“Embryo Research is ethically justifiable.” - Discuss

Genetic engineering is an umbrella term for all gene modification and research that is taking place in modern science. Embryonic research has results in multiple successes including stem cell research but has come under serious controversy for using potential life for gain with no regard for that life.

T - Kantian Ethics is purely deontological looking at doing duty for duties sake not the outcome of an action therefore for Kantian ethics to agree with the statement Embryonic research must pass the categorical imperative.
I - An example of embryonic research includes eugenic genetic engineering in which germ-line therapy to create a better ‘race’ of people by changing the genetic makeup of future generations.
C - Although eugenic genetics is illegal in most countries, examples have been seen throughout history such as Hitler’s arian race in which he tried to exterminate other unworthy races like jews.
K - Eugenic engineering would have to passed the principle of universalisability; in which the moral choice would have to be universal across everyone worldwide without conflict interests. Eugenic engineering would not be successful, by choosing to create a certain race it would create huge conflict from those who do not fit the model. Minorities would be ignored and potentially discriminated upon.
E - When applied to the issue, the principle of universalisability becomes an unrealistic choice to make an ethical decision. Although eugenics affect future generations it will not be something that could become a worldwide issue very easily, most countries with the capabilities to introduce eugenics have made it an illegal form of engineering.
T - Therefore, a Kant follower wouldn’t agree with the statement as it wouldn’t be following duty probably.

T - In direct contrast to Kantian Ethics, a preference utilitarian would probably agree with the statement that embryonic research is justifiable. Preference utilitarians do not favour human life over any other sentient beings who have the ability to think, care and have preference.
I - An issue of embryonic research is stem cell research. A stem cell is simply a blank cell that has the potential to become something else. By removing stem cells from an embyro they can decide what is created.
C - Stem cell research includes growing organs, cartilage or white blood cells with the first human ear growing on a mouse in 1997.
K - Preference utilitarians are different other forms of utilitarianism by caring about the majorities preference not only the best choice for the majority. Although embryos are being intentionally killed before growth for research, this is saving the majority of people as well as animals from future issues. Furthermore, in terms of sentient beings an embyro wouldn’t count due to its inability to think, prefer etc even if it has the potential to become one.
E - A problem of preference utilitarians is that it is a subjective choice as to wether the majority would prefer it. One could argue that an embryo isn’t a sentient being and therefore the research could be justifiable whereas one could suggest that the majority of public are not happy using embryonic stem cells and would prefer the research to be conducted using adult stem cells.
T - Hence, a differing opinion wether Preference Utilitarians would agree with the statement. I believe the vast majority would argue that it is ethically justifiable, however.

T - Natural Law is the practical application of God’s Divine Command with primary precepts being deontological by following the truth of the bible with practical applications in place via secondary precepts to reach our telos.
I - Saviour siblings has come about as a result of embryonic research in order to save a sibling by having another child whose genetic makeup is identical to that of the sick child.
C - Max Matthews was the first british saviour sibling successfully curing his sister of Fanconi Anaemia in which her bone marrow was failing to produce white blood cells.
K - If one was to try and apply this to the primary precepts it would be quite hard for a Thomist to justify embryonic research. Preservation of life and Reproduction are tow of the 5 precepts in which one would potentially justify a saviour sibling. However, it is not something that could contribute to an ordered society , etc.
E - Most importantly it wouldn’t follow the primary precept of Worshipping God. Within the bible it talks of reproduction through natural means suggesting IVF would be immoral as well as disobeying God by becoming “Lord of their own being.” By creating a child through genetic changes it would be becoming lords of their own choice and disobeying God’s natural creations.
T - Although a Thomist could argue that some factors would be applicable they would be ignoring the other primary precepts and twisting God’s teachings for their own benefit not their telos thus disagreeing with the statement.

T - An act utilitarian would completely disagree with Natural Laws deontological teaches on morality. Instead suggesting that a looking at the consequences of an action and the effect on the majority would be the most ethical system for modern day societies.
I - To highlight this one will follow the issue of saviour sibling identical to Natural Law.
K - Act utilitarians are focused upon the principle of utility and putting a situation through the hedonic calculus. A saviour sibling would hopefully produce a lot of happiness from saving someone’s life, a new addition to the family, the happiness of all those alive. It would reduce the pain of the ill child with minimal pain for the saviour sibling. The duration of pain is largely outweighed by the long lasting happiness of the success. Therefore showing that saviour siblings are good for the majority.
E - A small negative from following the utilitarian approach would be the ignorance towards the minority being the saviour sibling who had no choice in their conceivement or purpose. However, if one is to follow utilitarianism it is more important to value the majorities pleasure as it is a hedonistic approach to morality.
T - Ultimately a utilitarian would have to agree with the statement that embryonic research benefits so many that the pain is easily outweighed by the pleasure suggesting it is ethically justifiable.

In conclusion, I believe the strongest argument to be that of Preference Utilitarians; they are focused upon the preference of all sentient beings not just humans and the vocal minority who oppose embryonic research due to the potential for life. Something that feels nothing, has no thought process etc should be respected but does not hold more importance that the research that could save millions of people that already exist making it ethically justifiable.