Fetal Cell Transplantation: The Ethical Debate

While the use of cadaver organs and tissues has become common practice in the United States, the use of fetal tissues is still being debated. Before I introduce the two sides of the debate, I'll put forth the facts. The fetal tissue in question is gathered from fetal tissue taken out of a woman during an abortion. This tissue is generally thrown away, however, researchers have begun using this tissue in order to study and find treatments for debilitating diseases. That being said, there are those that support this use of aborted fetal tissue for medical research, and those that are adamantly against it.

Those against the use of fetal tissue bases their opposition on a likeness to Nuremburg medical researchers during Nazi Germany. Tom Longua, an instructor of anatomy and physiology at the Denver Academy of Court Reporting compares the defense statements of Nazi scientists with those of current fetal tissue researchers. He claims that those using aborted fetal tissues for medical research are committing the same "crimes against humanity" as the Nuremburg Nazi scientists. His reasoning for this likeness? Abortion. Longua argues that abortion is killing, and that is atrocious to try and put a benevolent spin on murder (Longua, 2005).

Additionally, fetal tissue opposition state that allowing the use of aborted fetal tissue would create an increase in abortions. They worry that money may be offered for the tissue, and that women would begin to exploit the process by getting pregnant merely to have an abortion and sell the tissue. Emanuel Thorne of the Wall Street Journal (1988) estimated that the "1.6 million annual abortions in America would not be enough to keep up with the demand for such tissue." However, even the opposition spokesman state that it is highly unlikely that women would go through the pain and anguish of abortion just to either, or make money, or help a nameless stranger.

Lastly, those in opposition believe that the use of fetal tissue will lead to a decrease of interest in other methods of research such as using a patient's own stem cells, and the use of autografts (when tissue from one part of the body is transplanted to another part of the body). They argue that the aforementioned methods are actually ethical, while the use of aborted fetal tissue is unethical and should be outlawed.

Proponents of the use of fetal tissue don't argue this point, however, they do address the other various issues of the opposition. In response to the argument that the use of fetal tissue would cause an increase in abortions, Doctor Curt Freed of the University of Colorado School of Medicine states that "An unwanted pregnancy is an intimate and deeply personal crisis; it is inconceivable that the pregnancy would be seen as a philanthropic opportunity (2005)."

Additionally, proponents argue that abortions are both the choice of the women, and that abortions are legal; thus, using the tissue from an abortion is not immoral and should not be an issue at all. Instead of the tissue being discarded, it can instead be used in the research and treatment of some of America's most ugly diseases. Proponents of the use of fetal tissue liken its use to the use of adult cadavers in research and organ and tissue donation. If we're using cadavers for organ transplants, cornea transplants, skin grafts, and the like, why then can't scientists make use of dead tissue from an abortion? They also express the importance in knowing that there is no use, nor any intention of using living fetuses for this purpose; nor are fetuses kept alive for this purpose. The only fetuses being used are those that are aborted and already dead (Mullet, 1996).

Lastly, supporters note that experiments on Parkinson's in animals and "early experiments in humans indicate that fetal dopamine cells transplanted into the brains of these patients may restore a patient's capacity to move and may even eliminate the disease (Freed, 2005). If fetal tissues were taken from this equation, the progress that has already been made may take years to reach again, hindering further progress. That is, if that stage can even be reached again through other sources. Beyond Parkinson's, fetal cells are being looked into as sources of research and treatment for immune disorders, diabetes, and even AIDS.

In the grand scheme of things, the debate between whether to use cadaver fetal tissue or not is an ethical debate. On one side, pro-lifers refuse to give in that abortion is anything but killing a baby and that no benefit can come from it. On the other side, proponents argue that abortion is a woman's choice and it is legal, and that if this procedure is done there is no need to waste the tissue. It seems that one's abortion stance has a lot to do with whether or not they believe fetal tissue should be used in medical research. As the debate still rages on abortion, so does the debate on the use of fetal tissue.

References:

Chiras, D., D. (2005). Human Biology, 5^th Ed. Sudbury, MA. Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Davis, G., Goldie, S., Stamper, R. (1992). Socioeconomic Implications of Fetal Transplantation an Exercise in Bioethics. Retrieved January 7, 2008, from http://www.woodrow.org/teachers/bi/1992/fetal_transplants.html

Mullet, S. (1996). The Debate over Fetal Tissue Research. Retrieved January 7, 2008, from http://www.goshen.edu/bio/Biol410/Biol410SrSemPapers/mullet.html