Debates over embryonic stem cell research have taken place on the Senate floor, in college classrooms and over family meals. Politics versus ethics. Taking a live versus saving a life.

Opponents of embryonic stem cell research argue that taking stem cells from embryos is unethical because it requires the destruction of a fertilized embryo—a human being in the very early stages of development. Since the stem cells are obtained through in-vitro fertilization, proponents argue that “surplus” embryos are going to be thrown away if nothing is done with them because they will not be needed for implantation. Another argument is that these embryos are not viable human beings at the embryonic stage. ¹

It's a debate that has caught the attention of former first lady Nancy Reagan and Dana Reeve, whose husbands suffered from Alzheimer's disease and paralysis respectively. Before her death, Reeve was an active supporter of embryonic stem cell research and Reagan has publicly endorsed the research in recent years. Both women believe embryonic stem cell research will lead to lifesaving cures for diseases that, at present time, have none. ²

And it's true. Stem cells can develop into a variety of different cell types and therefore can be useful in treating a multitude of diseases. However, the moral implications of the research are great. How can you justify taking the life of one human being for the possibility of saving another? Especially where there are other avenues for obtaining stem cells.

Umbilical cord blood stem cells provide just as many opportunities for curing diseases as embryonic stem cells, but don't require the destruction of a fetus in the process.

Umbilical cord blood stem cells are extracted after a baby is born and before the placenta is delivered. After the umbilical cord is cut, a nurse inserts a needle into the umbilical cord and withdraws the blood, which is collected and stored in a medical blood bag. The procedure is quick, painless, and most of all, does not harm the mother or baby in any way. ³

Stem cells from umbilical cord blood have been used to treat 65 diseases such as leukemia and lymphoma but no disease has been successfully treated by embryonic stem cells. ⁴

A recent study by the University of Texas Medical Branch and the Syntheon Corporation indicates that umbilical cord blood stem cells are a more desirable option for scientists because millions of babies are born globally each year, making it easier to obtain enough cells to work with. ⁵

Stem cell research is a good idea. Lives can be saved and diseases can be treated. No one is arguing that point. But using stem cells from embryos is taking one life to save another. And that is never justifiable. With another option for stem cells readily available in umbilical cord blood, which has been proven effective, embryonic stem cell research seems to be nothing short of murder.

¹CitizenLink, Frequently Asked Questions: Stem Cell Research, 2003.
²Father Jonathan Morris “A Battle for America 's Mind: What's the Big Deal About Stem-Cell Research?” 2005.
³CureSource.net. Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Collection
⁴Father Jonathan Morris “A Battle for America 's Mind: What's the Big Deal About Stem-Cell Research?” 2005.
⁵HealthDay “Embryonic-Like Stem Cells Made from Umbilical Cord Blood.” 2005

Laura Sweat is an Intern in Focus on the Family's Internet department