Swiss Vote for Embryonic Stem Cell Research

In a referendum yesterday, Swiss voters approved new government proposals to allow embryonic stem-cell research. Despite opposition from such diverse organizations as the Catholic Church and the Green Party, 66.4% of voters said they supported the new plans. The large margin appears to stem from the restrictions the referendum put on research, making Swiss law more restrictive than British or Belgian law, but the research can go on. One wonders if America can learn anything from the vote.

The law provides for extraction of stem cells from human embryos only under a few circumstances. First, any embryo older than seven days is not an acceptable source for stem cells. Second, any embryo used as such a source must be left over from fertilization therapy; that is to say, embryos created by natural sexual intercourse cannot be used. And third, the embryo must be due for destruction anyway.

While the absolutist view that all human life is sacrosanct and begins at conception will hold this law to be a violation of morality, it is hard to argue that the proposal lacks common sense. If an embryo is going to be destroyed, one may question the morality of the decision that has determined its fate. However, once the decision is made to destroy it, finding a way to use it before it is eliminated is sensible. More to the point, the fact that no natural embryos or those older than seven days can be used means that abortion cannot be a source of stem cells.

With Novartis and Roche, two global pharmaceutical companies, based in Switzerland, the Swiss had to either abandon the work altogether or make this kind of concession to research. England and Belgium permit the cloning of human embryos for the harvesting of stem cells. The Netherlands, France, Denmark and Spain use embryos left over from artificial reproductive therapies. Germany and Austria, two nations whose history causes great anxiety over eugenics, euthanasia and related areas, only permit research on imported embryos. Had Switzerland continued its ban on all such research, eventually it would lag in those medical treatments stem cell research pay yield.

In Mr. Bush’s America, where people aren’t so much pro-life as they are pro-birth, a similar decision is going to have to be made by someone. The Swiss constitution allows referenda, and the people have spoken. The Californian constitution does the same, and the people of the Golden State have decided to permit such study. But in the noisy House and Senate, where the loudest often prevail, there is no hope of a definitive result yet. The Swiss have offered America a lesson in navigating the treacherous ethical waters of embryonic stem cell research. America, though, is certain to ignore the offer.


© Copyright 2004 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.


Home