Saturday, August 31, 2019

TV is Bad for You

Many people around the world spend tireless hour staring at the TV screen every single day. TV is becoming like a drug, people are addicted to it! TV’s can expose to us the weather forecast, sports and global events. TV’s also can give quality entertainment, education programs and something to look forward to after a harsh day. Though there are advantages, there are also many more disadvantages to watching TV. The passage from ‘Small screen big trouble’ about the crime wave of the Bhutan clearly shows the negative impact from TV. An editorial warns: â€Å"We are seeing for the first time broken families, school dropouts and other negative youth crimes. We are beginning to see crime associated with drug users all over the world –shoplifting, burglary and violence. † This editorial warning was shown after the Bhutan had free access to the TV. Firstly, TV can ‘brainwash’ people, youths especially. The study by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that children aged between 2-18 years spend an average of 5 hours ? watching TV every day. That’s around a third of the time an average person is awake for. Watching 3 or four hours of TV everyday can develop your mind to abnormal levels of uncertainty. In fact according to a researcher, three in five percent of children in the US were diagnosed with attention â€Å"deficit disorders†, this unnatural level leads to laziness, restless, and impulsiveness. Watching long hours of TV also leads the loss of clear eyesight. Secondly, watching the TV can give negative impacts on children’s behaviour and education. According to a researcher, the children in grade 4 who had a TV in their bedrooms achieved lower scores than children who did not have one. Poor study was also linked to the increasing numbers of aggressive behaviour in children such as bullying. Children often stay up late for late night shows which often have inappropriate themes and can also affect their sleep. Children that are not sleeping well are more likely to feel tired and doze off than being active and concentrating on their studies. During childhood, children are most likely going to gain knowledge by the simple rule: monkeys say, monkey do. This can explain why the Bhutan youths committed such inappropriate actions. Yes, we are seeing some different types of crime, but that just reflects the fact that our society is changing in many ways. A culture as rich and sophisticated as ours can survive trash on TV and people are quite capable of turning off the rubbish, â€Å"says the deputy minister of communications, Leki Dorji. Obesity is a very serious issue today. For children over four years old, watching TV is a lead to obesity. You are basically motionless w hilst you are watching TV and sitting there will make you want to snack on something. The TV is always advertising junk food that a fattening for your bodies, like fries, chips, McDonalds, KFC, calorie soft drinks or even Krispy Kreme doughnuts. Whilst children are sitting there looking at the junk foods, they probably going to get greedy and snack on something innutritious. TV is also preventing people from going outside to get fresh air and exercise. Ultimately, TV is bad for people who watch it in excess. BY all means, watch your favourite show, but switch it off afterwards. People have underestimated the power of TV and all we can do right now is face up to it and try to make things better.

Friday, August 30, 2019

Living In A Multicultural Society Essay

Today it is not unusual to see people of all different races, ethnic backgrounds or cultural groups living in one society. Our society is formed of a mix of different people and sometimes it is not easy to define ones self. Since we live in a society that is influenced by many social aspects expressing ones personal identity may be a hard task. Aspects of society that make it hard to identify ones self include a persons sexual orientation, their ethnicity and their lifestyles. In society there are many labels that are put on people because of their sexual orientation. For years people have been taught that the correct way to live is to be in a heterosexual marriage. Andrew Sullivan states in his article What Are Homosexuals For? that â€Å"Heterosexual marriage is perceived as the primary emotional goal for your peers; and yet you know this cannot be your fate† (Sullivan 351). By stating this Sullivan makes it apparent that being a homosexual presents a challenge for the individual because he or she is considered different then others because of his or her sexual orientation. Sullivan also inquires the idea that without homosexuals in today’s society there are some things that would never be made sense of or even acknowledge. Sexual orentation may not be accepted by many in society, but it is a growing idea that people are becoming more adapt to because it is being exposed more and more in society. Another problematic area to identifying ones self is their ethnicity. Society sometimes does not make it easy to express yourself if you are not white. What I mean by this is that sometimes because you’re of a different race other then white like Spanish or African-American there may be disadvantages for you in society. For instance, I have a friend named Pedro and because Spanish is the only language he knows fluently before taking regular English courses in college he must first take and pass English as a second language. Language barriers are a part of everyday life for minorities. Not only does this mean that they will have to learn our English language it also means that they must find a way to hold on to their personal cultural backgrounds. A persons lifestyle can influence their role in society not only does it define who they are but it may present obstacles when trying to be accepted  in society. Zora Hurston lived in an all black society and was conditioned to their way of life and knew no other. Hurston states, â€Å"White people differed from colored people to me only in that they rode through town and never lived there† (Hurston 385). It was not until Hurston left her society that she realized that her lifestyle was much different then others. She expected that people of different cultures or who grew up in other areas had the same mind set as her, she found this not true. Despite the fact that she was colored there were many things that differed between her and society as whole. It was not just the color of her skin. A multicultural society presents obstacles to all humans, every person tries to find out who they are and where they stand in the world. Homosexual, heterosexual, Spanish, English, black or white it does not matter where you come from or what you look like there are always social changes, stereotypes, ethnicity differences and cultural differences, it’s just a way of life. Works Cited Huston. Zora Neale. â€Å"How It Feels to Be Colored Me.† The Presence of Others. Ed. Andrea A Linsford and John J. Rusziewicz. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 384-88. Sullivan, Andrew. â€Å"What Are Homosexuals For?† The Presence of Others. Ed. Andrea A. Linsford and John J. Rusziewicz. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 350-59.

Thursday, August 29, 2019

A Day in the Life of Me Essay

Welcome to the life of me, Jo Compton. There is nothing special about me I’m just a normal, mundane person but I thought I would introduce you into the real world. I am a man with no qualifications trying to be someone that I am not. I try not to blame my failure in this complicated world on anyone but if I had to I would blame my old college that used to be a mental institute in its early days, then I didn’t take any notice but looking back it seems a bit dubious that an institute for the mentally ill being converted into a school. My college was absolutely atrocious the teachers had no control over the pupils you could swear at the teachers and they wouldn’t hand out any punishments as if to say that it is right to disrespect those who are trying to help you for the future but the only good thing about the college was that they had excellent sports program with some of the best sports facilities in London this is mainly due to government resources because we were an under achieving school. Well, as I’ve already told you my name is Jo Compton and I live in Whitechapel, those who aren’t familiar to this place it is near the heart of the great city London (great disappointment). Whitechapel is a working class area where everything looks the same, each block of flats appears the spitting image of the other, for example if I told you to concentrate on a block of flats and then spun you around you wouldn’t have a clue which flats you were looking at. I do indeed live in one of those individual looking flats, my flat has the bare necessities with a lounge which could fool you as being a ‘Tate Modern’ exhibition as all four walls are a blisteringly stunning white with a television that’s sits in the corner blasting sounds measuring up to 30 decibels, two double seating sofas that equivalent to the Skoda Fabia in the sofa industry and lastly a table that some how has managed to maintain hold of all its unique four legs even after reviving it from previous owner with a five finger discount. Then there’s the kitchen with units that date back to the 70’s and 80’s made from the cheap MDF wood covered in a marble plastic coated affect that looks like faeces smeared over pieces of wood. The kitchen also consists of other objects believe it or not, firstly there’s the cooker that is calling out for attention as it hardly sees any action because the battered thing has a tendency to cause mini fires so I’d rather eat the ingredients raw than use the cooker as it is probably a lot more safer but to overcome this problem I bought a second hand microwave as I couldn’t afford a new one which made my life a lot easier wondering how to prepare my food but now it is a forgotten task. Lastly in the kitchen are the mismatching utensils to give a more contemporary feel to my already designer house. These houses cost as much as playing ‘Lotto’ which is a big advantage as all the house prices around the country are increasing rapidly except guess where, yep Whitechapel. Why? You may ask, it is due to several reasons why no-one wants to move to this dump. Firstly the car congestion is possibly the worst in the country with the maximum speed at about 6 miles per hour not that the government has enforced this speed ruling upon the motorists it just that it isn’t possible to go any faster because the large number of cars on the road meaning that no motorist can get above second gear as it would be pointless because you’ll probably come upon the dreaded traffic lights or waiting for some twat in a big convey or jeep, too scared to squeeze through a gap slowing us down even more and not forgetting the air pollution that is like living in a smokers’ club where all the factory chimneys act like the cigarettes and the factory owners as the smokers with us being the passive smokers having to cope with their incessant huffing and puffing, the effluence is so bad that it would only be appropriate to be twinned with Chernobyl, it just doesn’t seem fair that with have to suffer while the pollutants live in their 5-bedroom house relaxing in their Jacuzzi sipping champagne laughing at us, even if they worked hard through their school years and got good qualifications what about those who were deprived of a decent education. If I had my way I would lock all the ignorant pollutants in a room and filter their ignorance within so they can have a glimpse of how we live our lives everyday suffering from their constant contamination of ‘Mother Earth’. Another problem that degrades Whitechapel and London is that it seems that the government tried to fit the whole country in this one area making it confined and repellent to look at, this also contributes to the congestion within Whitechapel and London; you could compare this situation to a person who likes to be a perfectionist for example a purist builds and paints a model aeroplane which turns out to be good job but this isn’t enough for them only excellence will do so they keep adding to it until they over do it and the aeroplane turns out to be crap this is the circumstances that has fallen upon Whitechapel and London. I have to give Whitechapel some credit this was the place of my birth in the ‘Great London Hospital’ on September the twenty-third of 1977, those were the days, a person could live their lives with hardly any hassle only the odd couple of bills, they didn’t have to worry about being sued for absurd reasons like dropping a pen, the air was heavenly compared to today’s filth that we inhale, in those days cars seemed to be a gift from God but now we can see that it was a gift in disguise from Satan to bring the world slowly to a stand still taking us back a century. I hope this rather long passage of writing has enlightened you of the real world and of the real people, what they have to endure and cope with each day of their lives. Count yourself lucky when living your life; forget the little bad things that may happen in one day just remember that the real people in this world have to hack through much tougher ordeals each day, praying that they win the ‘Lotto’ and don’t have to live their repulsive life any more. A day in the life of me! Essay BEEP! BEEP! CRASH! (The alarm clock hits the wall) it must be 6:30 am, (I think that 6:30 should not even have an AM! ). Then I think to my self weekends shouldn’t have alarm-clocks going off on them but of course it is not a weekend it’s a Moany Monday Morning. On a Monday every one wants to know where the weekend has gone especially ME and all I can think about is Saturday night, when I was having a conversation with Sam. Lovely, lovely Sam. Then all I can hear is my mum shouting up the stairs â€Å"KIMBERLEY! KIMBERLEY! † As I have a glimpse of my clock I run out of my room and start to jump about on the bathroom floor mainly because its very cold. Then as I am doing this I jump into a lovely warm bath and before I can even think about it. Its seven o’clock and of this is the time I should be leaving. So as I am running out of the bathroom, I grab my dreary uniform, which I have worn for 4 years now (Unfortunately, Yes! ) And hurry to put it on. I am throwing my bag on my shoulder and running out the door to see my bus go racing past me but I still make it the bus in time because some one has got off the only good thing about this day so far! I step on the same bus as always with the same people as always and the same people are half asleep as always and as I’m on the way to the garage I see Tasha and Henna they come running up to me. Henna jumps at me (and she is not a light person either! ) so I hastily get my lunch and leave from Beaverwood as I leave, I get a bad feeling and YES. I am right; I have left my very, very over-due science homework at home! My first detention of the day and of the year. I have not even got in; I have already got detention fun, fun, fun! As I walk up Beaverwood road, I hear a familiar voice it is Charlotte and so I walk up with her. After talking to her for 10minites Alison turns up to remind me about the Geography test that I’ve got 1st lesson and of course I haven’t revised and I don’t have my folder with me. I am in trouble. And not forgetting science and that’s second lesson. Then the 8:30 bell goes so I begrudgingly walk into my form room for another ‘fun’ time with Miss joice my form tutor. The rest of my form walks in, in front of me I sit and talk to kirsty for 25 minutes. In this time I find out exactly what she has done this weekend and when Alison asks me whether I have done the maths homework, all I can say is â€Å"what do you think? † As the bell goes I walk upstairs to geography with Laura as I walk in Miss Aslett announces that we are going to do the test on Wednesday instead of today and for the first time to day some thing has gone right. But she hands us our homework back from last week. I did not get a very good mark on well I was trying to do it in Friday’s ICT lesson! And I did have a bit of trouble especially as I was do my ICT coursework at the same time . As I take zero notice in my geography lesson, I think About my Spanish Module which is during forth lesson. The bell goes ‘saved by the bell’ then break I spend sitting in my form room mucking about with my mates and trying to eat but when Karen around that will never happen! After break my second favourite lesson maths. This week we are doing display work it is all colouring in so it is easy and I show Alison that lovely homework she would not stop going on about. Next, I plod off to Spanish when I have my Spanish Module test, which I do really well in . at the same time having fun with henna, tasta, Laura and Sarah. It is always fun in Spanish because we joke Mrs Wales around because we are nice like that! At the end of the lesson Miss announces our results I get full marks and I didn’t even revise and Miss gives everyone with full marks a housepoint . I do not even collect them any more so they are really useful! After Spanish, I have to go to my technology room to do my work, which usually takes me until about 2pm but today Mr Harris gives me some help so it only takes me until 1. 45pm. I sit and chat to him at the same time he also helps me with my homework so I do not have to do it at home thus allowing me to go out at the weekend. Because I have tech last lesson I leave my bags in his room, so I do not need to carry them back and forth from my form room. I leave his room and run to my form room and nearly fall over in the process after form it back t until o tech in which I spend an hour doing absolutely nothing well if talking counts then I did do something! At 3:15pm I leave the room and run to catch the bus. Once on the bus I throw my bags down and go to the front to talk to the driver Malcolm and the teacher that’s on duty. The bus leaves to take us all back to our lovely warm houses I get off the bus at Elmstead and walk home which takes 10- 15 minutes when I get home I go straight in the bath then get dress I watch television. At 10pm, I go to sleep until

Astronmy Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Astronmy - Assignment Example 58-60). Ursa Major has also moved downwards and has crossed the meridian and its pattern has also changed. There is unnoticeable change after ten minutes repeat of the observation (Hale, p. 60). Less change could be recorded after ten minutes. From these observations, we can conclude that Polaris is always on the meridian and a star that never sets and can always be seen throughout the day and night at the same position. Also Ursa Minor and major rotate as the sky rotates and will set at some point and cannot be seen throughout the day and night (Hale, p. 59). The nest observation was at 02: 29. Star Polaris had not changed the position but remained on the meridian line. It is acting as the tilt point of Ursa Minor. However, less change has been observed with Ursa Minor (Pasachoff and Filippenko, p. 80). Its position has changed a bit as it is on the meridian line but the pattern has not changed. On the contrary, Ursa Major is also changing in its position but the pattern has remained the same (Hale, p. 60). It is slowly approaching the west side and still the same stars seen in its pattern at the beginning of the observation could still be seen which are Mizar, Alkali, and Dub he (Pasachoff and Filippenko, p.

Wednesday, August 28, 2019

Paper on TV shows and the reading Movie Review Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Paper on TV shows and the reading - Movie Review Example Something especially ironic is noted with regards to the â€Å"Lucy Does a Commercial† scene from the â€Å"I Love Lucy† show. On the surface, the scene engages the audiences with a tongue in cheek portrayal of an unwitting Lucy slowly becoming entirely intoxicated. However, on a deeper level, the portrayal of female intoxication is only allowable within the societal constraints of that time due to the fact that it was unintentional. Moreover, a secondary level of societal conventions which are challenged as well as affirmed are with regards to the way in which Lucy refers to both the director and her husband by saying â€Å"yes sir†. Although quaint, this level of acquiescence is somehow out of place and stands in stark irony to the fact that her agreeing to do the commercial at all was built entirely upon deceit and lies to her husband (Doty 18). In such a way, the gender roles and inferiority that women held during the 1950s is adequately displayed while at th e same time exhibiting a â€Å"will to power† and liberation of male repression by Lucy’s going to whatever means are necessary in order to accomplish her goals and desires (Di Gregorio 58). The comedic irony of the entire situation is what adds to the understanding that there is a real and present flaw within society that is addressed by Lucy’s non-linear approach to male chauvinism and dominance within her own life. A similar level of parody and irony is evidenced with regards to Girls season 1 (pilot episode). The subversive level of comedy is evidenced within this particular show with regards to the way in which the girl-girl dynamics that are exhibited within the plot lines so completely and entirely differentiate from the girl-boy dynamics that are evidenced. Naturally, the audience is fully aware of the fact that men and women are different from one another both in physicality and emotional response to key issues; however, the preposterous way in which th is is presented allows for a preposterously absurd level of difference to be noted as a means of allowing the viewer to come to a more actionable understanding of how the sexes relate to one another and oftentimes experience a complete breakdown in rational understanding (Stransky 41). Elements of gender non-uniformity are allowed to permeate the plot as well due to the fact that the outlandish and absurd behavior that men/boys exhibit within the show leads the main female characters to seek each other out in a world that has seemingly turned its back to them. Although this should not be meant to define a clear lesbian dynamic, the mental state of the relationship that the two main characters share is extraordinarily intimate as compared to any other relationship that is defined or related within the show. Lastly, with regards to season 4 episode 90 of the â€Å"Roseanne† show, the viewer is presented a comically ludicrous situation in which typical teenage behavior is reacte d to in an overbearing manner by the parents. Continuing in this pattern of blissful ignorance with regards to the standard means by which children are likely to behave and would best react to corrective discipline, the adults invariably blunder into a situation in which they relive and re-institute the same overbearing style of dictatorial rule that turned them against their parents so many years ago

Tuesday, August 27, 2019

Tell It To Women Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Tell It To Women - Term Paper Example of this is witnessed with a background chorus and voices of women who perpetuate a deeply mystifying songs and motions that creates a colorful fluidity (Onwueme 128). The story is formatted in form of a play that follows a dialogue thereby allowing the growth and development of character in a vibrant and prominent manner through murmur and mute. The play is actually a lush in dichotomies. It presents of rural polarization against urban background that shares both negative and positive prejudice. Main characters are from both the urban and rural backgrounds that are presented by different cultures and buildings and structures connecting these lands. Symbolically, the rural areas or towns represent North America while the rural areas are symbolic Africa. There prejudice that lies in the story is that the North America or the Eurocentric culture is superior; therefore, the rural culture or Africa is deemed inferior (Onwueme, â€Å"What Mama Said†¦Ã¢â‚¬  21). Apparently, the stigmas in the rural areas affect inhabitants negatively. For instance, the lives of Ruth and Daisy advocate some balance that fulfills lives of the rural women. The perseverance reveals independent and collective identity that aims at breaking that daunting traditional forces transcending to modernity (Onwueme 157). However, this is not an indicatio n that the tradition is superior or inferior to the modernity but it reveals that certain aspects of modernity need to be incorporated into entire tradition or the rural lifestyle. Another major ideal presented in the story is the polarity between women and men. The rural women are represented to inhibit fundamental knowledge that they present through the power of their voices. For instance, Daisy and Ruth are initially introduced as strong women, but with difference in expertise. This practically revealed when they interact with the urban visitor, Yemoja. Daisy revert prejudice towards Yemoja whereby he strips her from the power of voice by silencing

Monday, August 26, 2019

Immigration Laws And The Catholic Church Research Paper

Immigration Laws And The Catholic Church - Research Paper Example According to the research "Immigration Laws And The Catholic Church" findings the Catholic Church considers the immigration laws in the United States to be unjust in that it treats the so called illegal immigrants in a cruel manner despite the efforts they make towards enhancing success in the nation. Most people also feel that the laws should not be adjusted but rather the immigrants should be evicted hence revealing the hatred they have upon the immigrants. The Catholic Church fears that the immigration bill may make the lives of the immigrants even more unbearable and that it has some similarities with the immigration law in Arizona hence the fear that the illegal immigrants will not be treated fairly. The Catholic Church particularly in the United States has been actively involved in the debate concerning the immigration laws where it has shown its opposition in a great manner. The church has been calling for reforms in the immigration laws arguing that all the people involved ou ght to be given the best by being treated in the best way possible as the teachings of the church stipulate for maintenance of human dignity all the time. â€Å"Behind these walls are friends, neighbors, co-workers,† said the bishop. â€Å"They are children of God, our brothers and sisters, who came to this country with hope for a better life. That is why the bishops of the United States are once again calling for immigration reform legislation in 2010. We are calling on all Catholics and people of good will to ignore the rhetoric and follow the teachings of our church.†

Sunday, August 25, 2019

Freedom of Movement in EU Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Freedom of Movement in EU - Essay Example Signed in 1992, the Maastricht Treaty provides that European citizenship confers on every European citizen a fundamental and personal right to move and reside freely without reference to an economic activity. The Treaty also provides for additional active and passive voting rights in European and local elections. Diplomatic and consular protection is also enhanced by giving the right to EU citizens to ask for the help of any Member State represented in a third Country if his/her own Member State is not represented there. Treaty of Amsterdam enforced on May 1999, extended the citizens rights and obligations by introducing a clause allowing EU institutions to take measures against discrimination on the grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. It reinforced the free movement of people by integrating the Schengen Convention into the Treaty. This also affirmed the commitment of each Member State to raise the quality and free access to education at national level to the highest level of knowledge possible with, in particular, the view to tackling unemployment. In 2001, the Treaty of Nice was sign facilitating legislation related to free movement and residence by introducing qualified majority for the decision-making in the European Council. The legal basis for the Freedom of movement for persons in the European Union is: Article 14 (7a) ECT: establishing the internal market, which includes the free movement of persons. Article 18 (8a) ECT: Union citizens have the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. Article 61 (73i) et seq: new Title IV, 'Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons'. The objectives for the Freedom of movement for persons and the abolition of controls at internal frontiers form part of the internal market in which it is not possible for internal frontiers to exist or for individuals to be hampered in their movements. Since its inception, the concept of the free movement of persons has changed in meaning so that while the first provisions on the subject referred merely to the free movement individuals considered as economic agents, either as employees or providers of services, it has gradually widened to take on a more general meaning connected with the idea of Union citizenship, independent of any economic activity or distinctions of nationality. This currently applies to nationals of third countries as abolition of control at internal borders allows people movements that could no longer be checked for nationality. The freedom of movement applies to goods, persons, services and capital, the so-called "four freedoms" but specifically under

Saturday, August 24, 2019

Trafficking and Prostitution Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3750 words

Trafficking and Prostitution - Essay Example Slogans like â€Å"personal or political† not only helped in showing expression about women inequality in daily experiences but such analysis opened the entirety of personal life to a political analysis, so that, logically, major emphases within feminism were issues of sexuality and intimate relationships. (Irvine, 1990, p. 136) Despite over two decades of an international women’s movement, feminist debates upon prostitutes never end. Though feminists have been successful in providing an account of this dilemma that has categorized the debate in two broad categories, ‘free sex’ and ‘forced sex’ but how such an all-purpose dilemma which is problematic at every instance can fulfil the deviant that is played in many societies? The outcome of such ‘feminist’ perspective is nothing but that the end of the moral career being subjected to extraordinary public regulations. Situations aftermath end up in ghettoization, arrest, jail or prison sentencing, fines, ridicule, shaming, shunning, and deportation. Additionally, prostitutes are frequently the victims of violent crime raped and beaten by clients or pimps and murdered by unknown serial killers. Feminist philosophy is a subject which has acquired much attention in the past decades regarding speculative arguments and practical politics. It is us who create and visualize differences, differences based upon characters and differences that emerge as if woman is entitled to a separate class. Despite these differences, feminist philosophers are able to gather and unite woman in a single perspective which in the vision of a philosophical mind is free of the misogyny and male bias that have characterized so much of Western philosophical tradition. Feminist philosophy’s challenge to this tradition has been the challenge of repairing the distortions, centring the marginalization, and valorizing what were once considered the trivial, if not invisible, facets of

Friday, August 23, 2019

Environmental Laws and Regulations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Environmental Laws and Regulations - Essay Example nt environmental laws under the UN Conferences on Climate Change (Montreal and Kyoto Protocols), there is strident opposition from the powerful industry lobbies, especially in the developed world, to such efforts. Their arguments are mainly based on the reliability of the predictions of the impending drastic global warming on the one hand, the exorbitant costs of meeting the new emission norms, and the impact of such costs on industry competitiveness and profitability. Competitiveness and profitability are at best comparative measures in a given set of circumstances. It has been proven time and again that compliance to laws is more economical than paying the penalties for an environmental disaster. ‘Polluter pays’ is now an accepted principle. If environmental laws are not fully implemented or are violated, the potential risk of unforeseen liability also has to be counted in the profitability calculations, and this was not being All calculations of competitiveness and profitability are reduced to nothing, and the very survival of a business is threatened, when it has to pay millions or billions of dollars as penalty for non-compliance. The Bhopal Gas Tragedy (dubbed as ‘Hiroshima of the Chemical Industry’), which killed more than 2000 and injured over 300,000 people, cost Union Carbide $500 millions (Pratima, 1998). This is a pittance since it occurred in India and would have run into several billions if it occurred in the USA. Exxon Valdez oil spill was of catastrophic proportions on marine life, with hundreds of thousands of birds killed, fish poisoned, and large-scale death of other marine life like seals, sea otters and whales. Exxon spent $ 2.2 billion in clean up operations, while the total cost was of the order of $ 4 billion (Thinkquest). The adverse publicity of such events through the print and electronic media can threaten the very survival of the concerned businesses. At individual level, consumers are concerned with the quality of their

Thursday, August 22, 2019

Earlier Women of the Twentieth Century Essay Example for Free

Earlier Women of the Twentieth Century Essay The essay is based on the examination of discourses concerning the establishment of women and analysis of shifting patterns of child care within households in the opening decades of the early twentieth century, this study argues that although household divisions of labour by gender and age existed in early modern era, a more rigid female specialization in certain types of domestic work in housekeeping and child-rearing as opposed to childbearing and expected participation in more varied forms of productive labour developed during the modern era, especially for young married women. Beginning with the middle-class concern, women started loosing their morals towards family and children. It was due to the changing attitude of women that children that once were considered dependents and consumers became income earners and productive workers in their households. A number of recent studies of colonial Spanish and Portuguese America, for instance, have demonstrated that European notions of family honour and sexual morality were adapted in specific ways to the American colonies. Commoners in early modern Spain who testified before the Inquisition resisted the idea that it was sinful to have consensual sexual relations with prostitutes or non-virgin single women. This attitude was probably common in Portugal as well. Resistance to the church’s moral prescriptions grew considerably in the Americas, where European men frequently considered it their right to take Indian or African women, and equated their status with that of single women, regardless of their virginity, previous marriage, or the terms of their consent. (Caulfield, 2000, p. 5) In contrast, for elite families in Brazil and throughout Spanish and Portuguese America marriage alliances were crucial political and economic strategies up to the nineteenth century and even later in some areas. (Caulfield, 2000, p. 6) Parents chose children’s, especially daughters’, marriage partners with care. Legitimate birth and ‘purity of blood’ which came to mean the absence of African and Indian heritage was essential elements of status, and hence family honour, although ‘stains’ could often be washed away with money. Tremendous value was placed on the sexual chastity of privileged colonial women, who were generally considered white. Elite women’s seclusion not only marked them as morally superior to common women in the eyes of their peers but, also ensured the endogamy of their class and race. Scholars disagree about how to interpret this social reality, for both the colonial period and later. Some point to the high numbers of consensual unions, illegitimate children, and female-headed households to argue that the popular classes developed a set of alternative moral values in which patriarchal notions of family, women’s subordination, and the moral ideals of marriage and women’s chastity were relatively unimportant. An existence passed almost entirely within the confines of the domestic sphere, as was the case for the majority of the women interviewed, favours the recollection of events and deeds associated with that area of activity. So it is not surprising that they supplied often very precise details about daily life, more than their husbands would have been able to do, right down to the price of groceries and their husbands’ wages during the early years of their marriage. (Caulfield, 2000, p. 56) This â€Å"family memory† does not, however, operate according to the same dates or points of reference as does official history. On many occasions during the course of the interviews, the framework of events was reconstructed around the years when children were born, a close relative died or a move took place. The women were questioned more about how they had lived rather than what they had witnessed of the events which took place around them, an approach which, in theory, minimizes the risk of mistakes or oversights. We ought not, however, overlook the fact that respondents generally attempt to preserve the image they have of themselves or of the group to which they belong. This image refers to a socially and sexually oriented construction, but one whose elements may change according to the historical period. Even if these variations alter what was taboo into what is now acceptable, behaviours that were deemed deviant in previous years-premarital pregnancy, for example-can be more difficult to ascertain. Despite present-day tolerance of behaviour of this kind, the person being questioned knows that she transgressed the norm that was in force at the time and may still feel so embarrassed that she seeks to disguise the fact, even if it means lying about the date of her marriage or the year her first child was born. According to Uno (1999) â€Å"Rather than a deliberate and conscious lie, experience reveals that omissions and evasive responses are the means used to avoid an embarrassing question that has revived painful memories†. (Uno, 1999, p. 74) Whether conscious or not, these â€Å"oversights† and â€Å"mistakes† are as significant as the memory of an event and ought to be submitted to analysis when they can be identified. Even if parents were generally content to exercise a discreet and indirect surveillance over the unmarried couple, they rarely found themselves alone with one another, so important was it to preserve the young woman’s virginity, whether or not she was of age. This concern would even grow with industrialization and the appearance of new places for young people to meet away from traditional family settings, since it became more difficult to exercise control over the young. On dates, the parents made sure that the couple was accompanied by a brother, a sister, other adults, or, if necessary, their friends. The revolution in traditions and norms took place in 1930 when domestic labour was in the context of the depression. This involved a sample of women who were already married at the beginning of that decade. The most catastrophic year according to the economic indicators, 1933, was used as a reference point. The reason was nothing other than the emergence of classes in the era, which were the resultant of lack of opportunities. The probability that women who married much after this date would have felt the effects of the Depression on their domestic labour was indeed less great. Nevertheless, in order to be able to establish comparisons, it was necessary to find women who had spent the early years of their marriages before the depression or whose husbands had been working during the first months of the marriage. The influence of the Depression and of unemployment was felt largely in urban areas and it was the men of the working class, especially unskilled labourers, and tradesmen who were primarily affected. These factors thus determined the selection of respondents who had to have lived in a working-class district of Montreal in the years between 1929 and 1939. The residence qualification, while it may seem rather vague, permitted us to enlist women who, because of their partners’ occupations, had shared the living conditions of the working class without necessarily presuming their own class affiliations. It was the factory workers who changed their occupation least often though the majority of them worked for more than one employer. They worked longer than the other women in the sample; it is among this group that is found the four women who worked for more than ten years before marriage. On the other hand, domestic work, generally detested because of its servile character and because of the extremely long hours which it entailed, is where we observe the greatest mobility, as only one informant worked exclusively as a domestic and she did so for a rather short period of time (one year). Domestics’ wages were extremely low, between one and five dollars a week, but according to one informant, â€Å"What our parents counted was the food. You understand, if you have two working, that’s two less to feed†. (Baillargeon Klein, 1999, p. 57) Most of the time, domestic work represented a transitional occupation between the home and the factory, or the office or shop. These jobs, factory worker, saleswoman or clerk, generally involved a noticeable increase in salary, but what was more appreciated were the working conditions, particularly regular hours and the possibility of contact with other working women. â€Å"It was clean, and we weren’t bored. It wasn’t like in the private homes, where the day was never over. The hell with private homes! We were happy enough-we had our evenings free†. (Baillargeon Klein, 1999, p. 96) In this connection, it must be stressed that it was not simply the household tasks or the conditions inherent in this kind of work that put them off, but also, and most particularly, the context in which they arose. Beyond the isolation, the arbitrary employers, the long hours, and the array of tasks demanded of them, what they detested above all else was the idea of being ‘in service to’ someone else, of playing the subordinate’s role in a highly personalized relationship. One major way that early modern women constructed selves, was through social networks, often women’s networks. These women fashioned their identities in relation to salons, convents, family circles, epistolary communities, and social religious groups devoted to particular reading or singing practices. For example, a trend towards devotional intimacy in France travelled through women’s letter writing, and psalm singing in churches established connections across gender and class barriers. (Adele Mikesell, 2003, p. 36) Conclusion Recent trends in women’s studies and feminist theory have influenced the conceptual framework and methodology of the facts explored about the early twentieth century women. While historians have traditionally explored continuities and discontinuities in ideas, institutions, and practices, postmodernism has given new dimension to the exploration of opposition or rupture not only in the facts, events, and ideas being studied, but also in the conceptual frameworks scholars analyse the changes that took place between 1900 and 1945. For some years, however, women’s history and the history of the family have underscored the importance of the domestic sphere and of the work which women do in it in order to understand the totality of historical reality. The work undertaken in these fields has provided evidence of the connections which exist between the family and the world of work and of the central role played in this dynamic by women. References/ Bibliography Adele Seeff Mikesell Margaret, (2003) Culture and Change: Attending to Early Modern Women: University of Delaware Press: Newark, DE. Baillargeon Denyse Klein YvonneMaking, (1999) Do: Women, Family, and Home in Montreal during the Great Depression: Wilfrid Laurier University Press: Waterloo, Ont. Caulfield Sueann, (2000) In Defense of Honor: Sexual Morality, Modernity, and Nation i

Robert Brownings The Laboratory and Carol Ann Duffys Havisham Essay Example for Free

Robert Brownings The Laboratory and Carol Ann Duffys Havisham Essay The Laboratory by Robert Browning and Havisham by Carol Ann Duffy are two poems which are representations of a womans revenge and fury that takes place when angered by a male. It is a guide to what havoc a womans wrath can cause just to get her revenge back. We also come to realise as to what length a woman can go and the malicious capacities she displays out of revenge. It shows that the actions of a man can turn the character of a woman from a calm, loving individual into that of a ferocious, almost wicked one. This is coined in a famous phrase Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. In Carol Ann Duffys poem we see how outraged she is, as in the title of the poem she only mentions Havisham without specifying that she is Miss Havisham resenting the fact that she has been rejected by her lover. In heart breaking desperation she curses Not a day since then I havent wished him dead. Bitter resentment brought even a change in her life as the verse clearly shows: Whole days in bed cawing She degrades herself to the state of an animal, even a lonely one because she came unsocial. Due to his actions, she stereotypes every male and distrusts them as shown in the phrase Give me a male corpse for a long slow honeymoon. Similarly, in Robert Brownings poem we see a woman regretting having trusted a male; however she is more outraged by the fact that the husband has betrayed her, so she curses and plans to murder her rival. She seems desperate to get her revenge back, but also enjoy the time it takes to plan her murder. Both poems portray the phrase, Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned which means that even hell does not have the fury or rage to match a woman who has been deceived. This phrase was commonly used when women started to have equal rights as men. Although these poems carry similar meaning, revenge is expressed in different ways. In Carol Ann Duffys poem Havisham we see that the victim shows great signs of rejection, although she feels that she is powerless to do anything. She is constantly aware of her situation and curses her lover for his actions. Havisham seems very passive and pathetic, while the person in Robert Brownings poem seems much more aggressive, responsive and strong to her situation. Havisham is so mentally unstable that she is only able to hope evil things will happen to him, reminiscent of a kid who is powerless to do anything when opposed by someone bigger than them. The woman in Robert Brownings poem is possibly trying to reclaim back some power by planning to actually use physical force on the target. We can also derive from these facts that the two women differ in ages. Havisham is obviously the older woman as she describes herself in the sentence ropes on the back of my hands, which may mean that her skin is fragile such as that of an old person or from so much tensing and being angry. Her old age could also explain why she has such a passive personality. We see that she is very frustrated as she uses inappropriate language in the oxymoronic phrase Beloved sweetheart bastard. This shows more resentment and hatred to the husband. While in Robert Brownings poem we see that the woman is very aware of her beauty and she says Shes not little, no minion like me! This may suggest that her rival is larger, therefore unattractive. Since we know that she is younger and more energetic, it could be why she is deciding to use physical force. These two women feel pretty much the same about the men who disturbed them however, we see that in Havisham the woman detests all males, whilst in Robert Brownings poem we see that the woman wants another chance with the husband as she says on the last line Ere I know it next moment I dance at the Kings. Both women have very low self esteem as they cannot take it that they have been left and the man has departed. They cannot accept their own fate and this has made them very weak and they cannot keep control of their own lives. The woman in The Laboratory resents her rival who has attracted her husband. She feels that removing her rival would make things better and also she thinks that she will have her husband back as shown in the phrase next moment I dance at the Kings. In Havisham the lady bear a grudge to the man who has left her on the wedding her and she is astounded to be Spinster. In the phrase her, myself she is does not even recognise who she is and clearly does not want to be in such position. She clearly wants to cause damage but because of the circumstance she does not even bother as in the sentence till I suddenly bite awake and Bang. Both of these women are mentally unstable. In Havisham, we see that she has lost the power of speech. Since she has no-one to talk to she often makes animal noises as she believes that she has been rejected like an animal. This is in the phrase cawing Nooooo at the wall and Puce curses that are sounds not words., this also shows us that animals caw and make noises so we can derive that she is already mentally stable in behaving the ways she is. She has remained in her wedding dress since the day she was supposed to get married, this suggest that she will do anything to get married and cannot carry on without getting married. In Robert Brownings poem, we see that the lady is deranged as she imagines very evil thoughts towards her rivals Pauline and Elise. She has a certain pleasure watching the apothecary which is very unusual and suggests that she is missing pleasure from being with her husband. Both women are sexually frustrated at the fact that they have been left for someone else and they considered themselves degraded. In these poems a lot of gothic literature is used throughout to emphasize on the severity and longing of a male partner. It explores madness and isolation and is set in very old houses which fit the scene of horror and evil. The poem contains many supernatural and decay in them and vivid description of death and mysterious things. Both women act in an uncivilised manner such as the phrase the dress yellowing which could mean that she does not change them and urinates in them. This also makes her seem like an animal. In The Laboratory we see that the woman goes to a secret dark place to an alchemist for making her poison. This is all associated with gothic literature. Both poems carry very similar meanings and are expressed in different ways and the supposed audience is for people who treat women as possessions and does not recognise them as a favour. Both women have reacted in very different manners but carry a same important meaning. It reinforces the fact that women may cause ultimate harm if provoked and make men more aware of them. The women are similar because they have experience the same thing, they are just reacting in different ways to each other. Which way is more efficient is another question.

Wednesday, August 21, 2019

Ethical Questions in the Stem Cell Debate

Ethical Questions in the Stem Cell Debate The Stem Cell Debate: Ethical Questions The story for the year 1997 was the sacred. We fear a Promethean blunder. We fear that our own human hubris will violate something sacred in our nature; and we fear that nature will retaliate with disaster. To protect ourselves from a possible Promethean blunder by science, we are tempted to stop further research with the commandment: thou shalt not play God! Then, during 1999, we opened the first few pages on chapter two of the cloning controversy story. I will refer to this chapter as the stem cell debate. The debate has only begun. What is not yet clear is just what needs to be debated. Perhaps nothing. Perhaps everything. What is clear is that the fallout from the cloning explosion is still lighting fires here and there. Whether or not the public will add stem cells to the fuel to make those fires burn hotter remains to be seen. Stem cells have become front page news in Australia, as well as in the United States and other countries. On February 4, 1999, the Australian National Academy of Science issued a position statement. Note the structure of Recommendation 1. Council considers that reproductive cloning to produce human fetuses is unethical and unsafe and should be prohibited.However, human cells derived from cloning techniques, from germ cells should not be precluded from use in approved research activities in cellular and developmental biology Here two things are put together. First, disapproval of reproductive cloning for the purposes of making children. Second, approval of research on human embryonic stem cells, approval even in the face of ethical squeamishness regarding embryo research. If this Australian statement is a barometer, we need to ask: what is the cultural weather forecast? What might be coming? In what follows it will be my task to report on the fast-moving frontier of stem cell research within the field of anthropology, agenda questions raised by science that need to be addressed by systematic theologians and public policy makers. I will ask more questions than I am ready to answer. Yet, I believe that such work invested in trying to formulate the relevant question (die Fragestellung) takes us more than just halfway toward a helpful answer. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate Science, Ethics, and Public Policy Edited by Laurie Zoloth Human embryonic stem cells can divide indefinitely and have the potential to develop into many types of tissue. Research on these cells is essential to one of the most intriguing medical frontiers, regenerative medicine. It also raises a host of difficult ethical issues and has sparked great public interest and controversy. This book offers a foundation for thinking about the many issues involved in human embryonic stem cell research. It considers questions about the nature of human life, the limits of intervention into human cells and tissues, and the meaning of our corporeal existence. The fact that stem cells may be derived from living embryos that are destroyed in the process or from aborted fetuses ties the discussion of stem cell research to the ongoing debates on abortion. In addition to these issues, the essays in the book touch on broader questions such as who should approve controversial research and what constitutes human dignity, respect, and justice. The book contains contributions from the Ethics Advisory Board of the Geron Coroporation; excerpts from expert testimony given before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which helped shape recent National Institutes of Health policy; and original analytical essays on the implications of this research. Pros and Cons Debates over the ethics of embryonic blastocysts. Latest Developments The most recent research has shown that there are many options available other than working with embryonic stem cells. Stem cells can be obtained from cord blood or derived by manipulating differentiated cells (i.e. skin cells) to revert them to a pluripotent state. These are alternatives that may help broaden the acceptance of stem cell research. Background In November 1998 the first published research paper reported that stem cells could be taken from human embryos. Subsequent research led to the ability to maintain undifferentiated stem cell lines (pluripotent cells) and techniques for differentiating them into cells specific to various tissues and organs. The debates over the ethics of stem cell research began almost immediately in 1999, despite reports that stem cells cannot grow into complete organisms. In 2000 – 2001, governments worldwide were beginning to draft proposals and guidelines in an effort to control stem cell research and the handling of embryonic tissues, and reach universal policies to prevent â€Å"brain-drains† (emigration of top scientists) between countries. The CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Sciences) drafted a list of recommendations for stem cell research in 2001. The Clinton administration drafted guidelines for stem cell research in 2000, but Clinton left office prior to them being released. The Bush government has had to deal with the issue throughout his administration. Australia, Germany, UK and other countries have also formulated policies. (Continued from Page 1) Pros The therapeutic cloning. Stem cells provide huge potential for finding treatments and cures to a vast array of diseases including different cancers, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, Alzheimers, MS, Huntingtons, Parkinsons and more. There is endless potential for scientists to learn about human growth and cell development from studying stem cells. Use of adult-derived stem cells, from blood, cord blood, skin and other tissues, known as IPSCs, has been demonstrated to be effective for treating different diseases in animal models. Umbilical-cord-derived stem cells (obtained from the cord blood) have also been isolated and utilized for various experimental treatments. Another option is use of uniparental stem cells. Although these cells lines have some disadvantages or shortcomings compared to embryonic cell lines (they are shorter-lived), there is vast potential if enough money is invested in researching them further, and they are not technically considered individual living beings by pro-life advocates. Cons Use of embryonic stem cells for reasearch involves the destruction of blastocysts formed from laboratory-fertilized human eggs. For those who believe that life begins at conception, the blastocyst is a human life and to destroy it is unacceptable and immoral. This seems to be the only controversial issue standing in the way of stem cell research in North America. Where It Stands In the summer of 2006 President Bush stood his ground on the issue of stem cell research and vetoed a bill passed by the Senate that would have expanded federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Currently, American federal funding can only go to research on stem cells from existing (already destroyed) embryos. Similarly, in Canada, as of 2002, scientists cannot create or clone embryos for research but must used existing embryos discarded by couples. The UK allows embryonic stem cell cloning. Use of stem cell lines from alternative non-embryonic sources has received more attention in recent years and has already been demonstrated as a successful option for treatment of certain diseases. For example, adult stem cells can be used to replace blood-cell-forming cells killed during chemotherapy in bone marrow transplant patients. Biotech companies such as ACT are researching techniques for cellular reprogramming of adult cells, use of amnionic fluid, or stem cell extraction techniques that do not damage the embryo, that also provide alternatives for obtaining viable stem cell lines. Out of necessity, the research on these alternatives is catching up with embryonic stem cell research and, with sufficient funding, other solutions might be found that are acceptable to everyone. On March 9, 2009, President Obama overturned Bushs ruling, allowing US Federal funding to go to embryonic stem cell research. However, the stipulation applies that normal NIH policies on data sharing must be followed. Despite the progress being made in other areas of stem cell research, using pluripotent cells from other sources, many American scientists were putting pressure on the government to allow their participation and compete with the Europeans. However, many people are still strongly opposed Research Ethics and Stem Cells Stem cells show potential for many different areas of health and medical research, and studying them can help us understand how they transform into the dazzling array of specialized cells that make us what we are. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are caused by problems that occur somewhere in this process. A better understanding of normal cell development will allow us to understand and perhaps correct the errors that cause these medical conditions. Research on one kind of stem cell—human embryonic stem cells—has generated much interest and public debate. Pluripotent stem cells (cells that can develop into many different cell types of the body) are isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development). As science and technology continue to advance, so do ethical viewpoints surrounding these developments. It is important to educate and explore the issues, scientifically and ethically. The discovery, isolation, and culturing of human embryonic stem cells has been described as one of the most significant breakthroughs in biomedicine of the century.1 This description would be warranted by virtue of the biological uniqueness of these cells alone—their ability to self-renew infinitely while retaining a remarkable capacity to differentiate into any form of cell tissue. But as well as this, the culturing of embryonic stem cells holds tremendous potential for the development of new forms of regenerative medicine to treat debilitating or fatal conditions that would not otherwise be curable.2 It is somewhat of an irony that the discovery of cells with such a tremendous potential for improving and prolonging our own lives, should bring with it some of the most trenchant and intractable questions about the value of life itself. The harvesting of embryonic stem cells results in the destruction of the embryos from which they are harvested. It results, in other words, in the expiration of the very beginnings of a possible human life. Issues about the value of life emerge here in perhaps their most stark and poignant form in the question of whether life for those already existing should be improved at the seeming expense of a possible human life that has just come into being. Needless to say, what the most ethically justified response is to this sort of question is far from obvious. It is not immediately apparent, either, just what should count as the appropriate criteria for assessing possible responses to it. Indeed, it is even contentious as to what the right concepts and terminology are for framing the central questions. What is clear, though, is that it would be remiss to fail to engage with these questions in a manner that is commensurate with their depth, complexity and importance. With due regard to that, the following discussion provides a brief overview of some of the core ethical issues arising from the Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002 and to some extent the Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002.3 The public debate has focused mostly on ethical problems associated with the destruction of embryos (in the case of the first Bill), and with the creation of cloned human embryos (in the case of the second Bill). The current paper will confine its primary focus to the first set of problems, since many of the salient ethical issues about cloning will arise, as it turns out, in connection with embryonic stem cell research.4 1 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research The paper takes most of the major ethical concerns in the debate to be encompassed by the following core questions: †¢ What, in principle, is ethically at issue with destructive embryo research? †¢ What is important when it comes to judging the value of the potential consequences of destructive embryo research? †¢ In what does the value of the human embryo consist? †¢ Does the means by which an embryo expires—whether it is destroyed or merely succumbs—make a moral difference? †¢ Is there anything morally worse about using embryos created for research purposes compared to using existing excess or surplus ART (assisted reproductive treatment) embryos? The purpose of the following discussion is to clarify some relevant moral and conceptual distinctions connected with these core questions, and to clarify the basic structure of the major views and argument themes that have been developed by philosophers, bioethicists and theologians in response to these questions. Of course, in their more fully expanded form these distinctions and arguments will involve subtleties and complexities that are beyond the limited scope of this paper to address. Nonetheless, the discussion here will hopefully give an impression of where some of those further complexities and subtleties might lie. The Basic Ethical Problem The possibility of destructive embryo research, particularly embryonic stem cell research, presents us with a moral problem because it appears to bring into tension two fundamental moral principles that we esteem very highly: one principle enjoins the prevention or alleviation of suffering, and the other enjoins us to respect the value of human life. As noted, the harvesting and culturing of embryonic stem cells has considerable potential to bring about remarkable potential benefits in the way of alleviating debilitating medical conditions. So, it satisfies the first principle to a very great degree. On the other hand, there is a case to be made that the harvesting of human embryonic stem cells violates the second principle in that it results in the destruction of human life with value (i.e. human embryos). Accordingly, both principles apparently cannot simultaneously be respected in the case of embryonic stem cell research. The question then is which principle ought to be given precedence in this conflict situation. Should we give more weight to the first, and permit destructive embryonic stem cell research because of its remarkable potential benefits? Or should we give more weight to the second, and prohibit destructive embryonic research because it violates respect for the value of the 2 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research embryo as the very beginnings of a possible human life? This, at bottom, is the ethical problem generated by destructive embryo research. Crude as it may sound, responding to this problem calls for a moral calculation—a decision about how the positive value of destructive embryo research is to be weighted, from a moral point of view, in comparison to the negative value (or disvalue) of destroying embryos. Whatever way that calculation is done, it is important to get a clear idea of what moral weight each side of the equation has. This will involve: (i) developing a sound and accurate picture of what the real value is of the benefits of embryonic research, and (ii) clarifying what the value of embryos might consist in, and what, if anything, may be wrong with destroying them. The rest of this paper outlines some of the ethical arguments and philosophical considerations that have been considered relevant to these two matters. Evaluating the Benefits of Embryonic Stem Cell Research Evaluating the beneficial consequences of embryonic stem cell research is not straightforward. There are complexities associated with assessing how realistic the potential of the benefits is, how alternatives with different combinations of benefits and drawbacks are to be compared, and factoring in all of the sometimes overlooked possible consequences of embryonic research. Judging the Benefits Most attention has centred on the medical potential of embryonic stem cell research and cultivation, particularly somatic gene therapy for genetic disorders5, and the generation of replacement tissues and organs for transplant.6 There is no doubt that these outcomes, once realised, would be highly valuable. It is important to keep in mind, however, that currently these benefits are potential ones. A sound evaluation of stem cell research needs to take account of the likelihood of achieving its beneficial outcomes. In matters of science, and particularly, in areas that are newly developing and comparatively uncharted (such as embryonic stem cell research), it is sometimes difficult to settle on those probabilities with complete confidence. It is the nature of scientific discoveries and progress, that they are not easily predicted. Both advances and impediments to advancement can arise unexpectedly. This uncertainty about how real the potential benefits are, needs to be kept in mind wh en weighing and evaluating the consequences of embryonic stem cell research. 3 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research Comparing the Benefits and Harms of Alternatives to Embryonic Stem Cell Research Adult Stem Cell Research Whether destructive embryonic stem cell research is the right thing to do or not, will partly depend on what the alternatives are, and how their particular benefits and drawbacks balance out. There is another research program involving adult stem cells that are present in and drawn from bone marrow, brain and gut, and other tissues. Some of these stem cells have a capacity to differentiate into a limited number of different cell types, such as blood cells, muscles and neurones (i.e., they are multipotent), but they have not been shown to be pluripotent (able to differentiate into any cell-type) in the way that embryonic stem cells are.7 This limitation means that adult stem cells offer more limited potential benefits in regenerative medicine and gene therapy, at least from the standpoint of our current understanding and available biotechnology. (But with that said, it is worth keeping in mind the points made above about the limited predictability of scientific advances, including the possibility of inducing adult stem cells to differentiate into a greater range of tissue types.) The harvesting and use of adult stem cells for biomedical purposes, however, avoids some of the ethically and biomedically problematic features of using embryonic stem cells. For a start, harvesting adult stem cells does not involve the destruction of embryos. The extent to which that is an advantage will depend on the extent to which that destruction turns out to be a bad thing, (and this will be taken up shortly). Tissues grown from adult stem cells will be immunologically compatible with the person from whom the stem cells are harvested. This means that those tissues can be transplanted into that person without fear of the body rejecting them. Tissues produced from embryonic stem cells for the purpose of regenerative therapy, however, are unlikely to be immunocompatible with the person for whom they are intended. The immunological properties of the tissue are set by the characteristics of whatever embryo the stem cells are derived from. Apart from the ongoing use of immunosuppressant drugs (with its possible serious side effects), two other potential solutions to this immunological limitation have been suggested. The first proposes a tissue bank with a sufficiently large number of different embryonic stem cell types to generate tissue that can be immunologically matched with different recipients. Hall points out, however, that this would require a huge number of human embryonic stem cell lines (the number being a matter of debate). Such an embryonic stem cell bank would be technically difficult and expensive to generate. The number of embryos that would be required to produce the cell bank would probably test public support †¦ 8. The second possible way of overcoming the problem of immunological incompatibility is through what has been called therapeutic cloning. In this process, the nucleus of a human oocyte or egg is removed and replaced with the nucleus of a cell taken from the body of the intended tissue re cipient. The new egg is induced to develop into an embryo, from which immunocompatible stem cells are harvested. The embryo will be a human embryonic clone of the recipient, with all his/her 4 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research exact genetic characteristics. To date, there have only been one or two reported attempts at human cloning that have met with some success. A number of ethical objections have been expressed to therapeutic cloning, all revolving around the creating of an embryo, and moreover, the creating of an embryo for a use that will destroy it. These objections and arguments usually rely centrally on certain views about the value or moral status of the embryo, and these views will be outlined later in the paper. Whatever benefit the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells has in generating immunocompatible tissue, this benefit is likely to be possible only at the cost of having to engage in either the morally contentious practice of human (therapeutic) cloning, or the morally contentious practice of using (and destroying) a large number of embryos to create a sufficient range of embryonic stem cell lines for organ banks. It is especially important to note also, that if the Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002 is passed in its current form, and any kind of human cloning, including therapeutic cloning, is prohibited, there will be less opportunity to maximise the potential benefits of embryonic stem cell research, and embryonic stem cells will effectively have less of the advantage they would otherwise have over adult stem cells. The Inevitable Succumbing of Surplus IVF Embryos The Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002 only permits excess ART embryos existing before 5 April 2002 to be used for research purposes in accordance with a licensing regime. It is a fact about those embryos that they would likely expire or succumb anyway. They would still be destroyed, in other words, but through exposure to natural processes. On the face of it, this looks as if the harm or negative value involved in embryos expiring (whatever it might be) will be the same whether embryo research is allowed or not. In each case the embryo will expire. But this impression can be a little oversimplified. Some philosophers argue that there is a moral difference between acts and omissions, between actively killing something, and passively failing to intervene to stop its death from other causes (when one could have). Even though the outcome is the same in each case, it can be argued that there is something worse, or more morally culpable, about actively bringing about the death oneself. There are different views on what the moral difference between killing and letting die amounts to, and there are those who argue that there is no significant difference. Whichever way one comes out on this, it is not clear that the act-omission distinction maps neatly onto the particular embryo research scenario under discussion. Destroying surplus embryos through research is certainly an act. But so too, some would argue, is removing surplus embryos from the cold storage that keeps them from expiring. They would hold that this looks less like failing to intervene in independently occurring causal processes (that will lead to expiry), than an act that sets those processes in motion. If this is true, then the first impression above will stand. The harm or negative value involved in embryos expiring (whatever it might be) will be the same whether embryo research is allowed or not. 5 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research Some would argue that there is an important logical upshot from this. If the only two alternatives in the circumstances (destroying embryos in research vs making them succumb) involve the same level of harm or disvalue or moral wrongness, but embryo research involves much greater benefits than the other alternative, then it could be argued, it makes sense to opt for the more beneficial embryo research. And indeed, some might construe that as a sufficient case for the moral preferability of that option. (This would change, of course, if the relevant alternatives change—if say, embryos were purpose created for research, which were not pre-existing and destined to be expired).9 Taking into Account all of the Relevant Benefits and Harms The embryonic stem cell debate has been pre-occupied with the biological and medical benefits or drawbacks of that research. Central as these certainly are, there are nonetheless other, often-overlooked non-medical impacts that may be important to factor in. Some of the major among these are possible social impacts including: De-sensitisation to the Destruction of Human Life It is argued by some10 that allowing the destruction of embryos to become an entrenched practice would serve to desensitise the scientific establishment, regulating bodies, and society in general, to the destruction of life in general. An increased social toleration of loss of life, it would be argued, may make it easier for society to accede to (currently) more controversial practices involving the ending of life such as, late term elective abortion, or withdrawal of treatment for severely disabled infants, for example. This slippery slope argument about potential consequences is based on empirical assumptions about the causes and effects of certain social attitudes, and needs to be assessed in the light of their plausibility. Contributions to Social Oppression One strong but minority strand of argument emphasises the impact that biotechnology has on broader social relationships. It has been argued that research should be evaluated not only in terms of its effects on the subjects of the experiment but also in terms of its connection with existing patterns of oppression and domination in society.11 There is a considerable body of writing that explores the impacts of new reproductive technologies (such as IVF) on the interests of women, particularly how those technologies might contribute to oppression.12 In the case of embryonic research, it is sometimes argued that women who donate ova or embryos are at risk of exploitation to the extent that male-dominated medical practice appropriates their reproductive labour for research and commercial benefits. Women are at risk, therefore, of being alienated from their reproductive labour. Moreover, it is argued that womens body parts are at risk of being commodified, and their acts of altruistic dona tion demeaned, if downstream users can develop commercial applications for stem cells developed from their ova and embryos.13 6 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research The Value of the Embryo What weight does the other side of the moral equation have? What is wrong, if anything, with destroying embryos? If there is something wrong with that, is it sufficiently wrong to outweigh or override the benefits of embryo research, and therefore, render that research morally impermissible? Most of the leading arguments about the rightness or wrongness of destroying embryos are based on some view or other about the moral status of the embryo—how the embryo ought to be regarded or treated from the moral point of view, in virtue of it arguably possessing certain morally important intrinsic characteristics. It is relatively uncontroversial to describe embryos as human life (at its very beginnings). It is another thing, however, to describe embryos as persons, or human beings, or potential persons, etc. These descriptions are morally laden in that they carry with them potential implications about what can and cannot be done to embryos from a moral point of view. What those potential implications are, and indeed, whether they are sound ones, will depend on the nature and plausibility of the particular arguments that accompany each view on the moral status of the embryo. There are different views about this moral status. The leading views speculate that embryos have the status of: †¢ persons, or †¢ potential persons, or †¢ divine creations, or †¢ subjects of moral harm, or †¢ the beginnings of human life, with intrinsic value, or †¢ organic material with no more moral standing than other body parts. Each of these will be outlined in turn, with particular attention to (i) what the intrinsic moral characteristics are the each particular view attributes to embryos, and (ii) what these alleged characteristics or moral status are held to imply for our moral treatment of embryos—particularly whether they can ever or never be destroyed. Embryos have Status as Human Beings or Persons Some argue that, despite obvious physical differences between developed humans and embryos, the latter ought still be regarded as human beings or persons. One of the more plausible arguments to this effect relies on pointing out that there is no non-arbitrary point in the physical growth continuum between embryo and developed human that counts as a morally significant dividing line.14 Consequently, if individuals at their fully developed stage are human beings or persons, there is no non-arbitrary ground to think that they should not count as the same at their embryonic stage. Those who hold otherwise, 7 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research according to this argument, need to indicate the developmental point at which personhood, or status as a human being, is acquired. The argument continues that it is a very deeply and commonly held view in modern liberal democracies that individual persons are deserving of especially strong moral respect in certain ways. All individuals, by virtue of being persons, have fundamental rights not to have their basic human interests interfered with in certain ways, and most importantly, their interest in the maintenance of their life and bodily integrity. If embryos have the status of persons, then they too will have rights not to be harmed or killed. Or, put in another way, we will be under a very strong moral obligation not to harm or kill embryos. Most prominent ethicists, philosophers and commentators would agree that persons have a status deserving of strong and special moral respect, protection and dignity. Many, however, would dispute that embryos should be considered persons or human beings in any serious sense. Even if one cannot point to an exact black and white dividing line in human development, it is still reasonable (they hold) to point to the fact that wherever the transition occurs, embryos do not have the psychological, physiological, emotional, intellectual properties that we tend to centrally associate with personhood. Embryos, particularly the very early pre-implantation blastocysts involved in stem cell research,15 do not, for instance, have consciousness, individuality, the ability to reason, or the ability to form courses of action in life and to choose between them.16 Embryos have Status as Potential Persons Some ethicists have a response to the foregoing objection to viewing embryos as persons. It is to concede that embryos do not currently exhibit these properties of personhood, but they will, if allowed to develop and fulfil their potential. To the extent that embryos are potential persons, it is argued, they ought to still be accorded the moral respect and dignity that personhood warrants. This potential person argument Ethical Questions in the Stem Cell Debate Ethical Questions in the Stem Cell Debate The Stem Cell Debate: Ethical Questions The story for the year 1997 was the sacred. We fear a Promethean blunder. We fear that our own human hubris will violate something sacred in our nature; and we fear that nature will retaliate with disaster. To protect ourselves from a possible Promethean blunder by science, we are tempted to stop further research with the commandment: thou shalt not play God! Then, during 1999, we opened the first few pages on chapter two of the cloning controversy story. I will refer to this chapter as the stem cell debate. The debate has only begun. What is not yet clear is just what needs to be debated. Perhaps nothing. Perhaps everything. What is clear is that the fallout from the cloning explosion is still lighting fires here and there. Whether or not the public will add stem cells to the fuel to make those fires burn hotter remains to be seen. Stem cells have become front page news in Australia, as well as in the United States and other countries. On February 4, 1999, the Australian National Academy of Science issued a position statement. Note the structure of Recommendation 1. Council considers that reproductive cloning to produce human fetuses is unethical and unsafe and should be prohibited.However, human cells derived from cloning techniques, from germ cells should not be precluded from use in approved research activities in cellular and developmental biology Here two things are put together. First, disapproval of reproductive cloning for the purposes of making children. Second, approval of research on human embryonic stem cells, approval even in the face of ethical squeamishness regarding embryo research. If this Australian statement is a barometer, we need to ask: what is the cultural weather forecast? What might be coming? In what follows it will be my task to report on the fast-moving frontier of stem cell research within the field of anthropology, agenda questions raised by science that need to be addressed by systematic theologians and public policy makers. I will ask more questions than I am ready to answer. Yet, I believe that such work invested in trying to formulate the relevant question (die Fragestellung) takes us more than just halfway toward a helpful answer. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate Science, Ethics, and Public Policy Edited by Laurie Zoloth Human embryonic stem cells can divide indefinitely and have the potential to develop into many types of tissue. Research on these cells is essential to one of the most intriguing medical frontiers, regenerative medicine. It also raises a host of difficult ethical issues and has sparked great public interest and controversy. This book offers a foundation for thinking about the many issues involved in human embryonic stem cell research. It considers questions about the nature of human life, the limits of intervention into human cells and tissues, and the meaning of our corporeal existence. The fact that stem cells may be derived from living embryos that are destroyed in the process or from aborted fetuses ties the discussion of stem cell research to the ongoing debates on abortion. In addition to these issues, the essays in the book touch on broader questions such as who should approve controversial research and what constitutes human dignity, respect, and justice. The book contains contributions from the Ethics Advisory Board of the Geron Coroporation; excerpts from expert testimony given before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which helped shape recent National Institutes of Health policy; and original analytical essays on the implications of this research. Pros and Cons Debates over the ethics of embryonic blastocysts. Latest Developments The most recent research has shown that there are many options available other than working with embryonic stem cells. Stem cells can be obtained from cord blood or derived by manipulating differentiated cells (i.e. skin cells) to revert them to a pluripotent state. These are alternatives that may help broaden the acceptance of stem cell research. Background In November 1998 the first published research paper reported that stem cells could be taken from human embryos. Subsequent research led to the ability to maintain undifferentiated stem cell lines (pluripotent cells) and techniques for differentiating them into cells specific to various tissues and organs. The debates over the ethics of stem cell research began almost immediately in 1999, despite reports that stem cells cannot grow into complete organisms. In 2000 – 2001, governments worldwide were beginning to draft proposals and guidelines in an effort to control stem cell research and the handling of embryonic tissues, and reach universal policies to prevent â€Å"brain-drains† (emigration of top scientists) between countries. The CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Sciences) drafted a list of recommendations for stem cell research in 2001. The Clinton administration drafted guidelines for stem cell research in 2000, but Clinton left office prior to them being released. The Bush government has had to deal with the issue throughout his administration. Australia, Germany, UK and other countries have also formulated policies. (Continued from Page 1) Pros The therapeutic cloning. Stem cells provide huge potential for finding treatments and cures to a vast array of diseases including different cancers, diabetes, spinal cord injuries, Alzheimers, MS, Huntingtons, Parkinsons and more. There is endless potential for scientists to learn about human growth and cell development from studying stem cells. Use of adult-derived stem cells, from blood, cord blood, skin and other tissues, known as IPSCs, has been demonstrated to be effective for treating different diseases in animal models. Umbilical-cord-derived stem cells (obtained from the cord blood) have also been isolated and utilized for various experimental treatments. Another option is use of uniparental stem cells. Although these cells lines have some disadvantages or shortcomings compared to embryonic cell lines (they are shorter-lived), there is vast potential if enough money is invested in researching them further, and they are not technically considered individual living beings by pro-life advocates. Cons Use of embryonic stem cells for reasearch involves the destruction of blastocysts formed from laboratory-fertilized human eggs. For those who believe that life begins at conception, the blastocyst is a human life and to destroy it is unacceptable and immoral. This seems to be the only controversial issue standing in the way of stem cell research in North America. Where It Stands In the summer of 2006 President Bush stood his ground on the issue of stem cell research and vetoed a bill passed by the Senate that would have expanded federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Currently, American federal funding can only go to research on stem cells from existing (already destroyed) embryos. Similarly, in Canada, as of 2002, scientists cannot create or clone embryos for research but must used existing embryos discarded by couples. The UK allows embryonic stem cell cloning. Use of stem cell lines from alternative non-embryonic sources has received more attention in recent years and has already been demonstrated as a successful option for treatment of certain diseases. For example, adult stem cells can be used to replace blood-cell-forming cells killed during chemotherapy in bone marrow transplant patients. Biotech companies such as ACT are researching techniques for cellular reprogramming of adult cells, use of amnionic fluid, or stem cell extraction techniques that do not damage the embryo, that also provide alternatives for obtaining viable stem cell lines. Out of necessity, the research on these alternatives is catching up with embryonic stem cell research and, with sufficient funding, other solutions might be found that are acceptable to everyone. On March 9, 2009, President Obama overturned Bushs ruling, allowing US Federal funding to go to embryonic stem cell research. However, the stipulation applies that normal NIH policies on data sharing must be followed. Despite the progress being made in other areas of stem cell research, using pluripotent cells from other sources, many American scientists were putting pressure on the government to allow their participation and compete with the Europeans. However, many people are still strongly opposed Research Ethics and Stem Cells Stem cells show potential for many different areas of health and medical research, and studying them can help us understand how they transform into the dazzling array of specialized cells that make us what we are. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are caused by problems that occur somewhere in this process. A better understanding of normal cell development will allow us to understand and perhaps correct the errors that cause these medical conditions. Research on one kind of stem cell—human embryonic stem cells—has generated much interest and public debate. Pluripotent stem cells (cells that can develop into many different cell types of the body) are isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development). As science and technology continue to advance, so do ethical viewpoints surrounding these developments. It is important to educate and explore the issues, scientifically and ethically. The discovery, isolation, and culturing of human embryonic stem cells has been described as one of the most significant breakthroughs in biomedicine of the century.1 This description would be warranted by virtue of the biological uniqueness of these cells alone—their ability to self-renew infinitely while retaining a remarkable capacity to differentiate into any form of cell tissue. But as well as this, the culturing of embryonic stem cells holds tremendous potential for the development of new forms of regenerative medicine to treat debilitating or fatal conditions that would not otherwise be curable.2 It is somewhat of an irony that the discovery of cells with such a tremendous potential for improving and prolonging our own lives, should bring with it some of the most trenchant and intractable questions about the value of life itself. The harvesting of embryonic stem cells results in the destruction of the embryos from which they are harvested. It results, in other words, in the expiration of the very beginnings of a possible human life. Issues about the value of life emerge here in perhaps their most stark and poignant form in the question of whether life for those already existing should be improved at the seeming expense of a possible human life that has just come into being. Needless to say, what the most ethically justified response is to this sort of question is far from obvious. It is not immediately apparent, either, just what should count as the appropriate criteria for assessing possible responses to it. Indeed, it is even contentious as to what the right concepts and terminology are for framing the central questions. What is clear, though, is that it would be remiss to fail to engage with these questions in a manner that is commensurate with their depth, complexity and importance. With due regard to that, the following discussion provides a brief overview of some of the core ethical issues arising from the Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002 and to some extent the Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002.3 The public debate has focused mostly on ethical problems associated with the destruction of embryos (in the case of the first Bill), and with the creation of cloned human embryos (in the case of the second Bill). The current paper will confine its primary focus to the first set of problems, since many of the salient ethical issues about cloning will arise, as it turns out, in connection with embryonic stem cell research.4 1 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research The paper takes most of the major ethical concerns in the debate to be encompassed by the following core questions: †¢ What, in principle, is ethically at issue with destructive embryo research? †¢ What is important when it comes to judging the value of the potential consequences of destructive embryo research? †¢ In what does the value of the human embryo consist? †¢ Does the means by which an embryo expires—whether it is destroyed or merely succumbs—make a moral difference? †¢ Is there anything morally worse about using embryos created for research purposes compared to using existing excess or surplus ART (assisted reproductive treatment) embryos? The purpose of the following discussion is to clarify some relevant moral and conceptual distinctions connected with these core questions, and to clarify the basic structure of the major views and argument themes that have been developed by philosophers, bioethicists and theologians in response to these questions. Of course, in their more fully expanded form these distinctions and arguments will involve subtleties and complexities that are beyond the limited scope of this paper to address. Nonetheless, the discussion here will hopefully give an impression of where some of those further complexities and subtleties might lie. The Basic Ethical Problem The possibility of destructive embryo research, particularly embryonic stem cell research, presents us with a moral problem because it appears to bring into tension two fundamental moral principles that we esteem very highly: one principle enjoins the prevention or alleviation of suffering, and the other enjoins us to respect the value of human life. As noted, the harvesting and culturing of embryonic stem cells has considerable potential to bring about remarkable potential benefits in the way of alleviating debilitating medical conditions. So, it satisfies the first principle to a very great degree. On the other hand, there is a case to be made that the harvesting of human embryonic stem cells violates the second principle in that it results in the destruction of human life with value (i.e. human embryos). Accordingly, both principles apparently cannot simultaneously be respected in the case of embryonic stem cell research. The question then is which principle ought to be given precedence in this conflict situation. Should we give more weight to the first, and permit destructive embryonic stem cell research because of its remarkable potential benefits? Or should we give more weight to the second, and prohibit destructive embryonic research because it violates respect for the value of the 2 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research embryo as the very beginnings of a possible human life? This, at bottom, is the ethical problem generated by destructive embryo research. Crude as it may sound, responding to this problem calls for a moral calculation—a decision about how the positive value of destructive embryo research is to be weighted, from a moral point of view, in comparison to the negative value (or disvalue) of destroying embryos. Whatever way that calculation is done, it is important to get a clear idea of what moral weight each side of the equation has. This will involve: (i) developing a sound and accurate picture of what the real value is of the benefits of embryonic research, and (ii) clarifying what the value of embryos might consist in, and what, if anything, may be wrong with destroying them. The rest of this paper outlines some of the ethical arguments and philosophical considerations that have been considered relevant to these two matters. Evaluating the Benefits of Embryonic Stem Cell Research Evaluating the beneficial consequences of embryonic stem cell research is not straightforward. There are complexities associated with assessing how realistic the potential of the benefits is, how alternatives with different combinations of benefits and drawbacks are to be compared, and factoring in all of the sometimes overlooked possible consequences of embryonic research. Judging the Benefits Most attention has centred on the medical potential of embryonic stem cell research and cultivation, particularly somatic gene therapy for genetic disorders5, and the generation of replacement tissues and organs for transplant.6 There is no doubt that these outcomes, once realised, would be highly valuable. It is important to keep in mind, however, that currently these benefits are potential ones. A sound evaluation of stem cell research needs to take account of the likelihood of achieving its beneficial outcomes. In matters of science, and particularly, in areas that are newly developing and comparatively uncharted (such as embryonic stem cell research), it is sometimes difficult to settle on those probabilities with complete confidence. It is the nature of scientific discoveries and progress, that they are not easily predicted. Both advances and impediments to advancement can arise unexpectedly. This uncertainty about how real the potential benefits are, needs to be kept in mind wh en weighing and evaluating the consequences of embryonic stem cell research. 3 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research Comparing the Benefits and Harms of Alternatives to Embryonic Stem Cell Research Adult Stem Cell Research Whether destructive embryonic stem cell research is the right thing to do or not, will partly depend on what the alternatives are, and how their particular benefits and drawbacks balance out. There is another research program involving adult stem cells that are present in and drawn from bone marrow, brain and gut, and other tissues. Some of these stem cells have a capacity to differentiate into a limited number of different cell types, such as blood cells, muscles and neurones (i.e., they are multipotent), but they have not been shown to be pluripotent (able to differentiate into any cell-type) in the way that embryonic stem cells are.7 This limitation means that adult stem cells offer more limited potential benefits in regenerative medicine and gene therapy, at least from the standpoint of our current understanding and available biotechnology. (But with that said, it is worth keeping in mind the points made above about the limited predictability of scientific advances, including the possibility of inducing adult stem cells to differentiate into a greater range of tissue types.) The harvesting and use of adult stem cells for biomedical purposes, however, avoids some of the ethically and biomedically problematic features of using embryonic stem cells. For a start, harvesting adult stem cells does not involve the destruction of embryos. The extent to which that is an advantage will depend on the extent to which that destruction turns out to be a bad thing, (and this will be taken up shortly). Tissues grown from adult stem cells will be immunologically compatible with the person from whom the stem cells are harvested. This means that those tissues can be transplanted into that person without fear of the body rejecting them. Tissues produced from embryonic stem cells for the purpose of regenerative therapy, however, are unlikely to be immunocompatible with the person for whom they are intended. The immunological properties of the tissue are set by the characteristics of whatever embryo the stem cells are derived from. Apart from the ongoing use of immunosuppressant drugs (with its possible serious side effects), two other potential solutions to this immunological limitation have been suggested. The first proposes a tissue bank with a sufficiently large number of different embryonic stem cell types to generate tissue that can be immunologically matched with different recipients. Hall points out, however, that this would require a huge number of human embryonic stem cell lines (the number being a matter of debate). Such an embryonic stem cell bank would be technically difficult and expensive to generate. The number of embryos that would be required to produce the cell bank would probably test public support †¦ 8. The second possible way of overcoming the problem of immunological incompatibility is through what has been called therapeutic cloning. In this process, the nucleus of a human oocyte or egg is removed and replaced with the nucleus of a cell taken from the body of the intended tissue re cipient. The new egg is induced to develop into an embryo, from which immunocompatible stem cells are harvested. The embryo will be a human embryonic clone of the recipient, with all his/her 4 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research exact genetic characteristics. To date, there have only been one or two reported attempts at human cloning that have met with some success. A number of ethical objections have been expressed to therapeutic cloning, all revolving around the creating of an embryo, and moreover, the creating of an embryo for a use that will destroy it. These objections and arguments usually rely centrally on certain views about the value or moral status of the embryo, and these views will be outlined later in the paper. Whatever benefit the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells has in generating immunocompatible tissue, this benefit is likely to be possible only at the cost of having to engage in either the morally contentious practice of human (therapeutic) cloning, or the morally contentious practice of using (and destroying) a large number of embryos to create a sufficient range of embryonic stem cell lines for organ banks. It is especially important to note also, that if the Prohibition of Human Cloning Bill 2002 is passed in its current form, and any kind of human cloning, including therapeutic cloning, is prohibited, there will be less opportunity to maximise the potential benefits of embryonic stem cell research, and embryonic stem cells will effectively have less of the advantage they would otherwise have over adult stem cells. The Inevitable Succumbing of Surplus IVF Embryos The Research Involving Embryos Bill 2002 only permits excess ART embryos existing before 5 April 2002 to be used for research purposes in accordance with a licensing regime. It is a fact about those embryos that they would likely expire or succumb anyway. They would still be destroyed, in other words, but through exposure to natural processes. On the face of it, this looks as if the harm or negative value involved in embryos expiring (whatever it might be) will be the same whether embryo research is allowed or not. In each case the embryo will expire. But this impression can be a little oversimplified. Some philosophers argue that there is a moral difference between acts and omissions, between actively killing something, and passively failing to intervene to stop its death from other causes (when one could have). Even though the outcome is the same in each case, it can be argued that there is something worse, or more morally culpable, about actively bringing about the death oneself. There are different views on what the moral difference between killing and letting die amounts to, and there are those who argue that there is no significant difference. Whichever way one comes out on this, it is not clear that the act-omission distinction maps neatly onto the particular embryo research scenario under discussion. Destroying surplus embryos through research is certainly an act. But so too, some would argue, is removing surplus embryos from the cold storage that keeps them from expiring. They would hold that this looks less like failing to intervene in independently occurring causal processes (that will lead to expiry), than an act that sets those processes in motion. If this is true, then the first impression above will stand. The harm or negative value involved in embryos expiring (whatever it might be) will be the same whether embryo research is allowed or not. 5 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research Some would argue that there is an important logical upshot from this. If the only two alternatives in the circumstances (destroying embryos in research vs making them succumb) involve the same level of harm or disvalue or moral wrongness, but embryo research involves much greater benefits than the other alternative, then it could be argued, it makes sense to opt for the more beneficial embryo research. And indeed, some might construe that as a sufficient case for the moral preferability of that option. (This would change, of course, if the relevant alternatives change—if say, embryos were purpose created for research, which were not pre-existing and destined to be expired).9 Taking into Account all of the Relevant Benefits and Harms The embryonic stem cell debate has been pre-occupied with the biological and medical benefits or drawbacks of that research. Central as these certainly are, there are nonetheless other, often-overlooked non-medical impacts that may be important to factor in. Some of the major among these are possible social impacts including: De-sensitisation to the Destruction of Human Life It is argued by some10 that allowing the destruction of embryos to become an entrenched practice would serve to desensitise the scientific establishment, regulating bodies, and society in general, to the destruction of life in general. An increased social toleration of loss of life, it would be argued, may make it easier for society to accede to (currently) more controversial practices involving the ending of life such as, late term elective abortion, or withdrawal of treatment for severely disabled infants, for example. This slippery slope argument about potential consequences is based on empirical assumptions about the causes and effects of certain social attitudes, and needs to be assessed in the light of their plausibility. Contributions to Social Oppression One strong but minority strand of argument emphasises the impact that biotechnology has on broader social relationships. It has been argued that research should be evaluated not only in terms of its effects on the subjects of the experiment but also in terms of its connection with existing patterns of oppression and domination in society.11 There is a considerable body of writing that explores the impacts of new reproductive technologies (such as IVF) on the interests of women, particularly how those technologies might contribute to oppression.12 In the case of embryonic research, it is sometimes argued that women who donate ova or embryos are at risk of exploitation to the extent that male-dominated medical practice appropriates their reproductive labour for research and commercial benefits. Women are at risk, therefore, of being alienated from their reproductive labour. Moreover, it is argued that womens body parts are at risk of being commodified, and their acts of altruistic dona tion demeaned, if downstream users can develop commercial applications for stem cells developed from their ova and embryos.13 6 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research The Value of the Embryo What weight does the other side of the moral equation have? What is wrong, if anything, with destroying embryos? If there is something wrong with that, is it sufficiently wrong to outweigh or override the benefits of embryo research, and therefore, render that research morally impermissible? Most of the leading arguments about the rightness or wrongness of destroying embryos are based on some view or other about the moral status of the embryo—how the embryo ought to be regarded or treated from the moral point of view, in virtue of it arguably possessing certain morally important intrinsic characteristics. It is relatively uncontroversial to describe embryos as human life (at its very beginnings). It is another thing, however, to describe embryos as persons, or human beings, or potential persons, etc. These descriptions are morally laden in that they carry with them potential implications about what can and cannot be done to embryos from a moral point of view. What those potential implications are, and indeed, whether they are sound ones, will depend on the nature and plausibility of the particular arguments that accompany each view on the moral status of the embryo. There are different views about this moral status. The leading views speculate that embryos have the status of: †¢ persons, or †¢ potential persons, or †¢ divine creations, or †¢ subjects of moral harm, or †¢ the beginnings of human life, with intrinsic value, or †¢ organic material with no more moral standing than other body parts. Each of these will be outlined in turn, with particular attention to (i) what the intrinsic moral characteristics are the each particular view attributes to embryos, and (ii) what these alleged characteristics or moral status are held to imply for our moral treatment of embryos—particularly whether they can ever or never be destroyed. Embryos have Status as Human Beings or Persons Some argue that, despite obvious physical differences between developed humans and embryos, the latter ought still be regarded as human beings or persons. One of the more plausible arguments to this effect relies on pointing out that there is no non-arbitrary point in the physical growth continuum between embryo and developed human that counts as a morally significant dividing line.14 Consequently, if individuals at their fully developed stage are human beings or persons, there is no non-arbitrary ground to think that they should not count as the same at their embryonic stage. Those who hold otherwise, 7 Key Ethical Issues in Embryonic Stem Cell Research according to this argument, need to indicate the developmental point at which personhood, or status as a human being, is acquired. The argument continues that it is a very deeply and commonly held view in modern liberal democracies that individual persons are deserving of especially strong moral respect in certain ways. All individuals, by virtue of being persons, have fundamental rights not to have their basic human interests interfered with in certain ways, and most importantly, their interest in the maintenance of their life and bodily integrity. If embryos have the status of persons, then they too will have rights not to be harmed or killed. Or, put in another way, we will be under a very strong moral obligation not to harm or kill embryos. Most prominent ethicists, philosophers and commentators would agree that persons have a status deserving of strong and special moral respect, protection and dignity. Many, however, would dispute that embryos should be considered persons or human beings in any serious sense. Even if one cannot point to an exact black and white dividing line in human development, it is still reasonable (they hold) to point to the fact that wherever the transition occurs, embryos do not have the psychological, physiological, emotional, intellectual properties that we tend to centrally associate with personhood. Embryos, particularly the very early pre-implantation blastocysts involved in stem cell research,15 do not, for instance, have consciousness, individuality, the ability to reason, or the ability to form courses of action in life and to choose between them.16 Embryos have Status as Potential Persons Some ethicists have a response to the foregoing objection to viewing embryos as persons. It is to concede that embryos do not currently exhibit these properties of personhood, but they will, if allowed to develop and fulfil their potential. To the extent that embryos are potential persons, it is argued, they ought to still be accorded the moral respect and dignity that personhood warrants. This potential person argument