Human embryonic stem cell research: why the discarded-created-distinction cannot be based on the potentiality...

Area of Science:

• Biomedical Ethics
• Stem Cell Research Policy

Background:

• Public policy on human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research faces challenges due to ethical debates surrounding embryo use.
• A common compromise involves permitting research on 'spare' embryos while prohibiting research on 'created' embryos for research purposes (d-c-d).

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically analyze the ethical consistency of the d-c-d position in hESC research.
• To examine the 'potentiality argument' used to defend the d-c-d distinction.
• To propose an alternative approach that may foster broader consensus.

Main Methods:

• Philosophical analysis of ethical arguments and revealed versus professed beliefs.
• Examination of the concept of potentiality and its application to human embryos.
• Comparative analysis of different ethical stances on hESC research.

Main Results:

• The d-c-d position is ethically difficult to maintain due to internal inconsistencies.
• Defenders of d-c-d grant a relative moral status to embryos, contingent on internal and external criteria of potentiality.
• Potentiality as a variable, externally dependent value cannot logically justify the d-c-d distinction.

Conclusions:

• The d-c-d compromise in hESC research is not ethically robust.
• An approach permitting research on created embryos may align better with the underlying values of d-c-d proponents.
• Revising the policy could lead to greater consensus and advance research to alleviate human suffering.