Print
E-mail
Judge Rejects Challenge To New National Institutes Of Health Cell Guidelines
By Cary O'Reilly
A U.S. judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by an embryo-adoption agency and the Christian Medical Association that sought to block new National Institutes of Health guidelines for stem-cell research.
The groups, who sued on their own behalf as well as on behalf of all embryos, lacked standing to bring the case, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ruled last week in Washington.
"Embryos lack standing because they are not persons under the law" and the unborn have no right to life protected under the Constitution's 14th Amendment, Judge Lamberth said, citing U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
The groups had sued to prevent implementation of new NIH guidelines that would allow broader funding for research on embryonic stem cells. Former President George W. Bush limited funding to cell lines derived from embryos before August 2001.
President Barack Obama altered that order on March 9 and directed NIH to draft the new rules. Federal law prohibits the use of U.S. government funds for research that creates embryos for research or destroys them.
That law, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, has been interpreted to allow federal support for research on embryonic cell lines created with private funds.
The case is Sherely v. Sebelius, 09-cv-1575, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
Rev. Tad Pacholczyk, a medical ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, and a former research associate at Harvard, commented on the district court decision by stressing how it represents "an unfortunate and misguided ruling, opening the doors for the government to more broadly direct taxpayer funds towards research that depends on destroying the youngest members of the human family, the human embryo that we each once were ourselves."
He noted that, "As government money becomes available for this kind of research, it also has the effect of encouraging scientists to move rapidly into unethical research projects without much reflection, since federal funding is viewed by many as the highest form of blessing or approbation that a scientist can receive. Conversely, governmental refusal to fund certain kinds of research, as was the case under the Bush administration with human embryonic stem cells, caused researchers to pause, and weigh the grave ethical concerns more carefully."
The groups, who sued on their own behalf as well as on behalf of all embryos, lacked standing to bring the case, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ruled last week in Washington.
"Embryos lack standing because they are not persons under the law" and the unborn have no right to life protected under the Constitution's 14th Amendment, Judge Lamberth said, citing U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
The groups had sued to prevent implementation of new NIH guidelines that would allow broader funding for research on embryonic stem cells. Former President George W. Bush limited funding to cell lines derived from embryos before August 2001.
President Barack Obama altered that order on March 9 and directed NIH to draft the new rules. Federal law prohibits the use of U.S. government funds for research that creates embryos for research or destroys them.
That law, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, has been interpreted to allow federal support for research on embryonic cell lines created with private funds.
The case is Sherely v. Sebelius, 09-cv-1575, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
Rev. Tad Pacholczyk, a medical ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, and a former research associate at Harvard, commented on the district court decision by stressing how it represents "an unfortunate and misguided ruling, opening the doors for the government to more broadly direct taxpayer funds towards research that depends on destroying the youngest members of the human family, the human embryo that we each once were ourselves."
He noted that, "As government money becomes available for this kind of research, it also has the effect of encouraging scientists to move rapidly into unethical research projects without much reflection, since federal funding is viewed by many as the highest form of blessing or approbation that a scientist can receive. Conversely, governmental refusal to fund certain kinds of research, as was the case under the Bush administration with human embryonic stem cells, caused researchers to pause, and weigh the grave ethical concerns more carefully."
 |
 |
|
| Proposed Law Would Protect The Falsely Accused | Israel Wages Battle Against ‘NY Times’ |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
