On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Gruss wrote: > > For example, are the "embryos" created for couples that can't have > babies "research"? If not, why not? And if we're going to say > creation of THOSE is ok, why not for other types of "research"? And > what about the ones that are already created? What's to be done > there? Is the only reasonable remedy adoption of snow flake babies? >
Using embryos that were created for in vitro fertilization but would otherwise be destroyed (e.g. in vitro with one of the embryos worked or the couple gave up) is what Krauthammer favors. I agree with that position (it leaves a potential hole for a fertility clinic to create dozens or even hundreds of extra embryos for a couple that wants a single baby, although I think there are already ethical rules in place about that process). The issue with in vitro is that they make multiple embryos because it usually takes more than one to successfully implant. In theory, if the science improved to where a successful implantation could be done with a single embryo every time, there would be no ethical reason for creating "spares". What other ethical reason could you have for creating an embryo? To cut it up like firewood for research? even if research is valuable, doesn't that creep you out just a little? it sure does me... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:291562 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
