Get help now

Abortion Research Paper Fetal tissue research

  • Pages 7
  • Words 1657
  • Views 371
  • dovnload



  • Pages 7
  • Words 1657
  • Views 371
  • Academic anxiety?

    Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

    Get your paper price

    124 experts online

    Abortion Essay, Research Paper

    Fetal tissue research is the procedure of utilizing foetal tissue, derived from legal

    abortions, for scientific research into cardinal biological procedures and

    human development. In add-on, organ transplant research uses foetal tissue to

    survey possible intervention of life treating diseases. Recent statute law

    trying to let federal support for root cell research, a signifier of foetal

    tissue research, has caused this topic to be drawn into argument.

    Fetal tissue research frequently is morally and ethically controversial in that it is

    confused with the issues of abortion. Many people try to warrant their place

    on foetal tissue research by turn outing or confuting the humanity of the foetus ;

    nevertheless, in this paper I plan to give the foetus the benefit of the uncertainty by

    giving it the position of a fully fledged individual. This allows for the riddance

    of any issues associated with the morality of the abortion and allows for the

    separation from the ambiguous points involved in the abortion argument. I besides

    intend to merely cover with the jobs affiliated with consciously aborted

    foetuss. This is due to the fact that, by and large, research workers deal less with

    spontaneously aborted foetuss and spontaneous abortion foetuss because they are frequently

    associated with familial defects. I intend to reason that foetal tissue research

    is a morally legitimate point of view.

    By accepting the premise that foetuss are individuals so abortion would be a

    signifier of slaying. If killing guiltless individuals is slaying and foetuss, harmonizing to

    the premise, are individuals; so killing foetuss is slaying. Hence, it must

    follow that in order for research on aborted foetal tissue to be proven as

    morally admissible; so research on murdered individual’s tissue must besides be

    proven admissible. The followers is a state of affairs where research on murdered

    individual’s tissue is comparable to that on aborted foetal tissue:

    Suppose that 25 twelvemonth old individuals ( poetries foetuss ) were found to possess

    cells that the scientific community believed might hold a good consequence on

    humanity. While seeking to analyze these cells the scientists came across a

    job. They found themselves unable to execute research on the persons

    because the trials that they needed to execute in their research caused an

    instant decease to its topics. However, they found themselves able to

    execute the trials on individuals that were antecedently dead. They started a plan

    where they attained murdered organic structures of 25 twelvemonth olds that have gone

    unclaimed in order to execute research on them.

    In our society would the scientists’plan be morally sound? The reply lies

    in the rights of the individual who has been murdered. If the murdered individuals were

    to keep any rights ( e.g. life, autonomy and the chase of land ) so the

    scientists’rights to research would be out weighed ( lest the person allowed

    the research ) . What rights can slay individuals ( i.e. aborted foetuss ) have that

    would outweigh any scientific claims to their organic structures?

    The one right that is perchance entitled to asleep people is the right to

    funerary service. Throughout clip the rule refering to the saving

    of funeral rights has become quasi-archetypal for modern civilization. Some civilizations,

    such as ancient Greeks, have even gone every bit far as to claim that these rights

    should be held higher than that of life itself. If this were the instance, so a

    asleep individuals right to a funeral would outweighs any scientific claim

    associated with the research of his/her organic structure. This would do the scientists to

    non be morally justified in the creative activity of their plan above.

    In world, murdered, exanimate persons do non possess the right to a

    funeral. They, in actuality, do non possess any rights at all. The ground for

    this is as follows: in order to hold rights you must besides hold the will to

    execute those rights. E.g. in order to hold the right to bear pieces you must

    be able to take whether or non you are traveling to bear weaponries. Inanimate objects

    such as aborted foetal tissue are non able to hold rights. Take a picture, an

    obvious in animate object, for illustration. Does it hold a right to any thing

    connected with it? Throughout the greater portion of western civilisation pictures

    have been given frames. This fact may take you to believe that pictures do hold

    the right to a frame. On the contrary, a picture, in order to possess any

    right, must be able to act in conformity with its picks or volitions. They must

    be able to take a frame harmonizing to their desire in order to keep the

    right to a frame. In other words a picture must incorporate a Freedom of

    Voluntariness in order to retain a right to a frame; nevertheless it is absurd that

    any inanimate object possess this freedom, as it is a right held merely by

    individuals. It would follow that a dead individual, person who is nothingness of all standards

    refering to person-hood, besides would non possess this freedom and, hence,

    would non be able to keep rights.

    Traveling to an art gallery, it seems to be absurd that all of the pictures have

    elaborate frame

    s. Who or what, so, maintains the will and so the right to be

    able to indue graphics with intricate frames? The obvious reply would be the

    proprietors. They have the freedom to move in conformity with a pick to border the


    If it is the proprietors who have the right to border a image so who has the right

    to a funeral? Similar to the instance with graphics, it would be the proprietors, but

    specifying the proprietor of a one time living person is somewhat more hard than

    specifying the proprietor of a piece of art. Artwork has creative persons that created it and

    purchasers who retain a definite pecuniary claim to it; cadavers do non. They do,

    nevertheless, have household and associates ( i.e. parents who conceived them and

    familiarities who influenced them ) . The household and associates would, in fact,

    own the post-person because they were at some degree responsible for its

    being. It follows that because of this ownership they besides possess all

    rights associated with its organic structure and what happens to it.

    Through abortion all claims to the foetus are dropped. A foetus is a individual

    without associates. The lone people responsible for its being are its

    parents. If the parents decide to acquire an abortion they would, ab initio, be in

    ownership of the foetus’s organic structure and therefore posses all rights associated with it.

    However, by traveling through with the abortion they have executed the right to

    discard the organic structure and hold given up all claims of ownership and, accordingly,

    all of the organic structure’s future rights. Furthermore, the ownership would non be passed

    on to the 3rd party executing the abortion because the abortion is non

    involved with giving ownership to the abortion clinic but to take it from the

    parents. The foetal tissue would be without any claim of ownership.

    All parties, including the 3rd party executing the abortion, wanting to

    get foetal tissue would incorporate an equal right to it. The state of affairs would be

    correspondent to person disposing of a big amount of money by throwing it onto the

    floor of a busy airdrome. All people in the locality with a desire to hold the

    money would hold an equal right to it. The first people to get it, so,

    would be in right ownership of it. Consequently, the first individuals to get

    the foetal tissue ( by and large the individuals executing the abortion ) would be in

    right ownership of it and hold the right to command what happens to it.

    The possibility for foetal tissue research to be advantageous to humanity gives

    research workers non merely an equal right to discarded foetuss but, in fact,

    precedency to them. The mere guess that research on dead foetuss could

    give penetrations into birth defects and other diseases such as Parkinson’s and

    Alzheimer’s creates a little perchance that humanity will be improved. That little

    possibility would outweigh any other claim to the tissue. The lone ground that

    party executing the abortion does frequently stop up in ownership of foetal tissue is

    because they were simply the number ones to get it out of the female parent’s attention.

    However, Because foetal tissue research workers have a superior claim to the tissue it

    ought to be the instance where they are in instant ownership of it.

    Research workers are, hence, morally justified in foetal tissue research. The

    foetus possesses no rights, and any individual seeking for good effects

    derived from the foetal tissue would hold precedence over other claims. In

    ownership of the foetal tissue, a research worker would be morally appropriate in

    perform research on it because they are put to deathing their will.

    One of the most notable grounds to halt foetal tissue research is the

    possibility of the creative activity of a hard currency market for foetal tissue and variety meats. The

    concluding behind this is that because there is such a high demand for foetal

    tissue people would be willing to pay big sums of money in order to achieve

    it. This, in some instances, may advance abortion, which is a signifier of slaying, as

    mean for deriving money. Fetal tissue research would indirectly actuate slaying

    and, therefore, be partly responsible for it.

    Ideally the reply to this job is that it is a false belief to believe that the

    individuals selling the tissue of all time have any pecuniary claim to it. In fact, the

    people stand foring the greater good in the scientific community would be in

    right ownership of the tissue in the first topographic point and hence ne’er have the

    demand to but it.

    However, I am able to acknowledge that in our society this would ne’er be the

    instance. Possibly it is because we live in an economically goaded society. The

    greater good would non be salvaging lives or deriving cognition but to do money.

    This would render the ideal solution impracticable because it would warrant a

    pecuniary claim to foetal tissue. It would besides destruct my positive instance for

    foetal tissue research because the scientific community would no longer be

    stand foring the greater good.

    My merely answer to this is that I would wish to cover with normative claims non

    descriptive claims. I would wish to turn out foetal tissue research morally

    legitimate in comparing to how our society ought to be non with how it truly


    This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

    Need a custom essay sample written specially to meet your requirements?

    Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

    Order custom paper Without paying upfront

    Abortion Research Paper Fetal tissue research. (2018, May 08). Retrieved from

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper
    We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy