154
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 63:
Line 63: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
Great! [[User:Cthx]]
Great! [[User:Cthx]]
I'm not so keen on creating an embryo specifically for the purposes of destroying it in order to harvest the stem cells. It just seems to be in poor taste, to be honest. I see nothing wrong, however, with parents donating unused embryos for research, or with fertility clinics donating abandoned embryos.
Many embryos have been "abandoned" by their parents. That is to say, the treatment the embryos were created for succeeded in producing a pregnancy. Fertility treatments usually require the production of several embryos, only some of which will be implanted (they sometimes keep a few left over in case they need to try a second time). When embryos are left over, the parents have 4 options: discard them, donate them to other couples, pay several hundred dollars per year to keep them in storage, or donate them for medical research. However, often the parents will start by paying for storage and then disappear; the payments stop and the embryos are abandoned. This accounts for approximately 10% of the embryos currently in storage.
Most fertility clinics, and their owners, are uncertain about the ethical and legal ambiguities involved with abandoned embryo retention/destruction, so they will take on the burden of financing the continued storage themselves.
Consider these points:
*1) Whenever an in vitro fertilization procedure takes place, <i>several</i> embryos are created, only one (or two or mmmaybe three) of which will ever produce a fetus. So, any time these treatments take place, several embryos are created for the purpose of eventually being destroyed. There's no way around this.
*2) No one in this thread, that I have seen at least, has argued that the in vitro fertilization procedure itself is unethical, therefore there is clearly some level of acceptance of the fact that embryos will be created for the purpose of being destroyed. (Now, if you want to argue that IVF itself is an unethical procedure, that's another story.)
*3) An embryo that is destroyed has served no useful function. It has not produced a fetus, it has not furthered the cause of humanity; it was essentially created and destroyed in vain.
*4) Plenty of embryos are already being donated for the purposes of stem cell research. It has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen. (The one restriction is that Federal Government funds can not be used to support it.)
*5) An embryo donated for research has served some purpose. Its existence was not in vain and it stands the chance of possibly contributing to major medical breakthroughs.
Those points being made, I fail to see why abandoned embryos should not be donated. Their parents gave up their right to decide the embryos' fates and essentially left it up to the clinics. I would argue that the fate of an abandoned embryo falls to the owner(s) of the clinic they are stored at, and any of the 4 options I listed above (destruction, adoption, continued storage, research donation) should be available to the clinic the same as it would be to the parents.--[[User:Porthos|Porthos]] 10:35, 14 August 2007 (EDT)