THERAPEUTICAL CLONING: BIOETHICAL PARADOXES OF MEDIA COVERAGE
THERAPEUTICAL CLONING: BIOETHICAL PARADOXES OF MEDIA COVERAGE
Last week, in the field of bioethics, the top story was the first successful human therapeutical cloning and the development of stem cells announced by a British scientific team. Unanimously saluted by the press as a success for science, thereapeutical cloning has been at the heart of heated bioethics controversies these last years.
But maybe, let us recall first what is therapeutical cloning. The process is simple: take an ovule from a lady donor, enucleate it (empty it of its genetic content which is haploid - i.e. it contains only half of the genetic information necessary to make an individual). Then a cell is taken from an adult individual, the DNA is prelevated from that cell, and introduced into the empty ovule. An electric stimulation is then sufficient to start the process of development of an embryo up to the stage of a blastocyte (a cluster of undifferentiated cells which characterises the human embryo in the first days of its development). The target of the scientists is to interrupt the development of the embryo at that stage, extract those stem cells and possibly use them for therapeutical use (grafts, etc).
As one can see there are a number of ethical problems which arise, and which justify the opposition of the Catholic Church to this type of experiences: in the first place, one is creating life without need (the embryo), a life which is then destroyed in an utilitarian goal, to use its very components. The argument of the proponents of stem cell research has been that you can’t qualify an undifferentiated cluster of cells of « life », and that hence it is open to make experiments on the subject. For the Catholic Church, based on the advancement of science, there are good grounds to believe that life begins from the very beginning.
Jurgen Habermas, the German philosopher who is often quoted as the maître à penser of the secular activists has been himself having second thoughts about stem cell experimentation. In one of his most recent works, he conceded that the embryo had a right to be taken into account in the deliberation of a democratic society. This concern for the embryo also motivated the Italian Cardinal Camillo Ruini to call Italians to abstain from voting on the referendums on assisted reproduction planned in the beginning of June.
A paradox was that the success in this experimentation brought unanimous applause in international press, some newspapers such as the French Le Monde regretting that therapeutical cloning researches were forbidden in France. Not one newspaper devoted some lines to questionning the new relationship to human being that was being introduced by this experimentation: that of seing second rate beings used as reserve of « exchange pieces » . It must be admitted however that most of the newspapers made reference to the resistances of the Church towards therapeutical cloning.
However, this media reaction illustrates in a painful manner the responsibility which faces journalists. Most people are not specialist of bioethics and even less are specialist of science to understand the stakes in this case. They rely heavily on the media to get a grasp of these subjects. It is undoubtable that the media which favour such an unilateral view of the question, by putting the stress on the possible (and as yet hypothetical) advantages of therapeutical cloning, contribute to fashion in a way the public opinion.
What was quietly left away from public knowledge was the fact that the embryo must be destroyed in order for the stem cells to be prelevated.
In turn, opinion polls on people whose minds are impressed with the favourable comments of the press will show broad popular support for therapeutical cloning. Hence, modern mass media may become true instruments of propaganda if sufficient care is not taken to show also the drawbacks of such controversial techniques.
Last week, in the field of bioethics, the top story was the first successful human therapeutical cloning and the development of stem cells announced by a British scientific team. Unanimously saluted by the press as a success for science, thereapeutical cloning has been at the heart of heated bioethics controversies these last years.
But maybe, let us recall first what is therapeutical cloning. The process is simple: take an ovule from a lady donor, enucleate it (empty it of its genetic content which is haploid - i.e. it contains only half of the genetic information necessary to make an individual). Then a cell is taken from an adult individual, the DNA is prelevated from that cell, and introduced into the empty ovule. An electric stimulation is then sufficient to start the process of development of an embryo up to the stage of a blastocyte (a cluster of undifferentiated cells which characterises the human embryo in the first days of its development). The target of the scientists is to interrupt the development of the embryo at that stage, extract those stem cells and possibly use them for therapeutical use (grafts, etc).
As one can see there are a number of ethical problems which arise, and which justify the opposition of the Catholic Church to this type of experiences: in the first place, one is creating life without need (the embryo), a life which is then destroyed in an utilitarian goal, to use its very components. The argument of the proponents of stem cell research has been that you can’t qualify an undifferentiated cluster of cells of « life », and that hence it is open to make experiments on the subject. For the Catholic Church, based on the advancement of science, there are good grounds to believe that life begins from the very beginning.
Jurgen Habermas, the German philosopher who is often quoted as the maître à penser of the secular activists has been himself having second thoughts about stem cell experimentation. In one of his most recent works, he conceded that the embryo had a right to be taken into account in the deliberation of a democratic society. This concern for the embryo also motivated the Italian Cardinal Camillo Ruini to call Italians to abstain from voting on the referendums on assisted reproduction planned in the beginning of June.
A paradox was that the success in this experimentation brought unanimous applause in international press, some newspapers such as the French Le Monde regretting that therapeutical cloning researches were forbidden in France. Not one newspaper devoted some lines to questionning the new relationship to human being that was being introduced by this experimentation: that of seing second rate beings used as reserve of « exchange pieces » . It must be admitted however that most of the newspapers made reference to the resistances of the Church towards therapeutical cloning.
However, this media reaction illustrates in a painful manner the responsibility which faces journalists. Most people are not specialist of bioethics and even less are specialist of science to understand the stakes in this case. They rely heavily on the media to get a grasp of these subjects. It is undoubtable that the media which favour such an unilateral view of the question, by putting the stress on the possible (and as yet hypothetical) advantages of therapeutical cloning, contribute to fashion in a way the public opinion.
What was quietly left away from public knowledge was the fact that the embryo must be destroyed in order for the stem cells to be prelevated.
In turn, opinion polls on people whose minds are impressed with the favourable comments of the press will show broad popular support for therapeutical cloning. Hence, modern mass media may become true instruments of propaganda if sufficient care is not taken to show also the drawbacks of such controversial techniques.
posted by dawnofeurope | 5:17 pm
<< Home