Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply The Pro-life Guild
Child who received stem cells from aborted fetus on way home

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

people counter
  +1
View Results

ryokomayuka

Familiar Member

10,400 Points
  • Team Edward 100
  • Gaian 50
  • Happy Birthday! 100
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:26 am


Quote:
Child who received stem cells from aborted fetus on way home
PAUL ELIAS
Associated Press
SAN FRANCISCO - Daniel Kerner's parents knew the experimental brain surgery was risky, but without it the 6-year-old surely would die.

Last month in Portland, Ore., doctors for the first time transplanted stem cells from aborted fetuses into his head in a desperate bid to reverse, or at least slow, a rare genetic disorder called Batten disease. The so-far incurable condition normally results in blindness and paralysis before death.

Doctors don't know if the neural stem cells taken from fetuses - donated to a nonprofit medical foundation by women aborting early-stage pregnancies - will save Daniel's life. But the boy has sufficiently recovered from his 8-hour surgery to be expected to return to his Orange County, Calif., home Friday. The Jewish holiday of Hanukkah begins that night.

"We don't think that is a coincidence," said Marcus Kerner, who said a deep faith in Judaism and long hours of prayer prompted the family to volunteer Daniel for the risky procedure. Daniel was diagnosed two years ago and has since lost the ability to walk and talk. Daniel is the first volunteer of an experiment that plans to operate on five more afflicted children over the next year.

"He was a little boy who was basically waiting to die, now he's waiting to get better," said Kerner. He said Daniel recently called him "Dad" for the first time in two years.

The stem cells injected into Daniel's head aren't human embryonic stem cells, a research field for which President Bush has limited federal funding because of moral objections. Nonetheless, the new cells in Daniel's brain do carry their own ethical baggage.

Anti-abortion groups oppose the research, which was banned from federal funding by President Reagan in 1988. President Clinton removed the prohibition in 1993.

"They are trying to give an aura that this is good when this is the most grisly of examples that can be given about abortion," said Gayle Atteberry, executive director of the Oregon Right to Life, the state's leading anti-abortion group. "They are taking the brains from babies."

Research opponents argue that beyond their moral opposition, there is the long list of failed fetal tissue transplant experiments - most notably those involving hundreds of Parkinson's patients over the last decade, none of whom have shown dramatic improvements.

But Martin McGlynn, chief executive of Stem Cells Inc., which developed and owns commercial rights to the experimental Batten treatment, said the current operation differs dramatically from previous fetal tissue transplant attempts. The Palo Alto-based company is paying for the experimental operations.

McGlynn said the injections Daniel received were "highly purified" stem cells selected for their ability to obey commands from the brain to replace damaged cells. McGlynn said previous transplants were crude by comparison because those researchers simply injected fetal brain tissue with little selectivity of needed cells.

Batten disease is caused when defective genes fail to make enzymes needed to dispose of waste made by brain cells. The waste piles up in the brain and kills healthy cells until the patient dies. Most victims die before they reach their teens.

The company's idea is to inject the sick kids with healthy, fetal neural stem cells that will "engraft" in the brain, which will direct the new cells to turn into cells able to produce the missing enzymes.

The company's treatment showed promise in Batten-afflicted mice, but such an ethically charged test has never been tried before in children.

That's why Oregon Health Sciences University researchers have been trying to temper expectations since they first operated on Daniel on Nov. 14, steadfastly refusing to discuss the experiment except for a brief press conference two days after the operation.

"We don't want people thinking this is the best thing since sliced bread," said Dr. Robert Steiner, the lead Batten researcher in Portland.

The goals of the Portland experiment are modest and the results won't be known for at least a year. The researchers are mostly looking to see whether the stem cell injections harm Kerner and the other patients.

If they're satisfied that the side effects are mild enough, they will enroll more children in additional trials designed to measure whether the fetal stem cells are succeeding in loosening Batten's fatal grip. Batten afflicts roughly 3 out of every 100,000 children in the United States.


http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/16215833.htm

So that do you think?
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:29 pm


Mixed feelings.

On the one hand, an abortion is usually a human dying for no real reason. You wouldn't have a born human killed for something like, "His mother doesn't want him at this point in time." It's one way to make a death sort of...not valid, but at least not completely pointless.

On the other hand, it's using the body of a human without that human's permission. It'd be like using a born person's heart after death without that person's permission, and though I understand that parents are the ones who decide whether or not their child is an organ donator after death and children don't make that decision for themselves, it seems wrong to me. It's bad enough that a parent is willing to have his or her child killed. To turn around and further desecrate the body...

It tests my faith though. Honestly, if my child were in a situation where that was the only way for him or her to live...what would I do? Would I say yes to the procedure? Would I say no, and watch my child die when he or she doesn't have to, watch my child suffering and think, this is because of me. To face my family and say, "Because of my beliefs and viewpoints, I am willing to let my child die." I'm not going to pretend it's "different for me." It is directly benefitting from abortion, and am I willing to do that? More accurately, am I willing to refrain from benefitting?

I hope to God I never know the answer to that question. Part of me wants to say, it's to save a life. It's worth it. But then, I wouldn't kill someone and then take their heart to save someone who needs a heart transplant. Would people start offering women cash incentives to abort their children to get the tissue? I doubt it, but it's a possibility. If it causes more abortions, it's not worth it.

Basically...

From a practical standpoint, if they were necessary abortions to save the mother's life, then no. I wouldn't oppose it at all for myself.

I wouldn't be legally opposed no matter how morally opposed I am if it's from superficial abortions, either. It's saving a life, what is there to legally oppose? The cost was the end of another human's life, but that would have ended whether the stem cells were used or not.

lymelady
Vice Captain


Tiger of the Fire

PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:19 pm


Nope, not off my hiatus. Just wanted to point something out. It says nueral stem says were used, not undiferintiated stem cells. This dosn't benefit the pro-choice argumetn about stem cel research. The research most often argued for is the cultivation of stem cells that have yet to take on a role.
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:41 pm


lymelady
On the other hand, it's using the body of a human without that human's permission. It'd be like using a born person's heart after death without that person's permission, and though I understand that parents are the ones who decide whether or not their child is an organ donator after death and children don't make that decision for themselves, it seems wrong to me. It's bad enough that a parent is willing to have his or her child killed. To turn around and further desecrate the body...

It tests my faith though. Honestly, if my child were in a situation where that was the only way for him or her to live...what would I do? Would I say yes to the procedure? Would I say no, and watch my child die when he or she doesn't have to, watch my child suffering and think, this is because of me. To face my family and say, "Because of my beliefs and viewpoints, I am willing to let my child die." I'm not going to pretend it's "different for me." It is directly benefitting from abortion, and am I willing to do that? More accurately, am I willing to refrain from benefitting?


I don't think it's desecrating the body, to use parts of it to help another person live.

If you were in such a situation, and said no to such a procedure, knowing your child would die, then you're just as 'selfish' as mothers who abort. You're forcing your views onto your child in the worst possible way: resulting in the child's death. You're not killing it by your own hand of course, but in refusing your child treatment, you might as well be condemning them to death.

The way I see it, these foetuses are dead already. Nothing can be done about that, at the stage of using them in this way. Once the life has gone, there's no use for the body except things like this. And why not (with the appropriate permission)? Where one person has died, let another live. Nothing can be done for the dead person, but the living can be saved.

It's not like the foetus was killed for its stem cells, after all.

Scribblemouse


lymelady
Vice Captain

PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:42 pm


sure it does. "See what good can come out of abortion? It's caring to children to kill a child, suck it's brains out, and use it to save another child!"
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 3:44 pm


lymelady
sure it does. "See what good can come out of abortion? It's caring to children to kill a child, suck it's brains out, and use it to save another child!"


They're not killing the foetus just to save the other child The foetus is dead already, by abortion, for whatever reason/s the mother had.

Scribblemouse


lymelady
Vice Captain

PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:18 pm


I already said that in my first post.

But that is going to come up. Trust me.

I've argued this issue so many times, I can't help but pull up the examples that make most people go, "Wuh? That's not true!" Because they come up so much, it's ridiculous.

I've seen people argue that abortion is good and should be encouraged because if the child lived it'd be miserable and live off welfare forever but if it died it could be useful by potentially saving someone else. Well here's an example of it working, hopefully working at least. I'm just hoping my friend doesn't see it because then the headaches will start with him gloating and going, see? How can you oppose abortion? It saves people!


As to your answer to my other comment: I would never accept such a procedure for myself. I would rather die than benefit from what I see as a murder. Would I accept it for my child? Most likely, and that disturbs me. It depends on the success, but it still disturbs me, no matter how successful it is, that I'd be willing to allow my child to benefit from abortion. It's pushing my beliefs on my child either way, especially considering the procedure is dangerous and my child would probably end up dying anyway.

The bottom line: You either support something or you don't. It's hypocritical to say, oh, I don't support abortion, and then say, "But it's okay for me to use it to save my child. That's different." It's not. It's supporting abortion. Would I die rather than support abortion? Yes. Would I watch my child die rather than support it? I doubt it, and that is why I can't say I'm strong in my conviction. I would not do all it takes to reject abortion. I would embrace it. I would say, "I need to write a thankyou note to that woman for aborting, because if she hadn't killed her baby, mine would be dead! Thank goodness she decided she didn't want a baby at this time in her life!" I could never do that for myself. But like I said, I probably would with my child. And there, I fail. I don't fail in love of my child. I fail in love of what's right. Because when it comes to my loved ones, I am willing to put aside what is right and do what is necessary. That is a failing in me. It's selfish of me but it's something that I'm not willing to change.
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:32 am


Scribblemouse
lymelady
sure it does. "See what good can come out of abortion? It's caring to children to kill a child, suck it's brains out, and use it to save another child!"


They're not killing the foetus just to save the other child The foetus is dead already, by abortion, for whatever reason/s the mother had.


Yeah, I don't think it's any worse than using organs from an adult who was murdered. This doesn't make abortion a good thing any more than organ transplants make gang warfare a good thing. What about using organs from executed criminals? If you can't stop someone from being killed, you can at least do something to make their death not completely in vain. That's how I see this... neutral

La Veuve Zin

Rainbow Smoker

5,650 Points
  • Mega Tipsy 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200

andyz cool

PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:11 pm


you know it's funny, this clearly violates the whole argument pro choicers love to use about bodily integrity.

They say "oh, you can't force me to donate my kidney to you'

yet here they are doing it to someone else, forcing them to donate their BRAIN for goodness sake. A clear violation of another human beings bodily integrity. such hypocrites.
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:16 pm


Not really. Not any more so than a parent donating a dead child's organs; kids are too young to make that decision before death so it's up to parents. And besides..."A fetus isn't a human being."

lymelady
Vice Captain


Anardana

Magnetic Dabbler

9,750 Points
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Treasure Hunter 100
  • Tycoon 200
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:00 am


This would be similar to hospitals taking organs of dead adults without the families permission, which is sometimes the case.

I don't think it seems to pertain much to the pro choice standpoint other than that the cells were taken from an aborted fetus. I think that the actual situation is the issue of non consented organ harvesting rather then whether or not abortion is ethically right, as the tissue was not taken *because* the fetus was aborted, but because it was dead. I believe the same action could have been taken with a miscarraige or still born.

Adittionally a person of prochoice standpoint might still disagree with this issue, taking its situation out of being a question of the right to option of abortion or not.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:15 am


i agree with it when the fetus is already dead. if they were to actually concieve a second child and kill it for their first, that would be bullshit and i would wish them to die in a fire. much like parents who have a second child JUST to save the life of one who needs a bone marrow transplant or something- that's bullshit too, honestly. because the second child is onl existent to save the life of the first. something is wrong with that.

but yeah, that doesn't mean that abortion is good. this is one case out of 40 million. hardly a powerful position.

divineseraph


xalisae

PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:49 pm


La Veuve Zin
Scribblemouse
lymelady
sure it does. "See what good can come out of abortion? It's caring to children to kill a child, suck it's brains out, and use it to save another child!"


They're not killing the foetus just to save the other child The foetus is dead already, by abortion, for whatever reason/s the mother had.


Yeah, I don't think it's any worse than using organs from an adult who was murdered. This doesn't make abortion a good thing any more than organ transplants make gang warfare a good thing. What about using organs from executed criminals? If you can't stop someone from being killed, you can at least do something to make their death not completely in vain. That's how I see this... neutral


I agree wholeheartedly.
Reply
The Pro-life Guild

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum