Stem Cells

Introduction

According to the National Institute of Health, stem cells are cells that have the remarkable potential to develop into many different cell types in the body. Serving as a sort of repair system for the body, they can theoretically divide without limit to replenish other cells for as long as the person or animal is still alive. When a stem cell divides, each "daughter" cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function, such as a muscle cell, a red blood cell, or a brain cell ("Stem", 2006). The debate over which stem cell research can be detrimental to the construction of a family has been a prevalent sociological debate for the past decade. Through an analysis of the stem cell research history and what that research has taught, it is clear to see that the information must be dealt with extreme care in respect to building a family, but should not be ignored.

Theoretical Framework

Conflict theory states that conflict is a permanent feature of social life and that, as a result societies are in a state of constant change. Karl Marx thought that conflict arose out of social class, while contemporary conflict theorists include other groups such as gender, age or race. Sometimes the conflicts are not stated in black and white, such as news stories or articles, while others are (Basirico, 2005, p. 46-49). Stem cell research has been in numerous television shows and many viewpoints have been voiced in either written communication or other medias. The controversy has even led to the President of the United States making executive legal decisions. Conflict has the connotation for being something detrimental to a society; rather it should be seen as beneficial. This is so because it causes people of like-mindedness on the issue to come together to serve under a common purpose to accomplish their goal. There are mainly three groups of people who are in conflict over this issue; those who are completely for maximizing what the research can offer, those who agree the research can be useful if used properly with boundaries and also those who believe stem cell research should be completely neglected. However, the conflict can also cause major society rifts between those groups. People tend to become radical about their beliefs which can lead to major faction because neither side is willing to relent or compromise their viewpoint. So by the same token, conflict can bind those of similar beliefs together, while creating a split between those who oppose the respective topic.

Feelings about conflict, while normally expressed about stem cell research are voiced, can also be concealed for various reasons. However, by realizing that it is acceptable to voice the opinions, people can personally grow by learning to listen to other people's opinions and that conflict is to be expected and dealt with in a constructive manner.

Literature Review

The controversy that has encircled stem cell research is everywhere, but few understand what the process really entails. What is important to realize is that when stem cells are taken from an embryo or fetus, the embryo and fetus are destroyed (Tesar, 2003, p 34). When people hear that an embryo or fetus is being destroyed by this research, antiabortionists jump in saying embryonic stem cell research is murder. The Abortion argument comes into play because the issue as to when a human being is actually formed. However the anti-abortionists should realize that there is an alternative; adult stem cell research, which does not take human life.

The controversy over cloning, not just the treatments, takes on another group; (usually overlapping with anti-abortionists) the Christians. They believe that humans should only be formed by the way in which God ordained; not in a laboratory dish.

Scientists defend themselves by figuring out when biologically meaningful life begins (Mainschein, 2003, 260). Is a fertilized egg sitting in a fertility clinic a life? It is clearly the beginning of life, but has not yet begun to specialize its cells. Scientists also argue by saying the use of aborted fetuses may as well be used for research than simply disposed with no use gotten out of them. Anti-abortionists simply don't like the idea that the aborted fetuses are there to being with and most scientists believe that the right should be given to the mother. Scientists also realize the potential that could come out of all types of stem cell research with government funding. Many once thought incurable diseases could be no longer a threat to so many individuals.

Neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga used an interesting analogy at a meeting of President Bush's bioethics council when talking about the blastosyst's potential to be a human being. He said that during the blastosyst's stage of development, it is simply a clump of cells and an analogy might be what one sees when walking into a Home Depot. There are the parts and potential for at least thirty homes. But if there is a fire at Home Depot, the headline isn't thirty homes burn down. It's Home Depot burns down (p. 261).

Arguments making the same point are widely used by pro-choice supporters. Their idea is that even if the components are available to make a baby, there needs to be an action to give the fetus biological life.

Despite the surrounding controversy, the future of stem cell research is very promising. Some researchers regard stem cells as offering the greatest potential for the alleviation of human suffering since the development of antibiotics. Over 100 million Americans suffer from diseases that may eventually be treated more effectively with stem cells or even cured. These include heart disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancer ("Under", 2006). With successful advancements made in animals with stem cell treatment, the discoveries lead many to believe the same positive treatments will occur for humans as well. Some of the most promising work concerning stem cells involves restoring movement to the paralyzed. Birth defects, accidents, or diseases have been the main cause in paralysis of one or more limbs. What happens during these events is that signals from nerve cells leading from the spinal cord can no longer send messages to muscles in the limbs. There has been little hope in the past for a cure for the paralyzed, but in 2001, scientists restored movement to paralyzed mice and rats. They did this by injecting stem cells into the fluid within the specimen's spines. The stem cells began to replicate and thus became nerve cells. When the results were confirmed, the studies suggest that one day a similar therapy could be used to treat humans with comparable conditions ("Stem",