On Monday, March 9, the American president signed a decree authorizing embryonic stem cell research access to public funds. He will leave it up to the experts to establish the ethical and juridical rules.
After the announcement of the closing of Guantanamo and the planned withdrawal from Iraq, Barack Obama continues to reassess the politics of his predecessor by tackling the delicate issue of bioethics.
On Monday, March 9, during a ceremony at the White House, the American president signed decree authorizing the government to finance stem cell research.
This decision puts an end to eight years of strong restrictions: In 2001, George W. Bush prohibited the researchers’ access to public funds, excluding previously made stem cell researches.
No Law Limiting Stem Cell Research Exists in the United States
This type of research is controversial: In order to extract the cells, human embryos have to be destroyed within their first days of development, which hurts many religious convictions. Barack Obama announced on Monday that this debate is not yet closed. Beyond opening public funds, there are ethical and juridical rules that surround these undefined researches.
The new administration, which did not miss the opportunity to denounce the exploitation of science by the previous administration, intends to leave the decision in the hands of the National Institute of Health (NIH). This public organization, which is the equivalent to the French Inserm, will have to precisely define in which case studies on stem cells will be able to benefit from public funds.
Contrary to the majority of the European countries and Japan, there is no federal law in the Untied States imposing limits on stem cell research. The debate in Washington is concentrated on the financing of this research.
Obama’s Support of this Research Is Deemed Critical
After having been authorized by Bill Clinton during his first term in office, Congress voted in 1995 to refuse stem cell research access to public funds.
Six years later, George W. Bush attempted to compromise, though it didn’t satisfy the proponents of banning this research nor the scientists.
Since then, the subject has been continually brought up in politics, as new discoveries and hopes have arisen. This was notably the case in 2006 during legislative elections. The elections in Missouri were supposed to decide the addition of an amendment to the state constitution ensuring the legality of stem cell research. The Democratic candidate won, allowing Democrats the majority of votes. His support on this issue, in contrast to his Republican opponent, was thought to be critical in the election.
Researchers Cheer While the Vatican Condemns
Right now, the researchers’ side is prevailing. This community, which has accused the Bush administration of numerous manipulations of scientific research, especially on environmental issues, is pleased about the turn that the new administration is taking to separate ideology and science.
The American president is taking a new political ideology, as he stated in his inaugural speech on January 20, 2009: “We will give science the place it deserves and we will use technological innovations to increase the health care quality and diminish its cost.”
In contrast, many voices have risen against the White House’s decision, including that of John Boehner, the Republican minority leader in the House of Representatives, who announced that taxpayers will now have to “subsidize the destruction of innocent human life.”
“This news is a slap in the face to Americans who believe in the dignity of all human life,” said Tony Perkins, the president of the American Christian organization Family Research Council. During the weekend of March 7 and 8, the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, reminded the world that the Catholic Church judges this type of research to be “profoundly immoral.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.