Main   Terms   People   Interviews   Resources   Events

Framework #1: Protecting the Early Embryo

The first moral framework we call the embryo protectionframework. The most prominent issue in the public debate about stem cell research is the moral status of the embryo. People have asked: should an embryo be granted the same moral status as a human person? The embryo protection framework takes this as the principle moral concern; this concern functions as a moral frame for understanding and interpreting all of the stem cell debate.

This framing of the ethical question begins with the origin of stem cells. The destruction of the blastocyst takes center stage. Many who operate within this framework take the zygote as having a moral status equal to that of any other person. They argue that the destruction of the blastocyst is tantamount to taking a human life. Insofar as human embryonic stem cell research requires the destruction of a blastocyst, it is held to be morally illicit, regardless of the potential good it might offer.

On what grounds might we think the early embryo possesses a dignity that forbids scientists from harming it? The most sophisticated account is provided by Vatican Catholics. It ties together ensoulment, dignity, moral protection, and genetic novelty. This position, articulated already in the 1987 encyclical Donum Vitae provides the foundational moral logic for what would later become the official Roman Catholic position on the stem cell debate.Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origins and on the Dignity of Procreation (Donum Vitae) ( 22 February 1987 ), ActaApsotolicaeSedis 1988,80,70-102....Donum Vitae argues that three elements are crucial to the creation of a morally defensible human individual: the father’s sperm, the mother’s egg, and a divinely implanted soul. Donum Vitae notes that at fertilization a novel genetic code - neither that of the mother nor that of the father - is created. Donum Vitae takes this genomic novelty to be evidence of the presence of a unique individual, and thus reasonably the moment of ensoulment. Ensoulment is the event which establishes a divine moral claim, so that the destruction of the blastocyst constitutes not only murder but an offense against God’s creation. Alleged empirical evidence that the early embryo has this divinely ascribed status is the uniqueness of the person-to-be’s unique genetic code. Once a unique genome has been established, then it is morally incumbent on us to protect it from harm.

The orienting bioethical principle of the embryo protection framework is “nonmaleficence” - that is, “do no harm.” To take a life (the life of the developing zygote in this case) violates the do no harm principle. According to many working within this framework, our first ethical responsibility is to forestall stem cell research. Those who support stem cell research are accused of disrespect for the value of human life. Foremost among those who frame the debate in this way are Roman Catholic spokespersons and some outspoken Protestant American evangelicals.

When the issue is framed this way, those who support stem cell research must argue that an early embryo or blastocyst is not a ‘human person’ and that destroying it is not equivalent to murder. These arguments can be difficult to make. If the blastocyst is not yet fully a human person and therefore protectable, when does a developing zygote become protectable? The public debate has largely raged over this question; the embryo protection framework has set the terms of the debate. Because so much public attention is given to this framing, we sometimes fail to notice that voices speaking out of two other frameworks are trying to be heard.

Email link | Printer-friendly | Feedback | Contributed by: Gaymon Bennett, Karen Lebacqz and Ted Peters

Topic Sets Available

AAAS Report on Stem-Cells

AstroTheology: Religious Reflections on Extraterrestrial Life Forms

Agency: Human, Robotic and Divine
Becoming Human: Brain, Mind, Emergence
Big Bang Cosmology and Theology (GHC)
Cosmic Questions Interviews

Cosmos and Creator
Creativity, Spirituality and Computing Technologies
CTNS Content Home
Darwin: A Friend to Religion?
Demystifying Information Technology
Divine Action (GHC)
Dreams and Dreaming: Neuroscientific and Religious Visions'
E. Coli at the No Free Lunchroom
Engaging Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence: An Adventure in Astro-Ethics
Evangelical Atheism: a response to Richard Dawkins
Ecology and Christian Theology
Evolution: What Should We Teach Our Children in Our Schools?
Evolution and Providence
Evolution and Creation Survey
Evolution and Theology (GHC)
Evolution, Creation, and Semiotics

The Expelled Controversy
Faith and Reason: An Introduction
Faith in the Future: Religion, Aging, and Healthcare in the 21st Century

Francisco Ayala on Evolution

From Christian Passions to Scientific Emotions
Genetic Engineering and Food

Genetics and Ethics
Genetic Technologies - the Radical Revision of Human Existence and the Natural World

Genomics, Nanotechnology and Robotics
Getting Mind out of Meat
God and Creation: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives on Big Bang Cosmology
God, Humanity and the Cosmos: A Textbook in Science and Religion
God the Spirit - and Natural Science
Historical Examples of the Science and Religion Debate (GHC)
History of Creationism
Intelligent Design Coming Clean

Issues for the Millennium: Cloning and Genetic Technologies
Jean Vanier of L'Arche
Nano-Technology and Nano-ethics
Natural Science and Christian Theology - A Select Bibliography
Neuroscience and the Soul
Outlines of the Science and Religion Debate (GHC)

Perspectives on Evolution

Physics and Theology
Quantum Mechanics and Theology (GHC)
Questions that Shape Our Future
Reductionism (GHC)
Reintroducing Teleology Into Science
Science and Suffering

Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action (CTNS/Vatican Series)

Space Exploration and Positive Stewardship

Stem-Cell Debate: Ethical Questions
Stem-Cell Ethics: A Theological Brief

Stem-Cell Questions
Theistic Evolution: A Christian Alternative to Atheism, Creationism, and Intelligent Design...
Theology and Science: Current Issues and Future Directions
Unscientific America: How science illiteracy threatens our future
Will ET End Religion?

Current Stats: topics: >2600, links: >300,000, video: 200 hours.