History of Stem Cell Legislation in the United States - Research Paper Example

? Topic: Stem Cell Research Introduction Stem cell research which is also referred to as human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research is one of the contentious issues around the globe. According to Termini (2009), the controversies surrounding ESC are deeply mooted in the ethical, political and religious opinions of the public on the way the research is carried out since it touches on the sanctity of life. Stem cells derived from embryos are endowed with continued regeneration capabilities and ability to grow into any kind of body cell as opposed to mature human body cells. This ability or trait of stem cells is referred to as pluripotency and is usually very helpful in the medicinal world. It helps in studying of degenerative diseases such as leukemia as well the development of drugs that can treat many complicated diseases currently without cure (Liras, 2010). This paper will explore stem cell research legislation in regards to its history, ethics, future and related legal issues. History of Stem Cell Research legislation in the United States The history of ESC research in US is closely associated with the abortion debate that has been around for over three decades. As early as 1973, the US Supreme Court legalized abortion in the case Roe v. Wade in its decision through the argument that abortion is a private matter between a doctor and a woman. However, the legalization of abortion also led to banning of federal funding on research touching on embryos or tissues. This ban did not affect the private sector which continued in the research and saw the rise of infertility research and other related technologies. Conducting research is quite an expensive affair and much of the fruits of research being enjoyed currently in the world have taken the concerted efforts of both the private and public sectors. Therefore, much of the debate on ESC revolves around federal funding which can be very instrumental in achieving technological breakthroughs that seem untenable (Wertz, 2002). After the Roe v. Wade case ruling by the US Supreme Court that legalized abortion, the Congress imposed temporal moratorium on the funding of ESC research and allied technologies. This action by the Congress was taken so that regulatory bodies could be formed which in turn would come up with guidelines on the way forward. Prior to this ruling in 1974, there were no guidelines on which research to be supported with taxpayers’ money from the federal government. Shortly after this case (1974), a commission was formed (National Commission NC) which would be involved in the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (PHSBBR). The first order of business for the NC was development of ethical guidelines on ESC research which extended the same for fetuses and abortion. In order to make lighten its work, the NC later recommended the formation of Ethics Advisory Board (EAB). The work of EAB in turn was to continually review protocols enacted by the NC with regards to ESC related research. When the guidelines were put in place, a de facto moratorium was arrived at which allowed simple non-therapeutic research on embryos to continue (Hall, 2008; Wertz, 2002). Research continued in non-therapeutic ESC research with federal funding although the private sector was doing its own research in ESC. Outlawing of federal funding for ESC research really hampered its progress while other developed countries were slowly getting ahead of US. The de facto moratorium developed by the Congress ensured that basic research was carried out which could not present a major breakthrough without attracting public outcry. Most of the findings and outcomes of these basic researches could not by any chance lead to the treatment of diseases which is one of the promising prospects of ESC research (Skene, 2010). Proceedings of the private ESC research came into limelight around 2001 when it was announced that human embryos had been cloned from adult cells. These embryos would then be used to derive stem cells matching the donor’s cell types. The then Bush administration urged the Congress to completely outlaw all forms of cloning (Wertz, 2002). The condemnation of ESC research by the Bush administration was aimed at stopping the development of new ways or lines of acquiring stem cells as per the guidelines that had been published so far. Many of these guidelines had been published by National Institutes of Health (NIH) under the Clinton Administration. In reality, these guidelines had sought to provide modalities through which ESC research could be conformed to Congress’ requirements for federal funding. Publication of the guidelines acted as a catalyst for opening debate on ESC research in the American public. Political, religious and ethicists joined in the ESC debate which led to partisan stands in matters relating to conceptualization and understanding of culture. Federal funding for ESC research received a back lash from Christian organization due to the fact that the research involves embryos’ destruction. The framing of ESC research in the controversial abortion context led to polarization of the issue and eventual increase of media coverage. The polarization of the debate happened in all fronts including the political and academic circles (Termini, 2009). Comparison of ESC Research to Comparable Statutes in other Countries The current situation on the issues and perspectives on ESC research in US is similar to other countries especially in the Europe. In both regions, the opinion on funding of the research is highly polarized with equally balanced opposing arguments for and against funding. This funding is directly connected to public opinion which in turn informs the politics (politicians) which in turn determine legislation and funding. The current federal funding of US ESC research is permissible for very limited for embryonic stem cell lines that were developed before the year 2001. Most of these cell lines are of poor quality owing to the long storage time and as such may not lead to good results. However, some individual states in US are seriously deliberating on funding the research although it has to be decided through a referendum. Similarly, the situation in Europe is not different because the European Commission (EU) has a tight leash on ESC research funding. As the executive legislation body in many divergent bodies, EU has not prioritized ESC research but individual member states are left to regulate the research. Owing to the divergent religious, cultural and political views in these EU member states, the policies in place oscillate between two extremes of deeply restrictive and highly permissible (Bosch, 2005). The situation in Europe is further compounded by individual countries’ amorphous stand on the research which keeps on continually changing. In 2005, there were some breakthroughs across the EU bloc in making decisions pertaining to the research. The France government gave the green light for its researchers to import new stem cell lines but not develop their own. In the same year, the debate on the research was subjected to a national referendum in Switzerland which saw an overwhelming support for the funding of ESC research. The situation in Spain was somehow fluid due to its strong ties with Catholic religion. Research was allowed to go on although it was limited to four specific areas after five years of seeking the government’s consent by the academic fraternity (Bosch, 2005). In summary, several countries such as Netherlands, UK, Belgium, Sweden, France, Denmark and Greece allow importation of stem cell lines from other countries. In addition, Sweden, UK and Belgium have permitted the replacement of nuclear of somatic cells commonly referred to as therapeutic cloning. Countries such as Lithuania, Slovak Republic, Ireland and Poland have completely prohibited ESC research. There is a total forbid on stem cells procurement from surplus embryos in both Italy and Germany although they can import them. Other EU member states do not have specific laws regulation or laws on ESC research. In Germany however, the importation is strictly allowed for cell lines generated before 2002 and breaking of this regulation may lead to prosecution. These restrictive laws have led to ESC researchers in Europe to move their studies to Asia where regulations are not strict (Bosch, 2005; Liras, 2010). The debate in US about ESC research is quite different from EU countries due to three cultural factors with regards to perceptions about the embryo. The first one is that US is highly religious with a majority of its citizens being regular church goers. In surveys regularly conducted about church attendance in US and UK, the results show that at least 40% and 5% people in US and UK respectively attend church services. This speaks volumes about the importance of religion in the average American citizen as opposed to other countries. Moreover, a majority of these church goers in US believe in Bible as being the word of God. The highly religious American public forces the politicians to articulate their concerns on ESC research which conflicts with fundamentals beliefs of the Christian faith (Wertz, 2002). Secondly, in US the anti-abortion movement is quite active which seeks the banning of abortion. All along, ESC research has been closely associated with the abortion debate and therefore the two cannot be separated. It follows then that the activists agitating for banning of abortion are the same calling for banning of federal funding of ESC research. Antagonists of ESC research are of the opinion that the research is another form of abortion which is thinly disguised under the pretext of finding cures of diseases. In this sense, they argue that embryos are killed or sacrificed in order to save other lives which in itself violate the sanctity of human life. Many of these antagonists are pro-life conservative and religious people who do not condone violation of all forms of their religious tenets. Thirdly, the US is highly capitalistic in terms of enterprising and as such, it is increasingly becoming difficult to dissuade private entities from continuing their work in ESC research. The government is therefore caught in the middle of extreme conservative citizens on the one hand while on the other hand there are industrialists who want to exploit potentials of stem cells (Hall, 2008; Skene, 2010). The Future of Legislation of ESC Research in US The medical benefits that can be realized from ESC research have been stifled by association of the research with abortion which quenches public’s interest in advancement of the associated technologies. In the near future, ESC research and other related biotechnologies are expected to define global healthcare issues and therefore their bio-political implications should be subject to open public debate. The public interest and curiosity in ESC research is based on its potential to avail solutions that so far have not been realized using conventional medical research. These solutions have far reaching implications especially to the established global politics of nation-states (Hall, 2008). A current problem has been difficulties in establishing the culture of voluntary organ donation although in the industrialized world such problems have been partially addressed. The available programs are still plagued with problems especially the demand surpassing the supply of organs or tissues. In theory, the promises of ESC research can come in handy to address the problem of shortages in tissues or organs. Besides the bio-political problem of organ and tissues shortages, there is the incessant problem of changing demographics especially in the developed world (Bosch, 2005). The western world is faced with a fast aging population which presents a myriad of problems especially in policy making economical challenges in relation to health complications. Regenerative medicine and ESC research have potential solutions to the development of cure for degenerative diseases that develop with age and usually over burden healthcare systems. All these foreseen benefits of ESC research usually provide the impetus of continued development in the provision of significant bio-value in the future. These possible benefits are usually riddled with challenges because they only hypothetical. However, despite the fact that the benefits are hypothetical, many industrialized developed nations have debated on this issue and have agreed to try the research. Even then, the ESC research in such countries is closely controlled and monitored especially in matters relating to funding (Termini, 2009). Conclusion Stem cell research which is also referred to as human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research is one of the contentious issues around the globe. The controversies surrounding ESC are deeply mooted in the ethical, political and religious opinions of the public on the way the research is carried out since it touches on the sanctity of life. The sudden interest in this debate of ESC research is largely due to the foreseeable potentials it promises and which can only achieved using stem derived from embryos. On the one hand, there are extreme conservative citizens on while on the other hand there are industrialists who want to exploit these potentials. The result of these two extreme opinions is polarization of the matter which will eventually lead to both sides losing. The close association of ESC research with abortion has proved to be a thorn for its protagonists who seem to be cornered. In Europe, the situation is not different from the US scenario and the two extreme stands of the debate revolve around government funding of the research. An amicable solution to the debate can be arrived after bridging of this gap between the opposing opinions. References Bosch, X. (2005). In Europe, as in US, Climate for Embryo Stem Cell Research Is One of Extremes. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(18), 2202-2203 Hall, Z.W (2008). Stem Cell Research in California: The Intersection of Science, Politics, Culture, and Law. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, 10(1), E1-E18. Liras, A. (2010). Future Research and Therapeutic Applications of Human Stem Cells: General, Regulatory, and Bioethical Aspects. Journal of Translational Medicine, 8, 131-146 Skene, L. (2010). Recent Developments in Stem Cell Research: Social, Ethical, and Legal Issues for the Future. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 17(2), 211-244 Termini, R.B (2009). Does "Political" Science Exist Anymore? Embryonic Stem Cell Research in this New Political Era. Journal of Health & Biomedical Low, 5(2), 249-281 Wertz, D.C. (2002). Embryo and Stem Cell Research in the United States: History and Politics. Gene Therapy, 9(11), 674-8. Read More