This experimentation could be attack as unreliable. If you test a drug for side effects, you will not see all the adverse reactions in a neomort. Imagine a blood pressure medication with vision side effects, would this be noticed in a neomort? I do agree that drug testing would be tried on the neomort, but could be determined too unreliable. Gaylin then argues that the more controversial uses, banking and harvesting, will fix current problems of organ donation.
When Doctors and Scientists wanted to find out more about the cells Henrietta’s children were then used in research without their consent. This same kind of unethical practice continues to happen now. The bioethical legacy of Henrietta Lacks, as Skloot conveys, is complex yet instrumental to out legal understanding of human experimentation today. Debates over bodily rights, doctor-patient confidentiality, and the use of information acquired through genetic testing, have led to state and federal oversights such as the 1978 Protection of Human Subjects in Medical Experimentation Act, the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and the 2008 Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. (Tunc 40-41) “Today many Americans have their tissue on file somewhere.
The link between the baby’s present condition and the three-year-old sisters is that, the three year old might have transferred the virus to the six month old through touch, coughing or sneezing. As it is with shingles the virus was dormant for four month till the time that their mother noted the blister like lesions on the babies back (page17). 4.The baby did not have symptomatic illness when his sister was experiencing it because at the time, the baby was being breast fed by the mother. This means the baby was getting natural antibiotics from his mother through the breast milk. Two moths after the cessation of breast-feeding, the baby did not have that protection anymore.
Eventually, a bill was passed by George W. Bush, which gave hospitals the power to remove patients from life support. Soon after, Terri's feeding tube was removed and thirteen days later her heart stopped beating. (NNDB) Similar cases to Terri’s happen more than people think; it is a current growing dilemma. Nobody knows who was right in that situation, but many wonder if it was necessary to keep her alive or if it would have been better to take her out of misery. In “CORRECTED: When to Let Go?
“The ability to make precise genetic changes in human stem cells could be used to boost their therapeutic potential or make them more compatible with patients’ immune systems.” (Wexler 13) This achievement has set more boundaries to therapeutic cloning making funding for clone experiments dispensable. Surely, Therapeutic Cloning is a subject that should be left alone for the safety of our future generations and because it is option to an advancement in medicine not the only solution for mankind. Cloning is the type of technology that humans are not ready to face. Cloning comes with a lot suffering to the clones themselves. Clones would not have their own purpose in life or originality.
The moral argument is that scientists are killing fetuses to improve the medical condition of living patients. I think that this argument is completely absurd. I think that if a person wants to donate an embryo for this type of research, it should be left up to them. My way of thinking on this issue is very nonconsequentialist which insist that consequences, effects or outcomes are irrelevant: morality is about doing what is right as a matter of principle, regardless of consequences. That means you do the right thing no matter what happens (Thiroux).
Many people do not realize the significance this research can have on a human and society. This research can make paralyzed humans walk again. If this research was legal then who knows how far it can advance many different medical fields. It argued that this research is immoral because a fetus must be used, but this topic falls on all the same lines as abortion. The fetuses that come out of abortion can even be used in stem cell research.
Abstract The ability to use embryonic stem cells in research leads to major medical breakthroughs; the use of stem cells should be permitted and supported. Stem cells have the ability to acquire cures for diseases such as: Multiple Sclerosis, HIV, Alzheimer's, Cancer, and vast amounts of other diseases. Ethical and Religious beliefs influence peoples outlook on embryonic stem cells which can give embryonic stem cells a bad image. But, the truth is, embryonic stem cells give hope to many people suffering from diseases that, at this point in time, have no cure. "In the end, it's possible that human beings may die so that embryos will live.
The routine practice of physician-assisted suicide raises serious ethical and other concerns (Snyder, 2004). According to ACP-ASIM, legalization of physician assisted suicide would undermine the patient–physician relationship and the trust necessary to sustain it. It would alter the medical profession's role in society and endanger the value our society places on life; especially on the lives of disabled, incompetent, and vulnerable individuals. The Hippocratic Oath is one of the oldest binding documents in history. Its principles are held sacred by doctors, “Treat the sick to the best of one's ability, preserve patient privacy, and teach the secrets of medicine to the next generation” (Hippocratic Oath, n.d.).
Cultural – this could be due to the area you were brought up or the people you are friends with. For example the music people listen to. Moral – is all about what people believe to be right or wrong for example some people may be against animal testing as they feel it is cruel or unnecessary, others may believe it’s a good thing as it helps create new medicines and drugs to save humans. This can affect people in the health and care industry because of their beliefs. For example if a doctor is of the Jehovah witness belief and they have a bleeding patient they may not believe it is right to give them a blood transfusion but as the patient may not share that belief and it is in the patients best interest the doctor should perform the transfusion regardless of his own beliefs.