Sandy in Indy Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I do not support embryonic stem cell research. I do support adult stem cell research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reya Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I believe this reflects the ethics behind keeping the embryos frozen, or worse to destroy them. I don't think they should be destroyed either. I agree it is a problem to have freezers full of embryos. But the answer isn't to destroy them. The problem is in the indiscriminate creation in the first place. In my medical ethics course in college we discussed the ending of life support. The rule in most cases of life support withdrawal is whether or not the person has the potential to survive on their own in time. In other words, do they have the potential of life? You can not withdrawal life support if the person has the potential of recovery. The same rule should apply to embryos. They all have the potential for life. Even when they are in the blastula phase. The *potential* is still there. To do research on these "cells" is truly objectionable to me. Me, too. Remember, also, two things: 1. NOTHING useful has come from embryonic stem cell research. It is being funded almost completely as a political move, not because there's much of any hope that it will be a decent therapy for anything. 2. Those who are working to make stem cell research funded have the next step planned already--to encourage the creation and proliferation of embryos for the specific purpose of harvesting them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BakersDozen Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I wouldn't say that IVF should be unlawful! You do NOTNOTNOT have to create more embryos than you are willing to bring to term for IVF. Absolutely. We had to sign a slew of papers before going through IVF as to the # of embryos and all that. It was very clear what was to be done, what our decisions would be, etc. As for making it unlawful, I'm looking at my 10-week old IVF miracle baby right now and can't imagine her not being here. I also can't imagine anyone telling me that we can't use IVF to conceive because it is against the law. It is no one else's business, period. There are many things that I'm OK with being legislated but not in the area of reproduction - natural or otherwise. It breaks my heart to think of IVF embryos being destroyed and wish there was a way to ease the cost of "adopting" them. We looked into the Snowflake program and it was a cool 8K just to get started, the actual implantation process wasn't even included in that cost. We paid less for our own IVF than we would have going through the Snowflake program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PamJH Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I support any and all stem cell research, government or private. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen_Zarga Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I wouldn't say that IVF should be unlawful! You do NOTNOTNOT have to create more embryos than you are willing to bring to term for IVF. I think most people would agree, but the problem is we haven't yet figured out how to do this. In a typical cycle, let's say a doctor is able to retrieve 13 eggs. Of those 13 eggs, 10 eggs are mature enough to proceed and 8 are able to be fertilized. Of those 8, 5 make it to the blastocyst stage. Of those 5, 3 are implanted. Of those 3, only one makes to to a full term baby. And that is generally a best-case scenario. (And to add to the best case scenario, only 1 of those 2 remaining frozen blastocysts survive the thaw and become a live baby for the second round.) The success rates in IVF are something crazy-low, like 30%. At $20K a cycle, it is hard for many people to justify only retrieving 2 or 3 eggs, hoping not to have "extras." You can't generally tell who is going to be successful (i.e. all eggs retrieved fertilize, grow to blast, and become a live birth) vs who isn't; people going through IVF are generally doing it because they haven't been able to get pregnant any other way. I don't have an answer, but I also don't think there is a simple solution. Sorry I got OT. Maybe we should start a new thread about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim in Appalachia Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I think it is wrong to destroy life. It should always be illegal to be allowed to take someone else's life for your own personal gain. Other stem cell research is great. I hope they are able to make the great strides they believe they will make with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I support stem-cell research (any kind). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I don't support *fetal* stem cell research. Adult scr has proven to be quite effective in various areas. I certainly don't support government funded stem cell research. If there is a chance of scr curing anything, private companies would be all over it for the profit. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holly IN Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I too do NOT support embryonic stem cell research, and answered "No" on the poll because the common vernacular refers to it as "stem cell research" as if the adult version doesn't exist! ARGH! That is why I voted no. I do support Adult stem research but NOT fetal/embryonic research. Holly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holly IN Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I don't think the question in this instance is which is more ethical. As I believe embryos are human life, both are unethical from my world view. No moral braking points seem to have been put in place with the development of IVF, allowing couples and Doctors to create more embryos than needed. There should have been some provision made on how "extra" embryos would be handled. Perhaps a couple could have to offer the embryos a chance at continued life through more implantations (Not all at once like the woman in CA, though!) or offer them out for adoption. There are organizations like Snowflake Children which advocate for adoption of abandoned embryos. To hold embryos frozen indefinitely, to discard them like trash, to experiment on them are all unethical. To use them to save lives sounds noble, but it is without the consent of the developing person. It pits the fully developed humans against the weak, without voices. Should comatose people be used for medical experiments because there's a promising new potential cure that can be extracted from the comatose brain? We could argue that those people will probably never wake up again, their lives are going to waste. But the end justifies the means is not a good argument. I hopefully am coming across in a discussion tone, maybe a little passionate, but not angry or upset. I do feel strongly about this. :iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree: Holly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holly IN Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 In regards to the IVF, life begins at conception. So life is already started before the embryos are frozen. To me that is very unethical to use the "discarded" embryos for stem cell research. There is life in the discarded embryos. Holly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutor Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I don't support *fetal* stem cell research. Adult scr has proven to be quite effective in various areas. I certainly don't support government funded stem cell research. If there is a chance of scr curing anything, private companies would be all over it for the profit. Apparently, there is a Japanese resaerch team that discovered a process a couple of years ago that entices adult stem cells to "revert" to a fetal state. This would eliminate a need for fetal cells in research that requires a fetal origin. Also, treatments with adult stem cells would allow for self-donation and virtually eliminate the problem of rejection. I'd love to see research go in these two directions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBH Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I believe this reflects the ethics behind keeping the embryos frozen, or worse to destroy them. I don't think they should be destroyed either. I agree it is a problem to have freezers full of embryos. But the answer isn't to destroy them. The problem is in the indiscriminate creation in the first place. In my medical ethics course in college we discussed the ending of life support. The rule in most cases of life support withdrawal is whether or not the person has the potential to survive on their own in time. In other words, do they have the potential of life? You can not withdrawal life support if the person has the potential of recovery. The same rule should apply to embryos. They all have the potential for life. Even when they are in the blastula phase. The *potential* is still there. To do research on these "cells" is truly objectionable to me. :iagree: Very well put. I do not support embryonic stem cell research under any condition. Adult stem cell research is fine as long as the adult consents and government $$$ is not involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kissy Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I am not sure where I stand on the issue..I voted other but I know I don't support federal tax dollars to go to it. Right now we are in a recession and can't afford to spend anymore. We really need to reel in the government spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I fully support stem cell research for the reasons already mentioned by Bill and Ria. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovemyboys Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 The success rates in IVF are something crazy-low, like 30%. At $20K a cycle, it is hard for many people to justify only retrieving 2 or 3 eggs, hoping not to have "extras." ....... people going through IVF are generally doing it because they haven't been able to get pregnant any other way. I don't have an answer, but I also don't think there is a simple solution. Good points, QZ. The process is complicated and doesn't have a high success rate. It's unfortunate, as the other poster mentioned, that the cost of "adopting" left over frozen embryos is so high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutor Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Is it more ethical to dispose of (other other-wise discard) embryos left-over from IVF measures? Because this is (or was) the situation. Embryos have been destroyed for many years, when the alternative existed to create new stem cell lines with those embryos that other-wise would have been slated for destruction. Bill, I hope you don't mind that I am using your post as a spring board, but it reminded me of a thought that has been going on in the back of my mind for a few years. I am not familiar with the intricacies of IVF procedure, so forgive me if this already exists (from the results I am assuming it doesn't), but I would love to see IVF contracts include a voluntary parental rights termination clause if the embryos aren't implanted within a certain time frame. Then the embryos would be free to be adopted by a couple hoping to have children but not able to produce their own embryos (either due to biological or financial reasons). This would allow childless couples to have children of their own and eliminate the unwanted embryos problem (coupled with limiting the number of embryos produced in the first place, of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Bill, I hope you don't mind that I am using your post as a spring board, but it reminded me of a thought that has been going on in the back of my mind for a few years. I am not familiar with the intricacies of IVF procedure, so forgive me if this already exists (from the results I am assuming it doesn't), but I would love to see IVF contracts include a voluntary parental rights termination clause if the embryos aren't implanted within a certain time frame. Then the embryos would be free to be adopted by a couple hoping to have children but not able to produce their own embryos (either due to biological or financial reasons). This would allow childless couples to have children of their own and eliminate the unwanted embryos problem (coupled with limiting the number of embryos produced in the first place, of course). I don't mind. I believe such programs exist. This, I believe, is what is meant by the term "snowflakes". And I agree this seems like a great (and here I struggle to find the right word) outcome for embryos (potential people) that would other-wise might be destroyed or languish in freezers. I'm all for it. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CactusPair Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I support all forms of stem cell research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommylaw Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I'm here too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Is it more ethical to dispose of (other other-wise discard) embryos left-over from IVF measures? Because this is (or was) the situation. Embryos have been destroyed for many years, when the alternative existed to create new stem cell lines with those embryos that other-wise would have been slated for destruction. If stem cells can deliver on the hope being offered on many fronts (a condition not yet fully proven) the ethics from my perspective is clear. It's better to use them in an attempt to cure disease and other terrible medical conditions rather than simply throwing them away. Bill :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.