China is too expanding and making the subject broader. Today you will find many stem cell banks in major cities in
China. The major goal for
China is to gather more information of the subject and be safe while doing so. Lastly, men and women have different view upon the subject too.
Sources:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week448/perspectives.html, May 2, 2007,
Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, copyright 2007, Educational Broadcast Corporation.
http://www.newsbatch.com/stemcells.htm, May 2, 2007, Newsbatch Guide to understanding of Policy Issues, Stem Cell Research, Updated August 2006.
http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v5/n10/full/7400266.html, May 4, 2007, EMBO Reports, The Future of Stem Cell Research in Germany, Copyright 2004 European Molecular Biology Organization.
Rachel Davis, Part 4
Stem Cell Research through the eyes of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism can be summarized as follows: first, actions are to be judged right or wrong solely by virtue of their consequences; nothing else matters. Second, in accessing consequences, the only thing that matters is the amount of happiness or unhappiness that is created; everything else is irrelevant. Third, each person’s happiness counts the same (equality). Therefore, right actions are those that produce the greatest possible balance of happiness over unhappiness, with everyone’s happiness being of equal importance. John Stuart Mill, one of the founders of Utilitarianism, states “The utilitarian doctrine is that happiness is desirable, and the only thing desirable, as an end; all other things being desirable as a means to that end (Rachels 100)”.
Applying Utilitarianism to stem cell research requires us to make an argument. From a Utilitarian standpoint, stem cell research is ethically acceptable. First, any action or social policy is morally right if it serves to increase the amount of happiness in the world or decrease the amount of misery. The policy of stem cell research, which hopes to ease the suffering of many patients with varied illnesses, would decrease the amount of misery in the world. Therefore, such a policy would be morally right.
Most embryos used in stem cell research come from “left-overs” of in vitro fertilization (IVF). Embryos created through IVF can only be saved for 5 years; after this point they must be disposed of by law. At this point the only good use that can be put to these embryos is research. Nothing can be gained by making an embryo’s death a waste rather than dying to aid others. If we reject stem cell research on an embryo, it is highly unlikely that one more baby will be born. However, if we perform research on the embryo, it is highly likely that suffering will be relieved (as evidenced by current successful stem cell research on animals).
The end result of the destruction of embryos for use of the stem cells they contain would be so significantly positive for a great number of people that it must be the morally right action. The treating/healing of illness like Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, spinal cord damage, etc would greatly decrease human suffering and would save lives. This goal of healing justifies the killing of embryos for use of their stem cells. According to Utilitarian theory, this healing would be the greatest good which would result in the most happiness or pleasure for the greatest number of people involved. Therefore the sacrifice of embryos is necessary to result in an overall balance of more happiness over unhappiness.
The benefits of stem cell research far outweigh the cost of the embryonic life. These cells have the capacity to grow into anything we would care to differentiate them into. The social, economic, and personal costs of the diseases that may potentially be treated by the benefits of cellular therapies derived from stem cell research are also far greater than costs associated with the destruction of the embryos. Hospitals are crowded, housing there is limited, and medical staff are available in finite supply only. Reducing the amount of sick people by use of these cellular therapies would benefit our country economically which would also increase the amount of happiness in the world.
Krysta Priley, Part 5
Evaluate the application of Utilitarianism to steam cell research
Utilitarianism the greater good for the greatest number of the population. Stem cell research potential for treatments and cures for diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and diabetes. Diabetes damage to the brain, spinal cord, heart and genetic diseases. Stem cells from adults (extracted from bone marrow) are use to treat and cure leukemia. Steam cell can be saved from a baby’s embryos and a new born baby’s umbilical cord, as well as adult spinal cord. There is a advertisement out now for harvesting our newborn babies cord stem cells for later use. The major controversy is in that the best stem cells come from a growing fetus. Which brings up the debate is it right to from human embryos seeing as it would be possibly be for the greater good. When the cells are harvested from embryos the utilitarianism tic argument would be valid in that when the cells are coming from a fetus that would be aborted anyway the act would be for the greater good. This process can be beneficial to many people. In this process there are many ways that they are can do this with out having to hurt anyone.