|
SRT Home Page What is the SRT Project? Site Map & Subject Index What's New? Highlights Current Talking Point SRT Publications SRT Newsletter SRT Information Sheets General Assembly Reports SRT Topical Papers Press Room Contact SRT Send a comment Guest Book SRT Trust & Associates Links European Christian Environmental Network Eco-Congregation |
|
Tel. 0131-240 2250, Fax 0131-240 2239, Email: srtp@srtp.org.uk http://www.srtp.org.uk or Church of Scotland Press Office 0131- 240 2243
"The decision to grant the Roslin Institute a license to create cloned human embryos poses ethical problems beyond the strict legality of the proposed research," says Dr Donald Bruce, Director of the Society Religion and Technology Project of the Church of Scotland. "We commend the aim of the Roslin proposal, to produce cells which exhibit motor neurone disease for studying the causes of this awful disease, but is this reason enough to make cloned embryos?"
First, there is a significant danger that it would lead to the misuse of the technology by maverick scientists in some other country where there was little or no regulation, who wish to make and implant cloned embryos to create cloned babies, regardless of major risks and ethical objections. "This is not a case of some future 'slippery slope' but something already probable. It is unwise to allow cloned embryo research until there is a United Nations ban on reproductive human cloning," says Dr Bruce. The Church of Scotland called for such a ban in 1997, and it would have almost universal national approval. But it is currently stalled by a US-backed proposal to ban cloning for research as well, for which there seems little prospect of global agreement. The UK Parliament overwhelmingly outlawed reproductive human cloning. The UK bears a moral responsibility to the wider international community for the outcomes of its research.
Secondly, many in the churches and elsewhere object to human embryo research on a matter of principle. They see the destruction of human embryos in such research as equivalent to killing live human beings for research, which is unacceptable regardless of the future medical benefits.
Thirdly, for those who accept using surplus IVF embryos for research, cloned embryos poses some special problems. While surplus embryos would be destroyed anyway, some see it as wrong to create embryos just for research. It treats a human embryo too instrumentally, losing the current HFE Act's sense that it has 'special status', if it is reduced to being a mere research tool or a resource for 'spare parts'. And while cloned embryo research was made legal in the UK in 2001, in contrast to almost all other countries, the decision has remained a bone of contention. The European Commission's ethical advisors considered it premature, given that stem cell research could be done with surplus IVF embryos. In 2002, a House of Lords committee concluded that it would need an exceptional reason to use cloned embryos for research.
Roslin's proposal is the perhaps most persuasive case so far made in that it would provide a long term supply of cells which carry this incurable disease. But has HFEA's decision met the Lords' criterion? "To be an exceptional case ethically, it would have to be not merely legal within the Act and have medical hopes, but to have a very high probability to achieve a major medical breakthrough which nothing else could hope to do," concludes Dr Bruce. "Such a case has so far not been made in the public domain." We would expect to see a careful medical and scientific appraisal of the realistic expectations, evaluated against other options. Would such cells be available, for example, from surplus embryos in pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, without needing to use cloning? Only outline information has been published about this proposal. This is insufficient to assess whether HFEA have made a good ethical judgement or not.
We would commend Roslin for avoiding making exaggerated claims about so called 'therapeutic cloning'. A number of researchers and promoters have sought to justify cloned embryo use claiming that it could eventually lead to the production of genetically matched replacement cells. This is misleading. To provide a therapy for the hundreds of thousands of potential patients who suffer from degenerative diseases would require enormous numbers of human eggs. This is unrealistic and would benefit only a very few rich instead of being a general benefit to humankind.
Dr Bruce has engaged with the Roslin Institute on genetics and cloning issues since 1994, has spoken and written widely on the ethics of cloning and stem cells. He was an external ethical advisor on animal cloning to the former PPL Therapeutics plc.
The views expressed in this press release are currently just those of the Society, Religion and Technology Project (SRT) of the Church of Scotland and have not yet been considered by its General Assembly. SRT is part of an expert working group within the church to study these and other emerging issues in human embryology and stem cells, which will in the following months prepare a report for the General Assembly's consideration.
See other SRT Press Releases
