Fetal Tissue & Embryo Research

Current Status

Fetal Tissue
On January 23, 1993, President Clinton lifted the Department of Health and Human Services' moratorium on funding research projects which involve transplanting tissue from selectively aborted children. The initial moratorium was a temporary one implemented by the Regan Administration. President Bush made the moratorium permanent. Under the Clinton policy, federal research dollars are no longer prohibited from going to projects using aborted tissue.

Embryo Research
On December 1, 1994, a special committee of the National Institutes of Health issued a report declaring that a variety of research projects involving the intentional creation of human embryos for the purposes of genetic and other research are ethically acceptable. Some of the research being considered includes cloning and asexual reproduction of human beings through genetic manipulation. The panel indicated that projects which fell within the parameters it outlined should be eligible to receive federal grants to carry out the research.

At the same time President Clinton issued a directive that NIH not allocate any resources to projects which would create new embryos for research purposes. The Clinton directive, however, does not prohibit the identical type of research to be funded when the embryos used are "spare embryos." Spare embryos are those created in the in vitro fertilization process helping infertile couples have children . The in vitro fertilization industry, which currently supplies many of the embryos for research, will still be a ready source of embryos for research that can be federally funded. By failing to include the spare embryo research in his moratorium directive, President Clinton nullified any real effect of his directive.

In 1996, Congress adopted language ( the Dickey - Wicker amendment ) to the Health & Human Services budget bill prohibiting federal funding of ANY research on live human embryos, thereby superseding the Clinton directive.

The prohibition has been renewed in all subsequent Health and Human Services budget bills.

Stem Cell Research
In December of 1999, the National Institutes of Health issued draft guidelines under which, for the first time in history, our federal government will officially approve and regulate the destruction of innocent human life for research purposes. The guidelines instruct researchers in how to harvest "stem cells" from living week - old human embryos, a procedure which kills the embryos. They also establish standards for harvesting similar cells from dead unborn children following induced abortions - a practice that has its own increasingly visible moral problems, but is in accord with federal law enacted in 1993.

Scientists have found that adult bone marrow can also provide stem cells that may have the the same potential as fetal stem cells. The advantage in this source of stem cells is the ability to make tissues using stem cells from the person afflicted with the disease. When foreign tissues are introduced into the body as would be the case when using fetal stem cells, there can be many problems associated with the the body attacking the foreign tissue. Organs and tissues made from the stem cells of the person requiring the transplant would forego this "matching" problem. According to an article in Reuters Health on October 18, 2000, another source of stem cells has recently been discovered that would also avoid the "matching" complication using a more accesible and available source: human fat.

The Michigan House and Senate each passed identical resolutions (S.R.119 / H.R. 253) to memorialize the National Institutes of Health to withdraw proposed guidelines for federally funded research using stem cells destructively harvested from human embryos. The resolution makes several declarations regarding the NIH guidelines, including: Since 1996 Congress has prohibited federally funded research in which human embryos are harmed or destroyed. Michigan law prohibits any destructive embryo research. Medical ethics historically has rejected harming or destroying innocent human lives. Numerous avenues for developing new medical treatments from stem cells which do not require the destruction of human embryos have shown great clinical promise.

The resolution resolves to: 1) Oppose the guidelines, 2) Ask they be withdrawn, and 3) Urge that federal funding go to alternative, non-destructive research projects.

The House approved H.R. 253 on January 26, 2000 by a vote of 68-38. The Senate approved S.R. 119 on February 9 by a voice vote. Efforts are ongoing in Washington, D.C. to persuade NIH to withdraw the guidelines, or have Congress enact a prohibition to funding such research.

Michigan Law
Michigan currently has laws which prohibit or limit most forms of embryo or fetal experimentation ( MCL 333.2689 - .2692 ). Nontherapeutic research on a live embryo, fetus or neonate is prohibited. "Nontherapeutic" is defined as research not intended to benefit the subject of the research ( i.e. the fetus ). Research on a live fetus shall not be performed if it is the "subject of a planned abortion." Performing or offering to perform an abortion in exchange for the use of the fetus for research purposes is prohibited, as is the sale or transfer of a fetus.

These statutes were approved in 1978, and seem to prohibit exactly the type of embryo research recommended by the NIH panel. However, only in utero experiments were a reality at the time. Changes may be required in these current statutes' definitions in order to clarify that they apply to artificially created embryos. Whether these laws apply to fetal tissue transplants is unclear, as this type of research was not even a proposal at the time the statutes were passed. In this process, tissues are taken from aborted children for the purpose of immediate transplanting into patients suffering from diseases such as Parkinson's disease or diabetes. Right to Life of Michigan hold that both of these types of experimentation should be prohibited by law.

Federal Background Information

Fetal Tissue
The Reagan-Bush policy argued that advances in this treatment would create new incentives for abortion, and might actually lead to more abortion. The moratorium prevented federal grant moneys from the National Institutes of Health from being given to projects using aborted tissue. Even while the moratorium was in place, privately funded research was being done, as well as federally-funded research using tissue from spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and abortions needed to save the life of the mother.

During the Reagan administration, a panel was assembled by the NIH to study this issue. While the panel was portrayed as balanced and objective, less than one quarter of its members had a solid prolife position. The director of NIH who appointed the panel was publicly predisposed in favor of fetal tissue research. Not surprisingly, a large majority of the panel recommended that the moratorium be lifted. The argument given was that sufficient separation could be made between a woman's decision to abort and the use of the tissue for research. The panel did suggest that procedural safeguards were needed to insure that the prospect of abortion being socially beneficent would not influence a woman's decision to abort.

Embryo Research
The NIH panel regarding embryo research followed a frighteningly similar course. The make-up of the committee was heavily weighted with those directly involved in the proposed research. There was no effort to present the panel as balanced or impartial. The panel invented an arbitrary standard by declaring that research should be done only on embryos up to 20 days old. The "logic" of this distinction is that prior to this age, cell differentiation, particularly with regard to neurological development, is minimal. At the time the panel issued its recommendations it also expressed its dismay that public sentiment generally opposes this type of research. The panel urged the NIH "educate" the public as to the benefits of this research. One panel member told NIH Director Harold Varmus, "You need some shock troops, Harold."

The safeguards and the logic offered to create this separation are not convincing. News that aborted fetal tissue is helpful in treating diseases would become a fact of common public knowledge. The research has shown that to be successful, specific types of tissue, taken from children at certain stages of development, taken by certain abortion methods, is necessary. Thus, abortionists willing to supply tissue to researchers would inevitably have to look for certain types of children to abort, and alter the timing and method by which they abort them in order to supply the needed tissue. The idea that fetal tissue transplantation and abortion can be separated is at best a facade, and at worst, deception.

A more troubling aspect of accepting this research is the denial of the personhood of unborn children, while acknowledging that their tissue is useful because it is human. In short, fetal tissue transplantation says to the unborn, "You can be useful to society, you just can't be a member of it."

Stem Cell Research
In January of 1999, the Clinton administration, by way of the National Institute of Health's Director, Harold Varmus, announced that stem cells, or master cells, are not covered by the ban on federal funding of human embryo research, because they are not human embryos capable of developing into a person.

This announcement was sharply criticized by the prolife community as these stem cells are obtained by destroying human life at its embryonic stage.

This is a situation in which a federally funded researcher could easily go off the clock for lunch, destroy a human embryo in order to obtain stem cells, then clock in and conduct research at the taxpayer's expense.

In 1998, scientists around the nation were announcing huge advancements in the area of stem cell research. These advancements brought with them the possibility of culturing new organs, treating Parkinson's disease, curing brain disease and much more. But what is the cost??

These "advancements" are made at the cost of human life. Stem cells are obtained by destroying a human life at its embryonic stage, which is immediately before the child's cells begin to differentiate into the many tissues that are found in our bodies. The ethics of conducting such research is clearly in question, to say the least. But scientists have taken it one step further.

Immediately after announcing these advancements, scientists began to claim that the ban on federally funding of human embryo research was slowing down potentially life saving advancements in the area of stem cell research.