Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Advance Access originally published online on August 18, 2009
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2009 34(5):496-508; doi:10.1093/jmp/jhp036
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Regulatory Argument Against Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The National Catholic Bioethics Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Address correspondence to: Stephen Napier, PhD, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, 6399 Drexel Road, Philadelphia, PA 19151, USA. E-mail: snapier{at}ncbcenter.org
| Abstract |
|---|
This article explores the plausibility of an argument against embryonic stem cell research based on what the regulations already say about research on pregnant women and fetuses. The center of the argument is the notion of vulnerability and whether such a concept is applicable to human embryos. It is argued that such an argument can be made plausible. The article concludes by responding to several important objections.
Keywords: embryo, moral worth, regulations, research, vulnerability
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. E. Hinkley Animal-Human Chimeras, Sexually Deviant Behavior, and Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Introduction J Med Philos, October 1, 2009; 34(5): 439 - 446. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
