David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (12):852-857 (2008)
Five partly successive and partly overlapping framings have dominated the public debate about human embryonic stem cells since they first were “derived” a decade ago. Geron Corporation staged the initial framings as 1) basic research and 2) medical hope, but these two were immediately refuted and opposed by 3) bioethical concerns, voiced by influential politicians and leaders of opinion. Thereafter, the research community presented adult stem cells and therapeutic cloning as 4) techno-fix solutions supposed to bypass these ethical concerns. And in recent years, 5) institutional limitations to and hurdles within the university–industrial complex (such as patentability, misconduct and fraud) have attracted more attention. The article purifies the arguments and points out the interests and institutions behind the five framings. It also discusses their interplay and finally addresses the question of what happened to the stem cells?
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Norman Ford (2011). Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells. Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 16 (4):4.
Norman Ford (2007). Stem Cells, Altered Nuclear Transfer & Ethics. Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 12 (3):9.
Melinda B. Fagan (2011). Social Experiments in Stem Cell Biology. Perspectives on Science 19 (3):235-262.
Paul Lauritzen (2005). Stem Cells, Biotechnology, and Human Rights: Implications for a Posthuman Future. Hastings Center Report 35 (2):25-33.
Mariam Ghosn & Ford (2006). Stem Cell Technology Update. Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 12 (1):10.
Mark T. Brown (2009). Moral Complicity in Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 19 (1):pp. 1-22.
John F. Kilner (2009). An Inclusive Ethics for the Twenty-First Century: Implications for Stem Cell Research. Journal of Religious Ethics 37 (4):683-722.
Demetrio Neri (2011). The Race Toward 'Ethically Universally Acceptable' Human Pluripotent (Embryonic-Like) Stem Cells: Only a Problem of Sources? Bioethics 25 (5):260-266.
Howard J. Curzer (2004). The Ethics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (5):533 – 562.
Jane Maienschein (2002). Stem Cell Research: A Target Article Collection Part II - What's in a Name: Embryos, Clones, and Stem Cells. American Journal of Bioethics 2 (1):12 – 19.
John D. Loike Moshe Tendler (2008). Reconstituting a Human Brain in Animals: A Jewish Perspective on Human Sanctity. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (4):pp. 347-367.
A. M. Viens (2009). Morality Provisions in Law Concerning the Commercialization of Human Embryos and Stem Cells. In Aurora Plomer & Paul Torremans (eds.), Embryonic Stem Cell Patents: European Patent Law and Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads7 ( #264,410 of 1,696,615 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #346,146 of 1,696,615 )
How can I increase my downloads?