Abstract
AbstractThe number of publications on the governance of research with human embryo-like structures (hELS), i.e., 3D aggregates of human (induced) pluripotent stem cells made to model early human development, is growing rapidly. Public involvement is called for in many of these publications, but studies on public perspectives towards this emerging field remain lacking due to its novelty. To reduce the gap in the literature and contribute to the ongoing scholarly debate, we conducted interviews with Dutch lay citizens, health law and health care professionals, and interviewees reasoning from prominent worldviews in the Netherlands. This article reports on these participants’ views about the conceptual and moral qualification of hELS. With regard to the conceptual qualification of hELS, participants believed it should provide a shorthand for their (dis)similarity to human embryos, but differences remained with regard to the features upon which this (dis)similarity should be based. With regard to the moral qualification of hELS, participants believed this should depend on whether or not hELS possessed the features they considered morally relevant, among which those associated with sentience and a potential for continuous human development. Taken together, these findings align well with the arguments and positions traditionally found in related ethical debates and the recently proposed recommendations for the governance of research with hELS specifically. As such, they may also help allay concerns about lay publics not being able to meaningfully participate in debates about the ethical ramifications of (novel) scientific developments.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Psychology,General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference45 articles.
1. Aach J, Lunshof J, Iyer E, Church GM (2017) Addressing the ethical issues raised by synthetic human entities with embryo-like features. eLife 6:e20674. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.20674
2. Appleby JB, Bredenoord AL (2018) Should the 14-day rule for embryo research become the 28-day rule? EMBO Mol Med 10:e9437. https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201809437
3. Buckle S (1990) Arguing from potential. In: Singer P, Kuhse H, Buckle S, Dawson K, Kasimba P (eds) Embryo experimentation: ethical, legal and social issues. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 90–108
4. Cavaliere G (2017) A 14-day limit for bioethics: the debate over human embryo research. BMC Med Ethics 18:38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0198-5
5. Central Bureau of Statistics (2020) Religie in Nederland. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/statistische-trends/2020/religie-in-nederland?onepage=true. Accessed 26 Mar 2022
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献