Next week the Australian Parliament will commence debate reconsidering its 2002 unanimous ban on therapeutic cloning. The Victorian government is a strong supporter of therapeutic cloning because much of the Australian research and development is likely to occur in Victoria.
The Australian Catholic University is convening a public panel discussion on the issue on Thursday (2 November), bringing together two leading medical scientists and two ethicists who disagree over the way forward on the issue of therapeutic cloning. All four are Catholic.
There has been some tension this last week as senators have reflected on the role of religious thinking in such debates. Senator Kay Patterson responded testily to Bishop Anthony Fisher: "Dear me, I might be excommunicated! Anyway, I do not think I will be, because it is my choice, not the Church’s choice, I suppose."
The debate in Australia is focused on the use of embryonic stem cells which are derived from human embryos. There is division in the scientific community about the utility of embryonic stem cells. It makes sense for scientists to pursue both research tracks (adult and embryo) if this can be done ethically and in accordance with accepted scientific standards.
Some scientists would like a relaxation of the universal ban on embryo cloning so that they could use somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). With this procedure, by way of example, they can take out the nucleus of a human or animal egg and implant the nucleus of an adult human skin cell. This produces an embryo.
In 2002, the majority of our politicians were supportive of experimentation on excess IVF embryos, but all who declared their position opposed the deliberate creation of human embryos only for destruction and experimentation.
The recent Lockhart review of the legislation favoured the creation of an embryo for experimentation and destruction, provided the embryo not be implanted and provided it not be permitted to thrive beyond 14 days.
Sir Gustav Nossal is a strong advocate for embryonic stem cell research. He says, "As a Catholic, I deeply value my nine years at a Jesuit school, and my career as a medical scientist has further deepened my respect and reverence for human life. Embedded in this value is the belief that everyone should be given the opportunity to live as free from serious illness as medical science can ensure."
Sir Gustav thinks it is ethical and scientifically responsible now to