Medical Issues: Federal Stem-Cell Research Ban
Stem cells are gotten from human embryos and used as specimens for carrying out medical research. The embryos are often destroyed during the research process, making opponents of abortion to liken stem-cell research to murder. In 2010, a federal court banned public spending on the research. However, a year later, a panel of appellate judges lifted the decision of the lower court ((Mears, 2011). The decision to lift the ban has been met with mixed reactions. Lifting the ban has more benefits than enforcing it.Medical Issues: Federal Stem-Cell Research Ban
Opponents of abortion do not support stem-cell research because the process involves destroying the embryos after obtaining stem cells. They say that embryos should not be destroyed but should be allowed to develop to human beings. Further, some civil societies and religious organizations discourage using public funds to finance stem-cell research because there are alternative avenues of researching without destroying embryos.Medical Issues: Federal Stem-Cell Research Ban
While filing the lawsuit to stop financing the project, the executive director of Nightlight Christian Adoptions said they want the government to invest in adult stem-cell research since it does not involve embryo destruction ((Mears, 2011). Notably, many opponents of embryonic stem cell research do not oppose the entire research process but are concerned with the need to save a life.
Although the concerns of the opponents of using embryonic stem-cell are genuine, it is essential to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the research before grading the process as unethical. First, the government should finance the project because the research could lead to the discovery of the cure for many deadly diseases and conditions.
Scientists say that the cells could help produce medicine to cure diabetes, cancer, spinal cord injuries, and Parkinson’s disease. Therefore, lifting the ban will most likely help to find a cure for many deadly diseases.
Further, lifting the ban would help save a lot of money. According to some proponents of embryonic stem-cell research, sustained financing would help researchers to carry on with the process productively. Also, the government would not need to cancel ongoing experiments (Harris, 2011).
Notably, thousands of people die annually from diseases and conditions such as cancer and spinal cord injuries. As a result, a means that would save the life and future of millions of people should be highly encouraged. Therefore, since by using a few stem-cells, the entire globe can benefit, the lifting of the ban on federal stem-cell research was highly ethical.