Updating the Argument for Permitting and Federally Funding Stem Cell Research

Stem cell technology has advanced in recent years, raising the question of whether we might be able to bypass those concerns which traditionally have troubled opponents of stem cell research the most. In this light, we examine the major new techniques for the creation of human stem cell lines (HSCs), including induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) and somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) in order to assess whether either of these two alternatives are practically or ethically more advantageous than a reliance on the use of embryos procured in excess from in vitro fertilization (IVF). We conclude that these more recent techniques provide neither functionally comparable alternatives nor a straightforward escape from the moral difficulties involved in embryonic destruction. We then address anew the question of permissibility of stem cell research in comparison with two other biomedical ethical issues, namely, abortion and euthanasia. Finally, availing ourselves of the doctrine of double effect, we advocate for a permissive policy regarding the use of embryos in stem cell research and additionally provide fresh grounds for allocating federal funds for this research within a pluralistic society.