Saving Lives? Yes, but What Else?

Frankly, I'm not optimistic that our society can mature quickly enough, and bolster its ethical demands enough, to counter or even significantly mitigate the emotion-drenched choices that technology will allow:

In a growing practice that troubles some ethicists, a Chicago laboratory helped create five healthy babies to serve as stem-cell donors for their ailing brothers and sisters.

The made-to-order infants, from different families, were screened when they were embryos to make sure they would be compatible donors. Their siblings suffered from leukemia or a rare, potentially lethal anemia.

This is the first time embryo tissue-typing has been done for common disorders like leukemia that are not inherited. The results suggest that more children than previously thought could benefit from the technology, said Dr. Anver Kuliev, a Chicago doctor who participated in the research.

The Chicago doctors said the healthy embryos that were not matches were frozen for potential future use. But some ethicists said such perfectly healthy embryos could end up being discarded.

Unmentioned, in Lindsey Tanner's AP report, is that the ethical complications don't end with the frozen and discarded embryos. As difficult as these discussions may be, one has to consider the children who are actually allowed to live because they are of use to a sibling. Sure, most parents won't treat the first child as more important, but this is a dangerous road with too many potential unintended consequences on both the individual and cultural levels.

What happens, for instance, when the practice makes the leap from treating a sibling's illness to treating a parent's?

(via Amy Welborn)

Posted by Justin Katz at May 7, 2004 10:29 AM
Science