CASE STUDY: STEM CELL RESEARCH

Clark Wolf

Director of Bioethics

Iowa State University

jwcwolf@iastate.edu

BACKGROUND: The "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005" (H.R. 810) went before the House of Representatives on May 24, 2005 and was approved with bipartisan support. Since that time it has been held in committee waiting to be presented to the Senate for a vote. The Act seeks to expand the set of stem cell lines available for use in publicly funded research.

Embryonic stem cells represent a promising arena for scientific research, but there has been considerable public controversy surrounding this research. While many scientists hail embryonic stem cell research as extremely promising because of the possibility that this research may result in a wide variety of different medical treatments, some have urged that stem cell research is immoral or that it violates fundamental values that should guide public policy.

George Bush exercised the Presidential Veto power for the first time when H.R. 810 was presented to him for ratification. But the house reintroduced the bill in 2007 as H.R. 3. Participants in this case study are invited to consider the interests of various different groups who have expressed views about stem cell research and about this bill. The following four groups are represented here:

1) Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research

2) Do No Harm: Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics

3) American Association for the Advancement of Science

4) President Bush and the President’s Commission for Bioethics

ACTIVITY: You have been assigned to one of the interest groups above. For the purpose of this case study, you should consider yourself an advocate and representative for the group to which you have been assigned. You should aim to present that group's view in its strongest and most persuasive form.

This is a role playing exercise: You should strive, as much as possible, to adopt the perspective of a member of your interest group for the duration of this exercise whether or not you really do agree with the position your group would advocate.

1) First, read the text of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (the next item in your packet), and the ISSCR Stem Cell Primer.  Then study the materials associated with the interest group to which you have been assigned. (Note: You do not need to read material from all of the different interest groups, only the group to which you have been assigned.)

Then write down the main claims that represent the view your interest group would take on stem cell research and the view you would expect your group to take with respect to the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Be sure to identify the reasons that would be used by a member of your group to justify or defend these claims.

2) Get together with other class members who have been assigned to the same interest group, and discuss how you might best make the case for your group's perspective on this issue. As a group, you should work to put together a brief presentation (5 minutes or so) that will explain and justify your Interest Group's position. You should consider this to be in the spirit of a lobbyist presentation to the Senate: an effort to persuade members of the senate to vote on H.R. 810/H.R. 3 in the way that your group would prefer.

In preparing your presentation, you should pay attention to the mission or the aim of the interest group you represent. You should consider the way in which H.R. 810 might promote or thwart the interest group’s mission or broader objectives.

3) After preparing their presentations, all groups will re-assemble. Each group will present its case to the other members of the workshop. Members of the audience will have a brief opportunity to pose questions or to raise objections after each presentation. In posing questions to members of other groups, you may either adopt the position of a member of the Senate, or a member of your own assigned interest group.

4) Case Study "Debriefing." Participants will have an opportunity to discuss the issue, the different interests and values involved, and the case study without constraints or adopted roles.

Nota Bene: I would like to invite you to give me advice on how this case study might be improved (even typos!). You may send suggestions to me at jwcwolf@iastate.edu.

BACKGROUND MATERIAL:

1) H.R. 3, The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.

2) Stem Cell Primer, International Society for Stem Cell Research.

3) NIH Stem Cell Primer (Optional)

Note: As always, you should note where information comes from, and as you read it you should keep in mind the interests of the group that provides it. You should do this even for scientific reports, since such reports often include unrecognized biases of the researchers who produce them. The ISSCR has as its mission to promote stem cell research. Is the information they provide fair and accurate?