The greater good

President Bush must weigh the words of those who say embryo research is immoral against the heart-rending pleas of people with diseases that might be cured through such research. In the end, he must decide which path will lead to ...

Compiled from Times wires

© St. Petersburg Times,
published July 19, 2001

WASHINGTON -- President Bush was deep into a recent discussion on Medicare with members of Congress when he abruptly began musing about stem cell research.

He unexpectedly brought up the matter again last week at the end of a meeting with physicians on the patients' bill of rights.

Bush is famous for his quick executive decisions and abhorrence of long briefings or memos.

But as he confronts the most politically sensitive decision of his presidency, Bush is agonizing to an unusual degree.

Faced with a decision over whether to allow federal funding for research using stem cells from human embryos, the president finds himself caught between the opposition of social conservatives, who say embryo research is immoral, and the heart-rending pleas of people with diseases, including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, that might be cured through such research.

Bush is consulting widely. He is soaking up information, opinions and advice -- and, above all, taking his time trying to forge a compromise.

A hint of how he might resolve the debate came on Wednesday.

Sen. Bill Frist, a transplant surgeon and close ally of the president, announced his qualified support of federal financing for the research.

"After grappling with the issue scientifically, ethically and morally, I conclude that both embryonic and adult stem cell research should be federally funded within a carefully regulated, fully transparent framework," Frist told a Senate subcommittee.

Also on Wednesday, a 200-plus page report from the National Institutes of Health said scientists should be free to pursue all avenues of research, including that involving human embryos. The report does not make a specific recommendation on federal funding but endorses research using embryonic stem sells.

"During the next several years, it will be important to compare embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells in terms of their ability to proliferate, differentiate, survive and function after transplant, and avoid immune rejection," the report said.

Frist's 10 principles

Frist, a Tennessee Republican who aides say has had several brief talks with the president about stem cell research, outlined a 10-point plan that would provide government money for such research over five years.

At least two of Frist's principles go beyond anything found in the detailed set of stem cell research guidelines developed last year by the National Institutes of Health, raising questions as to whether funding might be delayed under a Frist regime until the NIH revises its guidelines.

One of those principles calls for restrictions on the number of embryo cell colonies, or lines, to be created with federal monies, and suggests a preliminary limit of five years of funding.

"I don't have the number," Frist told the New York Times, although he added that scientists told him that for now, fewer than 100 might be sufficient.

"My real intention," Frist said, "is that as we enter this new world, we want to do it in a careful, controlled, thoughtful way, and not have a free-for-all."

Another of Frist's principles calls for the creation of an independent presidential advisory committee to keep tabs of the research -- a suggestion that some observers decried as redundant given the planning and oversight already provided by NIH and the presidentially appointed National Bioethics Advisory Commission.

In an interview Wednesday with the Washington Post, Frist said he believed those differences could be worked out.

"My object is not to slow things down," he said.

But he and several other supporters of embryonic stem cell research said they did not support a bill co-sponsored by Sen. Tom Harkin, whose Senate panel oversees federal health spending and held the hearing where Frist's opinion was made public, and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. The bill would allow federal funds to be used not only for research on embryo cells but also for the direct destruction of embryos to get those cells -- activities not allowed under current NIH guidelines.

Frist and other supporters of the research also spoke out Wednesday against the creation of human embryos solely for the purpose of harvesting their stem cells. That practice was endorsed at Wednesday's hearings by representatives of the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Norfolk, Va., which last week reported it was doing just that, and by Michael West, president of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass., who has said his company hopes to clone human embryos as a source of stem cells.

The views of Frist, the only physician in the Senate, are important for two reasons. First, he strongly opposes abortion, and Bush is conscious that experiments involving human embryos greatly offend abortion opponents, who make up an important part of his political base. Second, Bush has previously looked to Frist for advice on health matters; during his campaign, he adopted Frist's model for overhauling Medicare.

Some observers say it would be unlikely for Frist to take such a concrete stance on the issue if it didn't suggest where the administration is going.

Frist joins a growing list of Republican senators, most notably Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who have recently come out in favor of funding the research. At the same time, former Florida Sen. Connie Mack has added his support for funding, and former first lady Nancy Reagan has discreetly sent word from California to Senate GOP leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., that she favors funding.

Harkin, a Democrat from Iowa, said Wednesday that he thinks there may now be as many as 75 votes in the Senate in support of federal funding. Other observers said the number may be closer to 65 -- still enough to overcome a Bush veto if needed -- and that a majority of the House may now favor the work as well.

Turning to the Bible

But the battle for Bush's heart and mind is by no means over, opponents of the research said. Saying the research is too morally treacherous to justify federal support, several witnesses Wednesday told the Senate subcommittee that federal funding should be limited to alternative approaches -- including research limited to adult stem cells, which come from adults but which some scientists say are less promising.

"The central question to this debate remains: Is the young human a life or mere property to be discarded as a master chooses?" said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kans. "Destructive embryo research -- research which requires the destruction of living embryos -- is deeply immoral, illegal and unnecessary."

"This embryo is alive," Brownback said. "The central question remains: Is it a life?"

Sen. Gordon Smith, a Republican from Oregon and a supporter of federal financing of stem cell research, replied by quoting from the book of Genesis -- "And the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life" -- to argue that life requires the presence of the soul.

Smith talked of how Parkinson's disease has devastated his family, afflicting his grandmother, an uncle, a brother-in-law and a cousin, Morris Udall, former representative from Arizona. As a young boy, Smith recalled, he watched his cousin "literally die in public."

"I believe that life begins in a mother's womb, not in a scientist's laboratory," Smith said.

A representative of the Catholic Church criticized Smith's interpretation of the Bible as "amateur theology."

Richard Doerflinger, of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, called it "absurd" to think that the womb conveys the "breath of life" to an embryo. "An embryo's development is directed completely from within -- the womb simply provides a nurturing environment," he said. If scientists one day created an artificial womb, he asked, would a child born from it not be human? Could it be killed for any purpose?

No rush to decision

In this atmosphere of uncertainty, publicly funded research of stem cells has slowed, though labs funded by biotech firms and other private money continue to study embryonic stem cells.

One of the nation's leading stem cell researchers, Roger Pedersen of the University of California at San Francisco, announced this week that because of the federal government's lack of support for the research, he is leaving to work in Britain. Many fear that others will follow suit.

On Wednesday, Vice President Dick Cheney suggested that Bush will announce his decision by the end of August.

"He recognizes the enormous significance of the decision and so he's really dug into it in great depth and talked to a great many people about it," Cheney said on NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.

Asked by Lehrer if there was room to craft a compromise, Cheney said it was not that simple. "It's not like highway money. There's no way you can split the difference; you get your highway and I get my highway. These are deeply, deeply significant ethical questions about the future of the race, about medical research, about our ability to deal with horrendous diseases, and at the same time give due regard to the sanctity of human life. It's appropriate that he should take plenty of time to make sure he understands all of the ramifications of it, that he's comfortable with the final course he decides upon."

- Information from the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post and Associated Press was included in this report.

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright