Sydney
29 June 2003

Home
Archive
Subscribe
Links
Contact

‘Unethical’ to kill an embryo

Roll on, Cologne

And they’re racing ... to help Vinnies

‘Renewal of my faith’

Seminar ‘rekindles Bible fire’

Year 9 - May the force be with you

‘Appoint acting judges’ to solve visa backlog

Charity race day

Society needs to ‘share pain of others’

Bombs found at Mass site

Movement seeks inquiry on Iraqi conflict

Cambridge choir in Sydney visit

China visitors

The Catholic Weekly- Spiritual tension

Letters

Moral values ‘a major role’ for the Church

Challenge to your neighbourhood?

Jesus Christ, the ultimate healer

Parents’ acts inspired Sr Huyen

Religion, art ‘a very powerful mix’

Classic rite controversial, but ‘a jewel’

Real feelings of life and faith

Bishop Peter Ingham’s message

Clergy-principals’ conference day

Students share justice issues

New team looks at needs

New director of vocations

Vocation Awareness Diocesan Poster Competition

Diocesan catechists train

Gothic paradise - the legacy of Pugin

‘Unethical’ to kill an embryo

By Chris Lindsay

It is never ethical to sacrifice one life for the real or perceived benefit
of another human being, Blacktown MP Paul Gibson told a State parliamentary
debate on a Bill to allow research on human embryos.

Even though his younger sister died at 29 of acute myeloid leukaemia and his
mother is battling cancer, he does not know, he told the debate, whether he
could make the decision to kill an embryo so they could survive.

“Even if I were satisfied that embryonic stem cells could be used to help my
sister when she was alive and my mum at the moment, I do not know whether I
could,” he said.

“I would hate to be in the position of having to make such a call; it would
be too hard. Like every other member, I think it would be wonderful if there
was a cure for people who are paralysed and in wheelchairs, people who are
crippled, people who are mentally retarded, and people with any other
sickness.

“But one has always to ask: What is the cost?”

A Bill allowing embryonic stem cell research passed through Federal
Parliament earlier this year and must now be ratified by each of the states.

All MPs in the NSW Legislative Assembly were given a conscience vote on the
Bill, which was approved by 68 votes to 21.

It has now gone to the Legislative Council for further debate.

Paul Gibson told the Lower House that there were moral and scientific issues
to consider and religious views to take into account.

“I find it very hard to support the Research Involving Human Embryos Bill
because, even today, scientists and researchers differ on the worth of stem
cells and any advantage they may provide.

“Embryonic stem cell research concerns me greatly, although I do not have
the same concern about adult stem cell research, because adult stem cells
have the great advantage that an embryo does not have. (The latter needs) to
be destroyed to access them.

“That is my main point about this bill. Various types of stem cells are used
in research. Stem cells taken from adult tissue - placentas and umbilical
cord blood - can be retrieved without harming the donor.

“However, the only way to obtain embryonic stem cells is to kill a living
human embryo, and that is something I find very hard to accept.

“My objection to this bill is that it is never ethical to sacrifice one life
for the real or perceived benefit of another human being.”

Marianne Saliba, MP for Illawarra, who is a Catholic, said Parliament had an
obligation to protect life, not destroy it.

She said scientists and specialists should be directing their energy towards
researching adult stem cells.

“Where is our respect for life? From the time of conception our genetics and
make-up lie in a tiny, fertilised egg,” she said.

“Federal and State governments do not appear to have much respect for life.
Stem cell research is a moral issue about life.

“If we believe that life begins at conception, we cannot support the
destruction of that life for any reason.”

Parliament does not “have the right to make decisions about whether somebody
should live or die”, Mrs Saliba said.

“We do not have the death penalty in Australia, but we are giving these
embryos the death penalty.

“We are saying: ‘Sorry, nobody wants you; out you go’.

“Laws in NSW specify that only four embryos can be transferred at one time.
If 15 eggs are fertilised, 11 embryos are frozen or otherwise disposed of.
“This Parliament should regulate the number of eggs that can be fertilised
at any one time.

“We must put a stop to this shameful practice. We should not be passing
legislation for further research. The jury is still out on the question of
embryonic stem cells versus adult stem cells. We might achieve something if
we put the same energy into researching adult stem cells.”

Others to speak and vote against the Bill included:

Virginia Judge (Strathfield): Embryonic stem cell research is unethical
because it involves a wilful destruction of created embryos that have an
inherent dignity. I fully support stem cell research that does not involve
embryo destruction. This debate is not about religion versus science but
about good science versus bad science.

Christopher Hartcher (Gosford): Science does not work its miracles by
destroying the very principles upon which society is built. Science works
its miracles by developing advances within the framework of ethics and
respect for human life. We do not advance human life by destroying it - and
that is what this bill would allow.

Kristina Keneally (Heffron): The bill opens the door to creating embryos for
research purposes, relies on a flawed definition of what constitutes human
life and marks the beginning of purely instrumental uses of human life.

Embryos have become available for research purposes only because NSW and
some other states have failed to enact legislation governing assisted
reproductive technology.

Andrew Stoner (Oxley): The issue is not whether the embryos are surplus; it
is the ethics of destroying an embryo for the purpose of benefiting another
human.

Paul Crittenden (Wyong): The root of the debate really comes down to the
ethical question of what’s the moral status of a human embryo? Is it a
person or is it a piece of property?

HOW DID YOUR LOCAL MP VOTE?