If you could, would you save a human life? I think most people would answer yes. Now what would happen if you knew that the person whom you were going to save was a killer? Would you vacillate a while between saving and not saving that person before making a final decision? Perhaps your brain says that he must die and, at the same time, your heart says that he should be saved. It is a difficult situation, isn't it? Similar situations are experienced by those who have the responsibility to decide where ethics ends and science begins, especially when human embryos are the issue. In particular, the fate of those embryos that couples reject because of death, divorce, disabilities, or change of mind must be decided.
The latest research with human embryos shows the potential applications are enormous and the possibilities are endless (Shirley, p. 352). Today there are many diseases such as cancer, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer's disease that do not have cures. Many institutions (e.g., The Gift of Life Donor Program) have donors who give their organs, such as kidneys, to those people who need them. In fact, in many hospitals there are people from all social levels waiting for organs. If the government has permitted the use of federal funds to continue research with embryos (Shirley, p 352), and there are embryos available for use, I do not see why these embryos cannot be used for such goals. Perhaps soon, many kinds of organs can be gotten from embryos, as well as the cures for many diseases
From the point of view of ethics, many people disagree with the use of human embryos in research because they are themselves human beings. But if that "life" is used for good purposes like saving others' lives, why not use them? I believe that in those cases, ethics should give a free hand to science. Sometimes when science does not weigh the consequences of its research and its implications take science into the realm of ethics, at that moment ethics must interfere and stop science (e.g., in the use of human embryos for economic profit).
Another point is the fact many embryos do not have "parents." Their "parents" do not want them or they are dead. In my opinion, these embryos should not be disposed of and wasted, but, on the contrary they should be used in a useful way such as research. However, these types of decisions must be made by qualified people such as lawyers, scientists, and ethicists who know well the import of these decisions. Groups composed of these professionals should be able to make such judgments more easily because they have more expertise in this area.
What type of research would be acceptable? What mechanisms of control would be used? Which people would control this type of research? These and other questions are not easy to answer. As a society we must understand the implications and the import of the ethical, social, legal, medical, theological and moral decisions that surround these questions. We also must analyze further ethical issues and scientific results for the true potential of this type of research.
References
Shirley J. Wright, "Human embryonic stem-cell research," American Scientist, July-August 1999 v87 i4 p352 (1).