Ethical Analysis of a novel My Sister's Keeper by Jodi Picoult - Essay Example

Analysis of My Sister’s Keeper with Respect to Stem Cell Therapy and Research The novel by Jodi Picoult, My Sister’s Keeper details a scenario involving a couple and their children. One of their children, (Kate) suffers from leukemia and is in need of a bone marrow transplant. Their other child (Anna) who was conceived specifically to be Kate’s bone marrow donor, is somehow suspended in the middle, “I was born for a very specific purpose. I wasn’t the result of a cheap bottle of wine or a full moon or the heat of the moment, I was born because a scientist managed to hook up my mother’s eggs and my father’s sperm to create a specific combination of precious genetic material.” (Picoult, 7,8). This situation is unique because the physicians involved with the child’s care, advise the parents to undergo in vitro fertilization in order to produce a child with a similar genome to their sick daughter, Kate. This can be done by selecting an egg and sperm which when combined, renders an offspring with many of the same alleles as another offspring from the same mother and father, Kate. It is hoped that by producing such a sibling, Kate may then be able to acquire bone marrow from her new sibling who is a perfect match to her tissue and blood type. This novel looks closely at the topic of both stem cell therapy and research by applying it to a real life situation in which Science can provide a solution and a cure. In fact, the author was inspired to write the novel after reading an article detailing almost the exact same scenario in a particular family. The purpose of this paper is to examine the technology of stem cell research and its endless possibilities, with regard to the question of ethics. In most cases of medical and Scientific technology, the goal is to determine if the benefits out weigh the risks. This is the case with the FDA’s approval or denial of new drugs and medications. Although it is assumed that most medications or therapies will carry some type of risk, it is hoped that these risks will be overshadowed by the therapeutic aspects of the treatment in question. In the case of stem cell research, the big question of whether or not it carries great potential, is not an issue. In fact, the potential is undoubtedly almost boundless. The ability to re-grow failing or damaged organs, limbs, tissues and so on would be possible. Additionally, diseases once considered an untreatable death sentence, would most likely be eliminated eventually, with the use of stem cell therapy. The issue however, is whether or not it is morally or ethically sound to use stem cells or to even obtain them. In the case of Kate and Anna, the sisters which Jodi Picoult’s novel centers around, there is a very real and present reason to undergo not only in vitro fertilization, for the purposes of saving a life, but also the harvesting of some of Anna‘s tissues in order to treat Kate (essentially using living, human tissue which can be considered as akin to stem cell therapy). Kate is suffering from leukemia and requires a bone marrow transplant. Her parents go to the extreme of having a specific procedure done in which a very particular combination of Sperm and egg are combined to produce an offspring with very similar DNA, to that of Kate’s. More specifically, Anna’s DNA would be an attempt at producing the same allele combinations which Kate possesses, thereby ultimately possessing the same phonotypical results as Kate, only healthy. This in vitro fertilization results in Anna, who the reader meets right away in the book, at the age of 13 years old. On one hand, it can be said that Anna is produced for a purpose and is able to help save a life, with her existence. This is therefore not ethically wrong as a life is potentially being saved. On the other hand however, Anna is subjected to multiple procedures and a life of constant medical intervention in order to utilize her tissues to save her sister’s life. Certainly, many religions would interpret this as “playing God”. There is of course a line insinuated by this suggestion. If it is acceptable to take antibiotics to rid one’s self of the occasional bacterial infection, at what point is medical intervention stepping on the toes of God? This continues to be debated, specifically in the area of stem cell research. Stem cell research began to heavily appear in the media during the last decade or so. Primarily, it received a great deal of attention as it promised hope to bleak areas of medicine such as cancer research, genetics (specifically in the area of genetic defects and diseases), malformations, serious injuries and multiple other areas of Science. Stem cells can be defined as a type of unnamed cell (or a non specific or undifferentiated cell) which could be exposed to any number of chemical pathways in order to become specific. For example, when stem cells are exposed to certain chemicals or cells which are responsible for kidney functions, the stem cells differentiate and become kidney cells and so on This process is known as differentiation and is a normal occurrence for embryonic cells in utero. The significance of this, was that scientists began to recognize that all kinds of tissue could be potentially regenerated with the use of stem cells. The dilemma however, came when the catch phrase “fetal cells” or “aborted fetal cells” which created a stigma that began to define the origin of ‘stem cells’ more than the endless life saving potential which they possessed. Since this time, stem cell research has been extremely controversial, particularly with respect to religious views and overall medical ethics. Stem cell research has not advanced quite as far as many scientists have hoped, due to ethical laws and political issues, but its further research could very well promise an end to cancer, organ failure, (the permanence of) loss of limbs and even Alzheimer’s disease. Further cause for its scrutiny was present when a series of isolated cases resulted in physicians and scientists who paid women to become pregnant and then allow for an abortion, rendering stem cells for research. The ethical laws surrounding the paying of individuals to conduct such tests are clear and dictate that this is not scientifically ethical in practice. Specific religious and political groups were so enraged by such occurrences and began to raise a great deal of questions regarding the practice of researching stem cells in general. Ultimately, it is usually stem cells from blastocyste which are already scheduled to undergo abortion, which render stem cells at this point. Additionally, the life which is theoretically lost in the process of abortion, yields a larger ratio of preserved life, when the aborted material is used in either stem cell research or therapy. After reading My Sister’s Keeper, the question of ethics surfaces when Anna realizes her purpose, as that purpose is why she was conceived. On the inverse, the question of her personal choice and her decisions about her body are raised. The fact that Anna is essentially created to save her sister, becomes very real to her as does her decision to make a choice in the matter of whether she wishes to be subject to invasive procedures in order to save her sister or whether there is another option, such as legal, medical emancipation from her parents. Anna peruses a case in the civil courts, to declare her medical emancipation from her parents thus affording her the sole decision making power in the future, in regards to her body and its medical treatment or invasion. She employs the pro bono help of a lawyer named Campbell Alexander, who achieves her medical emancipation but also is driving the day of the fateful car accident. Ultimately, Anna is victiom to a fatal head injury in this very car accident but is able to become an organ and tissue donor for her dying sister, Kate. The book eventually comes full circle to a point where though Anna’s human autonomy and choice is the topic of legal and ethical argument, her overall existence and eventual death are justified in that they contributed to Kate’s treatment and possible life extension. Not many people can boast such a purpose and such altruism at the end of their life. When Anna is granted medical emmancipation, she leaves the courthouse only to be killed on the way home, in an accident. Her organs however, are saved and given to Kate and other individuals in need of them who match her tissue and blood type. The ending to this book suggests an almost repreival from ethical guilt, by implying that Anna was ultimately able to save her sister’s life as well as the lives of others, just like many others who have passed away and have been organ doners. The factt hat she was purposely planned and conceived in a laboratory, is really beside the point in the end. The take home message, is that she was able to save lives when hers was lost just like so many lives are lost each day. In the past, many medical procedres and therapies have been viewed as ethically wrong or an intrusion on the territory of a creator, or God, to be specific. Interestingly enough however, these same practices are now not only considered to be ethically correct but are also quite common and necessary. Such procedures like organ transplants, blood transfusions and even in vitro fertilization; have been harshly critiqued before becoming a standard practice in modern medicine. This is not to say that the subject of practices involving organ donation or blood transfusions is not periodically questioned by specific groups or organizations, but certainly not to the extent that stem cell research has undergone in the past decade or so. Organ donation and receipt has been somewhat of a moral argument when it came to who received organs or who was eligible to receive organs. An example of this is reflected in a recent ABC news article which exposed a UCLA doctor of accepting money from Japanese crime bosses in exchange for organ transplantation. The controversy was not only the fact that the individuals receiving the organs were foreign and were therefore reaping the benefits of a system which they did not pay into, but also that they were in fact criminals and were being bumped up to the top of a waiting list. Ultimately however, U.S. law dictates that whether or not someone is a convicted criminal , they are still entitled to the same type of medical care and life saving techniques as anyone else including those with no criminal record. (Childs, 2008). The main elements of criticism which stem cell research faces are first and foremost, where and how the stem cells originate. As stated before, stem cells are found in human embryos and fetuses, (different nomenclature only represents different developmental stages). To be more specific, they are found in what is called a blastocyste. A blastocyste is a fertilized egg at four days past conception. Many religions view a fertilized egg as a human life. The question over when life begins exactly has also been at the heart of the controversy. Stem cells can be obtained through embryos which are created in a laboratory or can be found in utero, naturally. The latter of the two scenarios would result in abortion in order to retreive the stem cells. Of course, women have the right to choose whether to keep or terminate a pregnancy, and in the case of pregnancies which will be terminated, it only makes sense to preserve biological material which will otherwise be disposed of in an unceremonious fashion. Utilizing stem cells from aborted fetuses would ultimately provide the means for preserving life itself by allowing scientists to take those cells (otherwise discarded) to provide a cure for a sick or dying individual. As of this decade, President George W. Bush has taken the decision of whther to continue or cease stem cell funding, into his own hands and into the hands of Washington politicians, when it is a matter of Science, “The question of using stem cells for research is intrinsically scientific, and yet has become the political cause du jour in Washington. The debate surrounding the cells threatens to rend traditional alliances, challenging our comprehension of life and leaving some abortion opponents in a very uncomfortable spot: Is it possible to protect the strict boundaries inherent in the "sanctity of life" and still harvest these cells to help the living among us?”(Reeves, 2001). Incidentally, whether stem cell research is occurring or not, has no real bearing over the number of abortions which take place every year. If anything, it allows for women who have had to make difficult decisions in their best interest, rest knowing that the fetus that they were unable to keep, went towards important Scientific research which will potentially save countless lives in the near future. This is an interesting parallell to the novel by Jodi Picoult, My Sister’s Keeper. The parallell here is that when Anna fought for her right to make decisions regarding medical intervention or testing done on her body, she won that freedom. But, before fate intervened and rendered her legally dead in a car accident, she made the decision in the car, to provide help to her sister Kate, “Now, based on the day, I sometimes want to be a micro surgeon, a poet, a ghost hunter. Only one thing’s a constant. ‘Ten years from now,’ I say, ‘I’d like to be Kate’s sister.” (Picoult, 412). What this ending does is it reminds us that individuals should have the right and the power to make decisions regarding their body, particularly medical ones. Additionally, it reminds us that Science is allowing us at this point in time, to intervene in human existence in medical ways that will allow our survival for centuries and millennia to come. The greater message here however, is that with Scientific advancements such as stem cell research, in vitro fertilization and cloned human tissue; we are ultimately able to preserve the sanctity of all human life. Works Cited: Childs, Dan (2008) “Yukaza Transplants Spotlight Organ Network” ABC News, Medical Unit, retrieved 5 July, 2008 from website at: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4966543&page=1 Picoult, Jodi, (2004) “My Sister’s Keeper”, New York, Atria Books. Reaves, Jessica, (2001) “The Great Debate Over Stem Cell Research“, Time, in partnership with CNN, retrieved 6 July, 2008 from website at: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,167245,00.html Read More