As you might know reading this blog, I'm a scientist. I'm also, which I think I've written about a couple of times, someone who has taken a bunch of philosophy classes (ethics, moral, medical genetics), CITI training on compliance, patient care and even a couple of religious studies. And I attend church, albeit lately fairly infrequently. I'm part of an "care team" who visits and sits with terminally ill, old people and their relatives.
I'm not saying all of this to win some sort of nomination. Nope. I'm stating all this since I want you as a reader to have a little more background than "she's a scientist" since this subject - the fetal tissue research and the pending legislature - is a morass in mixing "personal feelings" with "what's best for the human beings" and "what is moral". The more you read about it, the more you will realize that the issue at stake is hidden in a bunch of red herrings and that it makes it impossible to have a reasonable and intellectual argumentation about WHY or WHY NOT it should be allowed.
You might not know but the last couple of months (almost a year) has been a flurry of politicians sensing quick votes of approval by stating very obvious things that no one really would take the stand against. And a bunch of lies to further their own agenda.
I'm going to try and write this post as short and succinct as possible. It's mainly because this subject is so sensitive that I can't really discuss it with too many people around me, nor does it seem to matter. People want to make it simple and I'm simply not sure on how many people who really understand the complexity of the issue and why it's not quite as simple as how certain republican politicians are expressing themselves currently in the US Congress nor in the various state legislatures around the country.
First,
here is a link to a Nature article that capture a bunch of arguments why the use of fetal tissue is important in science to find cures and understanding to a lot of diseases that affect us humans.
We could talk about
"is there really a need for the use of fetal tissue". No one argues this is a simple matter. Just like the research of embryonic stem cells. No one says it's easy nor obvious moral to do. Religious or not, people do understand the ethics complications and why it's so important to have rules and regulations in place for this. It's important to vet the ideas and the notion of what is allowed and not. That's why all the committees, international and institutional, exist. To debate and bring to light ethical considerations and moral implications of advances in science and humanity. It's not "
only religious people" who care about the human embryos and the potential implications on the human race. That's part of the red herrings coming from (mostly) religious anti-science people.
What you might ask, is it that I am upset about in this fetal tissue debate currently ongoing in the USA?
As you can see in
this link from Washington Post, the transcript from the first Congressional hearing in the matter, the arguments brought forth for making it illegal to obtain fetal tissue for certain institutions are so very poor and insincere.
If it was truly about "
not making it legal to do fetal tissue research" - a lot of what is being said wouldn't matter. Most of this debacle and grand standing stems from an outright lie - that was proven a lie in several state courts over the USA. It was deemed a lie by a court in Texas, and the fraud of the video was determined and convicted. In Texas, one of the strong holds of "
we don't want any abortions". They determined it was a LIE. That same lie can apparently continue to be repeated and be the basis of pending legislature though. Planned Parenthood did not sell baby parts. They didn't sell fetal tissue. Nowhere was there a transaction of money between a woman going to have an abortion and an evil researcher waiting eagerly to "
get their hands on baby parts". And to read the backgrounds of some of these suggested legislatures, there are quite a number of (evil&immoral) woman standing in line to time their abortions with the need of fetal tissue from even more immoral and evil researchers. I tell you, where these people are - I have no idea. (Apart from in some of these republican legislature heads that is.)
The whole argument makes me so angry & scared. Why scared you ask? Well, if it is one thing that I have learnt living in the American South - that's the abundance of guns and people who take action on their own. The protests outside of the clinic where I go to get my pap smear, the chants on how "
I'm a baby killer" since I'm going into said clinic.... and knowing that more likely than not, some of those protesters have a gun. Yes, that scares me*. I'm only human.
However, what scares me even more is that there are politicians who are arguing that in order to debate this pending legislature "
people should name names on who these researchers are" and drag them into open Congressional hearings. Again, I'm all for openness. Anyone who recieves NIH grant funding is named in public databases. However, if it's something that has been shown the last year it's that some politicians use a very strong (an sometimes even lying) language to endorse and rally their fan base to do violent and even illegal actions (hello Carly Fiorina). I'm sure we can all weep crocodile tears after some of these researchers, being called in front of congress to be called "b
aby part collectors and users" by rabid Republicans thus being in danger from people in the community where they live, are getting hurt.
It's not like anyone of these debates argue WHY it's relevant to study developing cells. Nor that anyone of these so called "
moral values guardians" are facing the hypocrisy of claiming that it's acceptable to THREATEN with violence even though it's perfectly legal research going on. Now, that is what scares me the most.
As for the legislature discussion. I wish that more people could realize when arguments like this is being used (from the WashPo article mentioned above) and in regards to the testifying in front of the USA Congress):
Another witness, Patrick Lee of the Franciscan University of Steubenville,testified that not only is it “unjust for the government to fund or encourage elective abortions” and to allow the use of fetal tissue resulting from those abortions, but that women who have abortions should have no option to donate their fetus: “Women who choose to have direct abortions by that act forfeit the moral standing needed for being a proxy decision-maker in regard to the disposition of their baby’s remains. (my bold)
there is something seriously wrong with the process. Not to mention that it does NOTHING to the actual issue at hand - should fetal tissue research be legal or not. It makes the argument though that not only should certain (female) people be removed from a decision process, it also makes the focus of the debate to something that isn't even on the table.
The vote on the new legislature starts in Tennessee within the month. TN is the first state to vote that it should be illegal to transfer any type of money or value in order to receive tissue for research. And since in reality there are only a handful of clinics in the USA that actually collects these fetal tissue samples (California is one state that has clinics), this will be efficient stoppage of research. 13 more states are scheduled to vote for this within the coming three months. And of course, with the future election in the fall - don't be too surprised if it comes up again on a Federal level. Someone needs to think about the future children and the unborn.... (sarcasm, in case it isn't obvious). it's not like those scientist are thinking about the future, oh wait....
Next installment in the series "things that have been making me feel lately" will be "
controlling women and teens by means of threat of violence". Yes, also touching abortions. And yes, also about lying and coercing by "moral people".
*I might be oversensitive but back in my undergraduate days, one of my fellow biology researchers got a letter sent home stating "this is the way your children go to school". The researcher used animal models and that wasn't liked by the local animal rights chapter. There were quite a few people thinking this was quite ok, considering the researchers being immoral. If people do that in regards to animal rights in Europe, what goes for the rights of the unborn in the south?
