Prime Minister John Howard has agreed not to ban the use of embryos left over from in-vitro fertilisation for use in stem cell research. He had little choice in the matter after the Victorian and NSW Governments announced that they would not accept any federal ban and would permit the research to go ahead. Some of Mr Howard’s colleagues and the some churches would have preferred a ban or at least a moratorium. Mr Howard has read the public mood correctly. For the Fedral Government to attempt a ban would have upset a lot of people who have pinned their hopes on this research to help treat and perhaps cure a range of diseases.
Several years ago, when the popular perception of embryonic stem-cell research was that it was aimed at making cloned humans, the public was rightly horrified. But has information slowly percolates through the community, people are realising the promise that this research offers for treatment and perhaps cures for diseases like diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, dementia and a host of other degenerative diseases. Moreover, more people are realising that the embryos for the stem cells sought for research are already in existence, having been created during in-vitro fertilisation programs. Those embryos are destined for destruction anyway after five years under legislation in most states. If the embryos are gong to be destroyed anyway it seems absurd – even cruel — to deny researchers the opportunity to seek cures and treatments that will relieve a lot of human suffering. The case for allowing the research is compelling.
There may well be case for banning or imposing a moratorium on creating embryos especially for research, at least until more is known about whether effective remedies will emerge from the research and if so whether those therapies can be achieved solely through use of stem cells from embryos left over from the in-vitro programs. That is likely to be the case because stem cells have an apparent infinite capacity to replicate without degeneration.
Those who oppose using the left-over embryos from in-vitro programs would logically have to end the in-vitro programs themselves because they cannot be successfully continued without the creation of surplus embryos. Closing in-vitro programs would be to deny many couples of the chance of parenthood.
A further dilemma for those opposed to the research would come if Australian banned it and medical researchers overseas achieved good results – would they then support a ban on the therapies that emerge from the research and make those who seek them suffer in silence?
Arguments that adult stem cells hold research promise warrant a ban on embryonic stem-cell research do not stand up. Researchers should have access to as many avenues for research as possible in looking for cures and treatments to alleviate human suffering. To deny it is unethical.
Arguments by Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson yesterday that allowing the research would be “”the thin end of the wedge” and would lead “”down a slippery slope” are just a meaningless jangle of mixed metaphors. If anything, wedges are used to fix something in place rather than send it down a slippery slope.
Perhaps the best solution would be for the Federal Government to do nothing. COAG should allow those states and territories which want to do the research using left-over embryos to do it. Given that no state or territory intends to allow the creation of embryos specifically for research, there is no need for federal intervention.