The Washington Post reports that Barack Obama's reversal of George W. Bush's stem cell research policy is finally paying dividends -- to women in New York.
New York has become the first state to allow taxpayer-funded researchers to pay women for giving their eggs for embryonic stem cell research, a move welcomed by many scientists but condemned by critics who fear it will lead to the exploitation of vulnerable women.
The opportunity for women to sell their eggs is not exactly new. I remember seeing ads in my college newspaper soliciting pretty, blond, skinny, Ivy League educated women to sell their eggs. These eggs were then presumably marketed to couples who can't conceive on their own, but were willing to pay a lot for eggs with good genes. The idea of a woman selling her eggs creeped me out then, and it still creeps me out now.
But let's be practical. Especially in light of the current healthcare debate, technological advances in stem cell research could do a lot of good. Maybe such advances would drive down medical costs.
In an economy like the one we've got on our hands, however, the idea of women harvesting their eggs for a quick buck seems to raise some difficult moral questions. Especially now, I find it plausible that some women could be so desperate for money that they feel they have few other options and could later regret the decision. It also raises the question: are fetuses next?
Feel free to provide your own utilitarian calculus in . . . three. . . two. . . one. . .!
"but condemned by critics who fear it will lead to the exploitation of vulnerable women."
Yes because vulnerable women are so well protected by our society now.
Brian
"the idea of women harvesting their eggs for a quick buck seems to raise some difficult moral questions"
Really, like what? There aren't very many moral questions asked in this country that can't be overcome with the liberal mantra of "personal choice" with maybe the exceptions of child porn and human trafficking and even that seems to be "ok" as long as you're bringing in potential new subsidy voters. Given who the people in charge of the nation are this will probably become a national, federally funded program very soon anyway.
As for fetus research, how do we know that it isn't already happening? And, if it were determined that we needed that sort of thing, we can always count on using the never ending supply of aborted children of the "vulnerable" women whose abortions we're already paying for everyday here and abroad. It's not like anybody is going to miss them in the landfills, right?
Anytime money is involved, you are incentivizing behavior. While I don't fully agree, a friend of mine constantly makes the point that a significant amount of divorces occur because the marriage was at least partially motivated by the government benefits of marriage. There is a reason blood and organ donations are not compensated (other than medical bills, obviously). It has the potential to put poorer people (in this case, women) in the precarious position of balancing money (food for children/self, etc.) and morality.
Perhaps we should also ban O negative blood donors from donating their blood, as they could be unfairly exploited for donating something that is a natural bodily product.
This post has nothing to do with donations. It has everything to do with payment. Bush never outlawed donating eggs, just compensation for the donation.
Blood donors are also compensated for their donation, especially O negative types.
Could you tell me where? I regularly donate at the Red Cross, and have never been compensated (other than a t-shirt). Apparently you can be compensated for plasmapheresis, a much lengthier and more painful (bigger needles in both arms) procedure. The WHO is attempting to make all blood donations come only from unpaid volunteers.
Also, was there a supply issue under the Bush law for eggs? Was this even necessary?
We already do this with subjects for medical studies, as well as plasma donors. That doesn't mean anything about its ethics or wisdom- we do plenty of wrong, dumb things- but it's hardly a new question.
It seems to me that it only takes advantage of vulnerable women if they are inadequately compensated. Egg donation is a months-long process involving getting your hormones jerked around, so it's some effort and inconvenience. I thought about doing it when I was younger, but aside from not having "desireable" genes, I didn't feel comfortable bringing children into the world, even so indirectly.
I would love to donate eggs, for free, to support stem cell research- I have a husband and mother who are both potential beneficiaries, and I would be as willing to donate eggs as to participate in a walkathon or public awareness campaign. If the womb police put a stop to the paid donation, or keep it contained to New York, the stem cell researchers can look for me and my like-minded sisters.