Part 1:

Directions: Explore the attached article and videos. Answer the associated questions with a few short sentences. Please submit under the “journals” tab under the heading “DNA: Gene therapy and cloning”.

DNA : Gene therapy and cloning

Picture courtesy of http://img.timeinc.net/time/2001/stemcells/images/stemcells.jpg

What are the ethical issues surrounding the stem cell debate?

“Human embryonic stem cell (HESC) research offers much hope for alleviating the human suffering brought on by the ravages of disease and injury. HESCs are characterized by their capacity for self-renewal and their ability to differentiate into all types of cells of the body. The main goal of HESC research is to identify the mechanisms that govern cell differentiation and to turn HESCs into specific cell types that can be used for treating debilitating and life-threatening diseases and injuries….”

(#1) Ethics of Stem Cell Research: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stem-cells/

1. The standard view of those that oppose Human Stem Cell Research is that a human being begins to exist with the emergence of what?
2. Why do Smith and Brogard (2003) and McMahan (2002) reject the stipulation that the early human embryo is a human being?
3. What are some of the capacities that are necessary for the right to Life?
4. How does the article morally distinguish the creation of embryos for reproductive purposes from the creation of embryos for research and therapeutic reasons?

(#2) The Ethical Questions of Stem Cell Research: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5d0ieWfKlI

1. What were the first guidelines available in the United States for governing the use of stem cells in research?
2. What is the Hinxton group?
3. Under the National Academy of Science, What does ESCROC stand for?
4. Who is involved in ESCROC?

What is the technology behind our understanding of gene transfer and cloning?

Pictures courtesy of: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/12/babies-cloning-340×255.jpg
http://www.intechopen.com/source/html/44748/media/image4.jpeg

(#3)Eyes of Nye: Cloning

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=eyes+of+nye+cloning&&view=detail&mid=80D719E65E993F03C22880D719E65E993F03C228&FORM=VRDGAR

1. What are some of the benefits to therapeutic cloning?
2. Describe the process of somatic cell nuclear transfer.
3. The first patent for cloning was given to the scientists who cloned Dolly the sheep. What did this provide for the company?
4. Dr. Billie Swalla uses stem cell research to study how genes do what?
5. Why does reproductive cloning not work very well?
6. Dolly died at the age of 7 indicating what about the nucleus used?
7. Dr. Hans Keirstead works with human embryonic stem cells in hopes of treating what kinds of injuries?
8. What evidence is shown (with the rats) that human embryonic stem cells have great therapeutic hope for the future?
9. What is happening inside the rat with the injected stem cells?
10. Where does Dr. Jeffery Kahn stand with regard to moral rights of the embryo?
11. Is there a law in the United States that prohibits that prohibits cloning?

(#4) Stem Cells- The Future: An Introduction to iPS cells

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=stem+cells+the+future+videos&FORM=HDRSC3#view=detail&mid=42240DF444901218969542240DF4449012189695

1. What are some of the benefits for using iPS cells? (2 points)
2. What types of patients does Dr. Shinyayamanaka hope to help with his technology?
3. What are the new ethical questions that arise with this technology? (2 points)

Images courtesy of: http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2007/archive/covers/95/6_12_95_205x273.jpghttps://kinoimages.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/christopherreeve-herb-ritts.jpg

(#5) Cloning Humans?-

1. What is the difference between reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning?

2. The Eugenics movement in the first part of the 20th century resulted in sterilization of certain members of the population whose genes were determined to not be desirable. How is cloning related to this movement?

3. Dr. Brent Blackwelder (President of “Friends of the Earth”) claims that genetic engineering will be similar to “invasive species” which could harm the environment. True or false?

4. According to the video, before researchers can use cloning in their research they must do what (in the code of practice)?

5. What was the cloning scandal that occurred in Korea?

6. What are some of the risks involved in therapeutic cloning?

7. According to the video, the media has misled the public leading them to believe that only embryonic stem cells could be used to cure certain diseases (such as Parkinsons, or spinal cord defects). True or False?

Part 2:

Post a brief blog / response to ONE selected article from http://www.bioethics.com. This response should be approximately 350-450 words, roughly 4 -6 paragraphs. You should be able to defend your viewpoint using one of the ethical approaches described in the “Framework for Ethical Decision Making” guide (attached in the Introduction to Bioethics link above).

Please follow the format and detailed rubric (below). Please post to the “Blogs” tab under “Tools”. This blog is worth 25 points.

Bioethics essay Rubric

What is the issue or topic of concern and why is this issue controversial?
What is the procedure, activity, research or technology used for?
What is the goal?What studies are being conducted?
What are the pros and cons?
What parties are affected?
What moral rights do the affected parties have?
How are these rights being violated?
What role has the media or education system played (if any) in reporting this issue and how has it affected the public?Do you feel the reporting has been fair and unbiased?
What treatment (policy or decision) do you support?
Which method (below) will you use to arrive at this decision?

1. What leads to the best overall consequences? (Utilitarian approach)

2. Which course of action best respects all parties’ rights? (rights approach)

3. Which course of action treats everyone the same and does not show discrimination? (The fairness or justice approach)

4. Which course of action advances the common good (common good approach)

5. Which course of action develops moral virtues (The virtue approach)

Post the link to another article that discusses similar technology – Describe the similarities (or differences) in the research

Respectfully respond to one other student blog

INTRODUCTION:

THINKING ETHICALLYA Framework for Moral Decision Making

***This article updates several previous pieces from Issues in Ethics by Manuel Velasquez – Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University and former Center director – and Claire Andre, associate Center director. “Thinking Ethically” is based on a framework developed by the authors in collaboration with Center Director Thomas Shanks, S.J., Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good Michael J. Meyer, and others. The framework is used as the basis for many programs and presentations at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.

TAKEN FROM: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/framework.html

Moral issues greet us each morning in the newspaper, confront us in the memos on our desks, nag us from our children’s soccer fields, and bid us good night on the evening news. We are bombarded daily with questions about the justice of our foreign policy, the morality of medical technologies that can prolong our lives, the rights of animals or perhaps the fairness of our children’s teachers dealing with diverse students in their classrooms.

Dealing with these moral issues is often perplexing. How, exactly, should we think through an ethical issue? What questions should we ask? What factors should we consider?

WHAT IS ETHICS?

Simply stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves-as friends, parents, children, citizens, businesspeople, teachers, professionals, and so on.

According to The National Institute of Health: “Ethics seeks to determine what a person should do, or the best course of action, and provides reasons why. It also helps people decide how to behave and treat one another, and what kinds of communities would be good to live in.”

“Bioethics is a subfield of ethics that explores ethical questions related to the life sciences. Bioethical analysis helps people make decisions about their behavior and about policy questions that governments, organizations, and communities must face when they consider how best to use new biomedical knowledge and innovation”.

WHAT ETHICS IS NOT:

• Ethics is not the same as feelings. Feelings provide important information for our ethical choices. Some people have highly developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something wrong, but many people feel good even though they are doing something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us it is uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.

Ethics is not religion. Many people are not religious, but ethics applies to everyone. Most religions do advocate high ethical standards but sometimes do not address all the types of problems we face.

• Ethics is not following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical standards, but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt, as some totalitarian regimes have made it. Law can be a function of power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may have a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas, and may be slow to address new problems.

• Ethics is not following culturally accepted norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, but others become corrupt -or blind to certain ethical concerns (as the United States was to slavery before the Civil War). “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” is not a satisfactory ethical standard.

• Ethics is not science. Social and natural science can provide important data to help us make better ethical choices. But science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Science may provide an explanation for what humans are like. But ethics provides reasons for how humans ought to act. And just because something is scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to do it.

THINKING LIKE A BIOETHICIST: MAKING ETHICAL DECISIONS

The first step in analyzing moral issues is obvious but not always easy: Get the facts. Some moral issues create controversies simply because we do not bother to check the facts. This first step, although obvious, is also among the most important and the most frequently overlooked.

But having the facts is not enough. Facts by themselves only tell us what is; they do not tell us what ought to be. In addition to getting the facts, resolving an ethical issue also requires an appeal to values.

Philosophers have developed five different approaches to values to deal with moral issues.

1. The Utilitarian Approach

Utilitarianism was conceived in the 19th century by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine which laws were morally best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are those that provide the greatest balance of good over evil.

To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify the various courses of action available to us. Second, we ask who will be affected by each action and what benefits or harms will be derived from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides the greatest good for the greatest number.

2. The Rights Approach

The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused on the individual’s right to choose for herself or himself. According to these philosophers, what makes human beings different from mere things is that people have dignity based on their ability to choose freely what they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right to have these choices respected. People are not objects to be manipulated; it is a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose.

Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic one. These other rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose.

• The right to the truth: We have a right to be told the truth and to be informed about matters that significantly affect our choices.

• The right of privacy: We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever we choose in our personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights of others.

• The right not to be injured: We have the right not to be harmed or injured unless we freely and knowingly do something to deserve punishment or we freely and knowingly choose to risk such injuries.

• The right to what is agreed: We have a right to what has been promised by those with whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.

In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach, then, we must ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone? Actions are wrong to the extent that they violate the rights of individuals; the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action.

3. The Fairness or Justice Approach

The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who said that “equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally.” The basic moral question in this approach is: How fair is an action? Does it treat everyone in the same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?

Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on people who are no different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and discrimination are unjust and wrong.

4. The Common-Good Approach

This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the pursuit of common values and goals.

The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as “certain general conditions that are…equally to everyone’s advantage.”

In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Examples of goods common to all include affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and an unpolluted environment.

Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society. While respecting and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their own goals, the common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those goals we share in common.

5. The Virtue Approach

The virtue approach to ethics assumes that there are certain ideals toward which we should strive, which provide for the full development of our humanity. These ideals are discovered through thoughtful reflection on what kind of people we have the potential to become.

Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our highest potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues.

Virtues are like habits; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic of a person. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally disposed to act in ways consistent with moral principles. The virtuous person is the ethical person.

In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might ask, What kind of person should I be? What will promote the development of character within myself and my community?

Putting the Approaches Together

Each of the approaches helps us determine what standards of behavior can be considered ethical. There are still problems to be solved, however.

The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of human and civil rights .We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm.

The second problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question “What is ethical?” in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information with which to determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance. And much more often than not, the different approaches do lead to similar answers.

Ethical Problem Solving **Students should be familiar with these five steps in ethical problem solving

These five approaches suggest that once we have ascertained the facts, we should ask ourselves five questions when trying to resolve a moral issue:

1. What benefits and what harms will each course of action produce, and which alternative will lead to the best overall consequences? (The Utilitarian Approach)

2. What moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course of action best respects those rights? (The Rights Approach)

3. Which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there is a morally justifiable reason not to, and does not show favoritism or discrimination? (The Fairness or Justice Approach)

4. Which course of action advances the common good? (The Common Good Approach)

5. Which course of action develops moral virtues? (The Virtue Approach)

This method, of course, does not provide an automatic solution to moral problems. It is not meant to. The method is merely meant to help identify most of the important ethical considerations. In the end, we must deliberate on moral issues for ourselves, keeping a careful eye on both the facts and on the ethical considerations involved.

WEIGHING ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Please Note: Sometimes it is not easy or even possible to act in accordance with all the relevant considerations at the same time.

For example, you might want to show respect for your grandmother by allowing her to continue driving, even when her eyesight is failing, but to minimize harm, you might feel a responsibility to take her keys away. In a case like that, it’s hard both to show respect for her desire to move around freely and to protect her and others from the harm that might be caused by a car accident. Which of these core ethical considerations should count more (respect for persons, which motivates you to allow her to keep driving, or minimizing harms, which motivates you to take her keys away)? How should you decide?

When an ethical problem arises, each individual may prioritize and choose which considerations should be favored in a different way. Often, there is no one right answer. In addition, people can emphasize different ethical considerations in the process of ethical analysis but arrive at the same decision about what should be done.