My Take On The Missouri Stem Cell Initiative

By: Ray Manuel U. Paguntalan

Sunday morning as me and my family was coming out of church, my oldest daughter asked, “hey dad! What is that amendment number 2: Vote NO To Stem Cell Initiative?” After explaining to her what the stem cell is all about, my daughter (who is a very conservative person by the way) quickly dismissed the idea as absurd and unethical in the eyes of God. I too, felt the same way and somehow agreed with her …. But let’s back up a bit and think about it for a while, I asked her…… is it really?

(The nation’s eyes are focused on the senatorial race in Missouri mainly because of the two senatorial candidates who both have the stem cell issue as one of their main campaign agenda. Senator Jim Talent is anti-stem cell while Claire McCaskill is pro- stem cell. Each candidate has expressed their views and has reasons for supporting or rejecting it.)

Stem cells are primitive cells that can be manipulated and coaxed into developing into the 220 different human body cells. Scientists have found ways of developing these stem cells into most types of human cells, such as blood, brain, heart tissue, nerve cells, bones, etc. These researchers are confident that they will lead to treatments to many diseases such as bone loss, broken bones, brain damage due to oxygen starvation, severe burns, some forms of cancer , diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease, heart disease, hepatitis, incomplete bladder control, Huntington's, leukemia, lupus, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, osteoarthritis, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, and stroke!

There is not much ethical concern related to the adult stem cell research as long as there is consent obtained. However, I read that stem cell lines from adults have limited usefulness compared to the stem cell line from embryos. During the time when a woman undergoes in-vitro fertilization, she is given medication to help her produce at least a dozen mature eggs which are then fertilized by sperm. She then gets 2-4 eggs implanted on her womb (2-5 days after fertilization) in the hope of getting pregnant. So what happens to the other embryos? They are frozen for future use (which I read is very expensive), used for research, or destroyed.

So if we leave the rest of the embryos to die or destroy them (which at times happen in fertility clinics), are we guilty of murder? What if we use it for research (once the stem cell is extracted, the embryo dies)? Is that also murder? This is what it’s all about anyways, right? Pro-life people give emphasis on the stem cell research as unethical, but believe or does not really argue much on the ethical issues on discarded embryos in fertility clinics. They apparently believe that leaving the embryos to die is letting it take its normal course of dying and does not constitute to murder.

I believe this is just plain hypocrisy. How can one address one as such devious act and not consider the other? One can certainly not make an excuse for one, though done with different process, the outcome is still the same. Wouldn’t you think that if someone is anti stem cell research should also be anti in-vitro fertilization? Isn’t it more prudent to go after the source than just focusing on its end results? After all, isn’t that where it all started? I guess the argument there is….
In-vitro fertilization was discovered to bring in life and can’t be seen as unethical due to its full benefits to life. So where do we actually draw the line?

After some major brainstorming, I guess I got my daughter confused. Don’t worry, I told her. I’m confused too myself. More so that I am to vote soon on this issue. I always consider myself as pro-life, but also believes in pro-choice. I guess I’ll just have to sort this thing out. After all, I have till November to figure this out.