Posted by Ellen on July 06, 2001 at 07:04:14:
July 6, 2001
Stem Cell Debate Revives an Old Political Battle
By RUTH J. KATZ
NEW HAVEN — As the debate over whether to approve stem cell research continues in the White House, President Bush would be well advised to learn from history — specifically, from the mistakes of his own father.
Stem cells taken from human embryos at the earliest stages of development show remarkable promise for use in treating a number of serious diseases — but only if researchers are able to pursue the science. The issue is caught up in abortion politics: opponents argue that destroying an embryo, even one left over from in vitro fertilization processes and never implanted in a uterus, is tantamount to destroying human life.
To the president's father, this argument must sound familiar. In 1989, the subject was federal funding for research that involved fetal tissue transplantation — a technique using cells taken from dead fetuses that had developed further than the embryos now under discussion. Abortion politics was similarly influential then, with opponents arguing that the research, even though it involved tissue from pregnancies already terminated for other reasons, involved destruction of human life.
To the surprise of many observers, a White House-approved committee appointed to study the issue, led by an opponent of abortion, had recommended that the government be allowed to finance fetal tissue transplantation research. But President George H. W. Bush, in his first months in office and under pressure from social conservatives active in Republican politics, defied the committee's recommendations and issued an executive order banning federal support for this research.
There was a groundswell of opposition. A core question framed the debate then, as it does today: On what basis will the biomedical research agenda of this country be set — scientific merit or political controversy?
Henry A. Waxman, a Democrat, and Fred Upton, a Republican, headed an intensive battle for Congressional legislation overruling President Bush's ban. Prominent medical associations and research groups testified in support, but in the end, it was the testimony of ordinary Americans that clarified what was at risk. A Baptist minister talked about the two children he had lost to a rare genetic disorder and the hope that his wife's participation in a fetal tissue study might save a third child, still unborn but already diagnosed with the same inevitably fatal condition. People with Parkinson's disease and parents of diabetic children told stories of suffering that they believed might eventually be eased through research on fetal tissue transplantation. Both houses of Congress voted by large majorities to allow financing for the research, with appropriate ethical safeguards. But the elder President Bush again bowed to pressures from abortion opponents: he vetoed the legislation.
The political lesson that George W. Bush should remember now is that his father's veto was criticized in the 1992 presidential campaign and almost certainly hurt him in the election. One of President Bill Clinton's earliest official acts was to sign a law permitting federal funding for fetal tissue transplantation.
No one can predict the success of any area of medical research. A recent fetal tissue transplantation trial to treat Parkinson's patients was a disappointment. But the overturning of the 1989 Bush ban has helped scientists follow this line of inquiry, and they continue to do so. Federal involvement has also ensured that the research is monitored and that donors provide adequate informed consent.
The stem cell research that is the subject of today's controversy will undoubtedly advance even without public financing. Its potential is simply too great, and polls show most Americans support it. But federal financing is a crucial source of medical research dollars. And when private dollars are used, the government does not provide oversight. By saying yes to stem cell research, President Bush can adopt the same model of accountability used in the fetal tissue transplantation research, allowing the best possible science to progress.
Stem cell research may not bring all the hoped-for cures. Some scientists even think that adult, rather than embryonic, stem cells can be used for many studies. But cutting off any avenue of research for ideological reasons is bad public policy and dangerous precedent. The 43rd president has demonstrated a determination to learn from the mistakes of the 41st. Here is another opportunity.
Ruth J. Katz, associate dean of the Yale University School of Medicine, was counsel to the House subcommittee on health and the environment from 1982 to 1995.