We had a great discussion last week about embryonic stem cells. What follow-up questions do you have? Have you rethought any positions, arguments, etc. from before? Have you altered any of your original thoughts?
I have rethought a lot about my arguments from the class. I still stand by my thoughts on the fact that embryos created outside the womb are not considered human until they implant within the uterus because they need that to survive. However, part of me agrees for the research on the embryos weather they are destroyed or not because with out that type of research i would not be here since i am an IVF baby. I feel like since the embryos could become a human with the correct implantation they should be treated with a lot of respect.
I agree with you Emily on everything. I find it hard to believe that the embryo outside of the mother's womb is a human because they technically can not be alive until planted in the uterus. I also go both ways on whether or not the unused embryos should be destroyed or not. In a way I still feel like they technically are not alive, but yet they still have potential
Abbie excellent thanks for shorting my ideas i think you helped me clear it up a lot more! I still struggle with the idea of embryo destruction however i would not be here without it because those advances IVF exists. I feel as though i would be hypocritical to say that i do not believe in the destruction because i would not be here without it!
Emily, i completely agree with the idea that embryos outside of the woman's womb are not seen as true human beings until they are in an environment where they can survive and flourish. Also, while i see the usefulness of creating embryos for research purposes, I have a problem with the disposal of them. Simply because that embryo has the possibility to become a human being in the correct environment.
I'm with Abbie and Emily. I have the same beliefs about embryonic cells aren't human until they are put in the womb however, I too battle my opinion on what to do with the embryo that is not implanted. Like what Abbie said, it's not a human but it does have the potential. I don't know much about stem cell research but it could be argued that it's the same as having a stem cell that could produce a heart. Is it wrong to get rid of the cells if the technology to build a heart doesn't exist?
I still stand in how I feel about embryonic stem cells. I believe that the arguments that we all have stems from your intentions and motives. I think just as Emily says, IVF and other things such as that create lives for families unable to have children. However, without research we would never be able to advance our technology because nothing would ever be able to be tested. With that said, I don't agree with being able to pick and choose which embryo we use based on genetics. Now, if we have a case like we looked at in class that has to do with finding out if the embryo is carrying a gene for a deadly disease and the parents have to pick which one to use I would have to agree with that. I don't think raising a child that you know is going to have a terminal disease is ethical. Why put them through such a thing when you had the option not to. Don't mistake this with me agreeing with abortion or anything like that because like I said at the beginning, your argument stems from your motives and intentions.
I think that the stem cell research is a good idea in some aspects. I think that it is wonderful that medical research has come this far to where doctors can give a woman a child, if she is unable to conceive a child herself. With that being said, I do not agree with picking and choosing the genetics of an embryo. I think that is abusing the whole purpose of the procedure, although it could avoid a harder lifestyle, i still believe that you should take life how it has been given to you. I agree with Emily when it comes to the embryos not being considered human until the embryo is implanted into the mother's uterus. In my opinion i think that IVF is a great thing that can be given to a woman, just as long as they are doing the procedure ethically, which would be not choosing the genetics.
I still stand with believing whether an embryo is inside the uterus or not, that it is a human being. Especially with going into the medical field myself I find the advancements in technology to be a positive thing, though what we do with these advancements and how morally acceptable they should be, is the real question at hand. I believe IVF is a great thing for woman wanting to start a family, though I also back that statement up with saying the amount of eggs that start out in the petri dish is the same amount of eggs that should then be planted into the mother. Discarding of the eggs or freezing them until who knows when is what I believe to be morally unacceptable. Any form of genetic engineering or enhancement to those said eggs should not take place. Life should happen as is, let nature take its course.
I can completely agree with you here Amanda on saying that discarding the eggs is wrong. To me that seems to be something that doesn't need to be happening. Freezing might be a different story. They could be used in the future. As long as they are used I can see this kind of being okay.
I agree with you as well. If a couple is having trouble becoming pregnant, and they tried for a long time with no luck, then IVF is a wonderful option for them. However, freezing the fertilized eggs for an unknown amount of time, or discarding them when they are not needed anymore, I believe, is unacceptable. Those embryos are lives that are being prohibited from becoming someone, and I don't think that is right. Genetically modifying embryos is also not acceptable to me. This is like picking exactly how you want your child to be, instead of just being thankful for what you have been given. I think that too much power is given to people in these circumstances, when they should not have so much.
It is hard for me think about this topic because I've never been in the situation where I had to pick either side of the other. I believe that there has been a lot of advancements in technology. This is wonderful when it comes to things that are going wrong with the world. I don't think that we should be allowed to pick and choose what our kids become. This includes eye color, hair color and etc. It's hard not to think of this topic from a religious view. I believe that God creates us and that he chooses that aspects of our life. There are certain things in our lives that are hard and this is hard for me to think of this situation and people to think that I am wishing certain bad things on people. I am not doing that.
I agree with you we should not believe to " design our babies" but sometimes as my parents had to families need a little extra help conceiving children and if you do it for that sole purpose then i think it is a great thing. Excellent points.
I also agree that it is difficult to think without a religious basis, especially growing up with a strong faith background. And of course this topic and abortion is probably some of the harder topics to discuss without the presence of God or religion.
It seems this topic has come up in almost all of my classes this semester which is interesting to get so many people input about the topic and really helps me formulate an opinion. I feel as though embryos outside of the woman's womb are not seen as human beings until they are in an environment where they can survive. However, it is difficult for me to even see an embryo as a human being yet either, simply because it has the possibility to become a human being or the basis of a human being doesn't make it a LIVING human being yet. When someone is pronounced dead, they have all the makings of a human being and still possess the makings of being a living human being, however they are seen as dead and not living. So I struggle with this idea that an embryo with simply the makings and possibility can even be seen as a living thing when in order to pronounce someone dead at the other end of life, they have to have no brain activity, no circulation or respiratory functioning. I struggle with this & im still trying to decipher my feelings about this
Obviously there is a major notion towards the persons motives. I do not agree with choosing eggs as a means of fulfilling some sort of personal achievement. I think eugenics is wrong and this could be considered similar, however, I do promote this if it for the well being of a mother desiring to have a family or if it is being done to avoid some significant inherited disease. I think that last reason is the most intuitive of them all. It seems like everyone here is all about preventative medicine. Therefore, in the future if we have the ability to avoid a disastrous disease before birth then we should do everything in our power to deviate from that "x" disease
I have rethought a lot about my arguments from the class. I still stand by my thoughts on the fact that embryos created outside the womb are not considered human until they implant within the uterus because they need that to survive. However, part of me agrees for the research on the embryos weather they are destroyed or not because with out that type of research i would not be here since i am an IVF baby. I feel like since the embryos could become a human with the correct implantation they should be treated with a lot of respect.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Emily on everything. I find it hard to believe that the embryo outside of the mother's womb is a human because they technically can not be alive until planted in the uterus. I also go both ways on whether or not the unused embryos should be destroyed or not. In a way I still feel like they technically are not alive, but yet they still have potential
DeleteAbbie excellent thanks for shorting my ideas i think you helped me clear it up a lot more! I still struggle with the idea of embryo destruction however i would not be here without it because those advances IVF exists. I feel as though i would be hypocritical to say that i do not believe in the destruction because i would not be here without it!
DeleteEmily, i completely agree with the idea that embryos outside of the woman's womb are not seen as true human beings until they are in an environment where they can survive and flourish. Also, while i see the usefulness of creating embryos for research purposes, I have a problem with the disposal of them. Simply because that embryo has the possibility to become a human being in the correct environment.
DeleteI'm with Abbie and Emily. I have the same beliefs about embryonic cells aren't human until they are put in the womb however, I too battle my opinion on what to do with the embryo that is not implanted. Like what Abbie said, it's not a human but it does have the potential. I don't know much about stem cell research but it could be argued that it's the same as having a stem cell that could produce a heart. Is it wrong to get rid of the cells if the technology to build a heart doesn't exist?
DeleteI still stand in how I feel about embryonic stem cells. I believe that the arguments that we all have stems from your intentions and motives. I think just as Emily says, IVF and other things such as that create lives for families unable to have children. However, without research we would never be able to advance our technology because nothing would ever be able to be tested. With that said, I don't agree with being able to pick and choose which embryo we use based on genetics. Now, if we have a case like we looked at in class that has to do with finding out if the embryo is carrying a gene for a deadly disease and the parents have to pick which one to use I would have to agree with that. I don't think raising a child that you know is going to have a terminal disease is ethical. Why put them through such a thing when you had the option not to. Don't mistake this with me agreeing with abortion or anything like that because like I said at the beginning, your argument stems from your motives and intentions.
ReplyDeleteI think that the stem cell research is a good idea in some aspects. I think that it is wonderful that medical research has come this far to where doctors can give a woman a child, if she is unable to conceive a child herself. With that being said, I do not agree with picking and choosing the genetics of an embryo. I think that is abusing the whole purpose of the procedure, although it could avoid a harder lifestyle, i still believe that you should take life how it has been given to you. I agree with Emily when it comes to the embryos not being considered human until the embryo is implanted into the mother's uterus. In my opinion i think that IVF is a great thing that can be given to a woman, just as long as they are doing the procedure ethically, which would be not choosing the genetics.
ReplyDeleteI still stand with believing whether an embryo is inside the uterus or not, that it is a human being. Especially with going into the medical field myself I find the advancements in technology to be a positive thing, though what we do with these advancements and how morally acceptable they should be, is the real question at hand. I believe IVF is a great thing for woman wanting to start a family, though I also back that statement up with saying the amount of eggs that start out in the petri dish is the same amount of eggs that should then be planted into the mother. Discarding of the eggs or freezing them until who knows when is what I believe to be morally unacceptable. Any form of genetic engineering or enhancement to those said eggs should not take place. Life should happen as is, let nature take its course.
ReplyDeleteI can completely agree with you here Amanda on saying that discarding the eggs is wrong. To me that seems to be something that doesn't need to be happening. Freezing might be a different story. They could be used in the future. As long as they are used I can see this kind of being okay.
DeleteI agree with you as well. If a couple is having trouble becoming pregnant, and they tried for a long time with no luck, then IVF is a wonderful option for them. However, freezing the fertilized eggs for an unknown amount of time, or discarding them when they are not needed anymore, I believe, is unacceptable. Those embryos are lives that are being prohibited from becoming someone, and I don't think that is right. Genetically modifying embryos is also not acceptable to me. This is like picking exactly how you want your child to be, instead of just being thankful for what you have been given. I think that too much power is given to people in these circumstances, when they should not have so much.
DeleteIt is hard for me think about this topic because I've never been in the situation where I had to pick either side of the other. I believe that there has been a lot of advancements in technology. This is wonderful when it comes to things that are going wrong with the world. I don't think that we should be allowed to pick and choose what our kids become. This includes eye color, hair color and etc. It's hard not to think of this topic from a religious view. I believe that God creates us and that he chooses that aspects of our life. There are certain things in our lives that are hard and this is hard for me to think of this situation and people to think that I am wishing certain bad things on people. I am not doing that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you we should not believe to " design our babies" but sometimes as my parents had to families need a little extra help conceiving children and if you do it for that sole purpose then i think it is a great thing. Excellent points.
DeleteI also agree that it is difficult to think without a religious basis, especially growing up with a strong faith background. And of course this topic and abortion is probably some of the harder topics to discuss without the presence of God or religion.
DeleteIt seems this topic has come up in almost all of my classes this semester which is interesting to get so many people input about the topic and really helps me formulate an opinion. I feel as though embryos outside of the woman's womb are not seen as human beings until they are in an environment where they can survive. However, it is difficult for me to even see an embryo as a human being yet either, simply because it has the possibility to become a human being or the basis of a human being doesn't make it a LIVING human being yet. When someone is pronounced dead, they have all the makings of a human being and still possess the makings of being a living human being, however they are seen as dead and not living. So I struggle with this idea that an embryo with simply the makings and possibility can even be seen as a living thing when in order to pronounce someone dead at the other end of life, they have to have no brain activity, no circulation or respiratory functioning. I struggle with this & im still trying to decipher my feelings about this
ReplyDeleteObviously there is a major notion towards the persons motives. I do not agree with choosing eggs as a means of fulfilling some sort of personal achievement. I think eugenics is wrong and this could be considered similar, however, I do promote this if it for the well being of a mother desiring to have a family or if it is being done to avoid some significant inherited disease. I think that last reason is the most intuitive of them all. It seems like everyone here is all about preventative medicine. Therefore, in the future if we have the ability to avoid a disastrous disease before birth then we should do everything in our power to deviate from that "x" disease
ReplyDelete