Stephen Napier
Villanova University
Contemporary philosophical discussion on human embryonic stem cell research has focused primarily on the metaphysical and meta-ethical issues suchresearch raises. Though these discussions are interesting, largely ignored are arguments rooted in the secular research ethics tradition already informing humansubject research. This tradition countenances the notion of vulnerability and that vulnerable human subjects (of which human embryos are likely members)ought to be protected from research-related harms. This is the basic idea behind the argument from vulnerability, and it enjoys prima facie plausibility. This articlepresents the vulnerability argument and then focuses critically on several lines of attack including: (1) twinning and totipotency arguments, (2) embryo-rescuearguments, and (3) natural loss arguments. The article concludes that there is no good defeater for the vulnerability argument, and, therefore, we have undefeated reasons for protecting human embryos from research related harms
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Contemporary Philosophy  History of Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1051-3558
DOI 10.5840/acpq201084454
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,247
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

What Must Pro‐Lifers Believe About the Moral Status of Embryos?David B. Hershenov - 2020 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 101 (2):186-202.
Twinning, Identity, and Moral Status.Stephen Napier - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (1):42-43.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Regulatory Argument Against Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research.S. Napier - 2009 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (5):496-508.
Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and the Discarded Embryo Argument.Mark Moller - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (2):131-145.
Killing Embryos for Stem Cell Research.Jeff Mcmahan - 2007 - Metaphilosophy 38 (2-3):170–189.
Abortion, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, and Waste.David A. Jensen - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):27-41.
The Ethics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research.Howard J. Curzer - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (5):533 – 562.
Stem Cell Research, Personhood and Sentience.Lisa Bortolotti & John Harris - 2005 - Reproductive Biomedicine Online 10:68-75.
The Ethics and Politics of Small Sacrifices in Stem Cell Research.Glenn McGee & Arthur L. Caplan - 1999 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 9 (2):151-158.
Embryonic Stem Cells and Property Rights.A. -K. M. Andersson - 2011 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (3):221-242.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #472,608 of 2,448,492 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,843 of 2,448,492 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes