 |
 |
Question: If a cure to PD were to be developed using stem cells, would a PWP opposed to stem cell research refuse the cure? Answer. As with most seemingly simple questions involve with ethical issues, the answer is quite complex. A legal doctrine known as "the fruit of the poisoned tree" may be useful. The doctrine holds that if any evidence is obtained in a fashion that is contrary to the rules of evidence, all evidence or testimony flowing from the tainted evidence is also tainted and inadmissible. A strict legalist could argue that if stem cell research was unethical or immoral then a cure flowing from that research would be tainted and therefore also immoral and unethical. I believe a strict legalist approach to be fundamentally flawed and the fruit of the poisoned tree argument invalid. Many of those opposed to stem cell research base their opposition on what they call 'Christian teaching'. Stem cells did ot exist in the minds of Biblical humanity, so interpretation of text is the source of all controversy. Those familiar with the Gospels will know that Christ: healed those sick with the palsy - possibly PD ; did not hesitate to violate the customs of the day to heal on the Sabbath; and used love and compassion to be the focus of his healing ministry. While no one can know for certain how Christ would react to stem cell research, I would venture to speculate that he would approve of their use if they had the potential to ease human suffering and misery. Thus, II think the uestion is moot. Bill