Embryo Adoption Revisited, Page 3
2001 Congressional Hearings on Stem Cell Research
There is no question but that research on embryonic stem cells is going to go forward, if not in the U.S., then in the United Kingdom and other countries. This fact should not stampede U.S. policymakers. It is not unique for one country to engage in actions that most other countries question, or condemn. One could easily recount examples not just from medicine, and not just from the Nazi era, but from other arenas of human activity. For instance, despite the fact that the U.S. outlawed human slavery more than 100 years ago, as did most nations, we are today confronted with slavery in at least one African country, Sudan. The point is: just because some other country may gain some purported advantage by engaging in questionable activities, that is no reason why U.S. policy should react in blind competitive activity. If researchers who want to experiment on living human embryos leave the U.S. because they cannot be supported by federal tax dollars, this is a reverse "brain drain" that cannot be stopped, given the freedom to travel and the nature of free enterprise. In the view of some of us, this is no loss because the researchers at least will not be conducting questionable experiments in U.S. laboratories.
Such research may even continue in the U.S., under private funding. Much was made of this issue in the July 17 hearing, as if such research is inherently suspect. No such outrage was expressed and no major negative results flowed from the competition between federal researchers and privately-funded researchers to decode the human genome. This is not to say that ethically illicit research should go forward without the strongest appropriate objections being raised, whether funded by tax dollars or private sources, but rather to say that some of the objections raised appear disingenuous.
At the July 17 hearing, an alternative for frozen human embryos was discussed at length: so-called "embryo adoption." Although there seems to be no reason not to cautiously move forward with embryo adoption at this time, especially given the alternatives, there are many unanswered questions which need to be explored. Some of those questions were included in a Statement for the Record provided to Chairman Souder's staff in advance of the July 17 hearing. Copies of the statement are available by email by contacting
pgidc@AOL.com.
Home
Add Your Comments!
We want to know what you think. Your comments are important to us and the other readers. You are what makes this site special.