Construction vs. Development: Polarizing Models of Human Gestation

In Embryo: A Defense of Human Life, Robert P. George and Christopher Tollefsen argue that terminal, destructive experimentation on human embryos is morally wrong and should not be supported with state funds. Here I summarize their case which implies that abortion is wrong also. While they admirably explain why many arguments in favor of embryo experimentation fail, I argue that their positive argument against embryo experimentation fails, as do their criticisms of perspectives that justify embryo experimentation. Thus, they do not give good reasons to believe that embryo experimentation is wrong and should be legally prohibited. Keywords: Bioethics, ethics, biomedical ethics, research ethics, abortion, embryo, personhood Bio: Nathan Nobis, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Morehouse College. He has written extensively on ethical topics concerning animals, as well as abortion and other topics in bio-medical ethics. He is the author of the open access textbook Ethics & Animals 101: Thinking Critically About Animal Rights, and a short booklet on personal finance for young adults. His webpage is at NathanNobis.com

The debate about the moral status of embryos has a long tradition in many western countries and is at issue not only with respect to stem cell research, but with respect to abortion or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis as well. Accordingly wide is the range of arguments presented in favor of the different views. Because of the intensive discussion of this question without any tendency towards a consensus, the debate is perceived as muddled. Therefore, it becomes more and more attractive to bring about a decision on an indirect way. One argument along these lines is the so called ‘argument for precaution’. It holds that in a situation with persisting doubts regarding the status of the embryo, we should treat embryos as if they were human beings as long as good doubts regarding their moral worth persist, since otherwise we run danger of killing a lot of human beings. This argument has become very popular in contemporary German debates. In this paper, I want to scrutinize this argument to see how well it works out and in how far it can help to find a decision in gridlocked debates like the one concerned with the moral worth of embryos. I try to show that it is difficult to make good sense of this very popular and widespread principle and that in its best formulation that can be found in German philosophy, it clearly collapses.

2010

Public attention on embryo research has never been greater. Modern reproductive medicine technology and the use of embryos to generate stem cells ensure that this will continue to be a topic of debate and research across many disciplines. This multidisciplinary book explores the concept of a 'healthy' embryo, its implications on the health of children and adults, and how perceptions

Monash Bioethics Review

What is a human embryo? A new piece in the bioethics puzzle

South Dakota Medicine, 2023

The human embryo is dimensionally complex. As the details of its developmental biology and pathobiology became more established, widely divergent concepts about the embryo emerged in culture, religion, morals, ethics, and law1 and today underlie worldwide controversies about the very meaning of human life. Our investigation began with our belief that historical research into the evolution of our biological and philosophical understanding of the embryo could provide a basis for approaching those controversies. We hypothesized that scientific understandings of conception and fetal development historically influenced the social, cultural, philosophical and legal status of the embryo. We explored the conceptual divergence between embryology and philosophical domains that began in the Renaissance. We confined ourselves to embryology within western civilizations and philosophical and theological doctrine from a predominantly Christian perspective.

Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2001

Reproductive biomedicine online

The use of the embryo in research into birth defects, infertility and the possible therapeutic value of embryonic stem cells, has given rise to vigorous discussion of the ethical, moral and legal status of the embryo. This paper considers the parliamentary debate that surrounded the passing of legislation in the UK in 2000 governing the use of the embryo in research. Underlying disagreement by members of Parliament as to whether embryo research was permissible, were considerable differences regarding when life was thought to begin--whether at the moment of fertilization of the egg, or whether after 14 days, at the time of the beginnings of cell differentiation, and the point after which the embryo can no longer split to form twins. Those who favoured the latter view argued that, while the conceptus might possess a unique genetic formula, it had only the potential for life before 14 days, the development of human life being a gradual and continuous process. They considered it mistake...

Philippiniana Sacra