SRT: The Society, Religion and Technology project

Helping the church to engage with ethical issues

in science 

Dr Murdo Macdonald

Society, Religion and Technology Project

Society, Religion and Technology Project

•Set up in 1970 by the Church of Scotland

•Exploring ethical issues in current and future technology

•Engaging with:

•research, industry, governments, regulators

•Multi-disciplinary

•seeking balanced and informed assessment

•Christian ethical reflection applied to technology

•Addressed to policy makers and public debate

Some Basic Ethical Issues of Technology

•Limits – lines we decide not to cross even though we could?

•Intervention / Conservation – where does the balance lie?•environment, waste, animal-medical, long & short term

•Innovation / Risk•Uncertainty and precaution – whose burden of proof is it?

•Particular issues raised by each area :•energy, food, medicine, IT, communications, transport, etc.

•Nuclear power, GM food, cloning and stem cells, genetic information, animal research, mobile phone masts, food miles, climate change, personal mobility and lifestyle ….

•Is technology always ethically neutral?

Some guiding principles

•You are the salt of the earth…You are the light of the world

Matt. 5 v 13, 14

•Wherever the church lacks a presence, that environment becomes impoverished of values and ethics

Fr. Claudio PaganiniFour- Four- Two, Sept 2007

•People generally don’t care what you believe unless they believe that you care

Working at the intersection…

Living in God’s World

Working under different jurisdictions

Short life working groups

•8- 10 people

•1-2 year lifespan

•Clearly defined primary outcome–Report to General Assembly of Church of Scotland

•Includes:–Professional scientists–Theologians

Synthetic Biology group

•Rev. Dr. Alistair Donald–Chaplain to Heriot-Watt University•Dr. Angeliki Kerasidou–Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics•Dr. Donald Morrison–Microbiologist•Dr. Kaihsu Tai–Research Associate, Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford.

Strengths and weaknesses

•Writing a report for widely differing constituencies–(Lay) commissioners to General Assembly–Policy makers–Scientific community•Consensus may be difficult to achieve–Minority reports•Nuanced response may not suit media reporting

•Wide range of issues covered–Strength or weakness?

•“Futurology”/ horizon scanning

•Scotland is small country–Universities and research centres–Communication between differ centres easy

•Church has relatively high profile and influence within society

•More medical research is conducted per capita in Scotland than anywhere else in Europe.•Life science research and technology base: more than 500 organizations and more than 26,000 employees.•Scotland produces 1% of the world’s research with less than 0.1% of the world’s population.

Engagement with scientific community

•June 1972: SRT Project officially designated to attend 1st United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm

•This meeting led to establishment of UN Environmental Programme (UNEP)- forerunner to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

Dolly the sheep

•Prof Ian Wilmot involved in SRT working group on GM

The Church in Scotland continues to have influence

Church of Scotland Communicants as Proportion of Scottish Population 1900-98

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1900 1908 1916 1924 1932 1940 1948 1956 1964 1972 1980 1988 1996

Per

cen

tag

e

Church of England communicants as percentage of total population 1900-95

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1900 1909 1918 1927 1936 1945 1954 1963 1972 1981 1990 1999

Easter Day communicants Parochial Easter communicants

Conclusions

•SRT project has evolved over the years

•Continues to work with scientific community

•Communication of our work isn’t always easy–Biomedical work tends to generate more attention

•Transferability?

www.srtp.org.uk

IVF lottery to be launched in UK

•$30 ticket to win $40,000 worth of IVF treatment

•IVF in UK costs $6- 15,000 per cycle

Living in God’s World

•UK government currently reviewing status of Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority

•Statutory body which oversees all aspects of clinical and research work related to IVF in UK

•Suggestion is that responsibilities be redistributed–Care Quality Commission–Human Tissue Authority•Many argue this represents a downgrading of the special status of the human embryo which formed basis of original Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act–Led to formation of HFEA

End of Life issues•Assisted suicide/ euthanasia much in the news–Debbie Purdie- MS sufferer

–Daniel James- rugby player

–Margo Macdonald’s proposed “End of life choices” bill

•DPP “clarified” issue recently–Set out conditions when prosecution likely or unlikely

–Does this apply in Scotland?

•Paper addresses these issues, but also many wider areas–Palliative/ pastoral/ spiritual care

–Care for carers

The church cares…

•Largest provider of social care in Scotland–Crossreach and other agencies–The church is experienced and good at this!

•Hospital chaplains–Patients–Relatives–Staff

•Funerals/ bereavement counselling

Assisted suicide in UK?

•Do we need to change the law to allow–Assisted suicide–Physician assisted suicide–Euthanasia

•Many within church would argue against it–Human dignity–Sanctity of life–“slippery slope”

Euthanasia

•“Deliberately terminating the life of another person by an act or omission in the context of terminal, painful or distressing illness”–Euthanasia: A Christian perspective (C of S)

•Currently illegal in UK, though some pressure to change

•Legal in various jurisdictions–Netherlands, Australia, some US States

Euthanasia

•Usually involves a doctor

•Not usually decision of person whose life is being ended

•What about “pulling plug on life support machine”?

•What about withdrawal of treatment?

Assisted Suicide/ PAS

•Differs from euthanasia in that person concerned has expressed will to die–Unable to carry out act themselves, so request assistance from others

•Physician- assisted suicide

•Assisted suicide- non- medically trained person administering drug

What is our response?•Many in society would argue that we need to address the issue–Majority in many polls–Opposed by medical profession–RCN officially “neutral”

•What about–Autonomy–Dignity–Preventing abuse of legislation

•Right to die vs. right to live

•Crossing prohibition on killing

•Changes way society perceives people–Utilitarian approach

•Allocation of resources–Always going to be cheaper to end life than to care for people

Church called to care•Church has a track record in caring–Something that we do well

•C of S one of the largest social care organisations in the country•Many local initiatives–Caring for carers

•By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another

Jn 13: 35•A bruised reed he will not break, and a smouldering wick he will not snuff out

Is 42: 3

Human embryology researchin the UK

•Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990

•Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008

•Many issues raised by this legislation

•Concentrating on–stem cells–Human/ animal combinations

Background•Human embryology research in the UK has been governed by the 1990 Act–through HFEA

•Technology has advanced in 18 years–e.g. “saviour” siblings allowed to be conceived in order to treat genetic disorders

•Government brought forward a Bill for public consultation in 2007–“…while fertility treatment leads to the birth of smiling babies and happy mothers (or at least aims to), research destroys embryos with no such short- term gain”

John Gillott

Saviour siblings•Production of embryos using IVF techniques to produce genetically matched children to donate tissue for transplant to affected siblings

–Production of saviour siblings involves destruction of embryos that are not the right genetic match

•Change from ‘life-threatening’ to ‘serious’ diseases operating

•Should children be used as a means to an end?

–The use of cord blood and adult stem cells may in time make this technology redundant

•Harvesting tissue carries dangers for the donor

–Parents giving consent for child to donate tissue

Status of the Human Embryo and Research

Three Basic Positions

•“Ball of cells” (until implantation or ‘primitive streak’)

–no moral status at all (few Christians support this)

–any research on embryos permitted

•“Human being from conception”

–Full human status or benefit of the doubt

–no research on embryo permitted (Catholic, Orthodox + some Prot.)

–stem cell use only permitted from adult tissue or cord blood

•“Special status” gradual or potential human status

–may allow limited ES cell research (many Protestants accept this)

–only when no alternative exists, clear benefit, and strictly regulated

UK law takes the third approach; 14 day limit

Human embryo before 14 days

Morally significant factors in development of embryo

• Complete potential to become a child

• Individuation – may split into twins until ~14 days

• Differentiation – general cells start becoming specific cells; after ~14 days primitive streak begins

• Implantation – physical relationship with mother

• Wasteage – many early embryos don’t survive

Inner Cell Mass (ICM)

• Genetically complete

• Free-floating

• No body plan, generic cells

• No nervous system, blood circulation

The Bible and the embryo•So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Genesis 1: 27•For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from You when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be

Psalm 139:13-16•Yet You brought me out of the womb; You made me trust in You even at my mother's breast. From birth I was cast upon You; from my mother's womb You have been my God

Psalm 22:9-10•Did not He who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same one form us both within our mothers?

Job 31:15

The Bible and the embryo

•The incarnation•The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God

Luke 1: 35

•The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us

John 1: 14

Christian positions•Over the last two thousand years there have been different legal, biological, and theological views about the human embryo.•Pope John Paul II: 'Human life is sacred and inviolable at every moment of its existence, including the initial phase which precedes birth'.•Second Vatican Council affirms that 'from the moment of conception, life must be guarded with the greatest care'.•common Christian view until the mid-twentieth century and is still held by most Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Evangelical protestant Christians.

Christian positions

•Different beliefs about when the soul enters the body–In Middle Ages, theologians believed that the soul was given when the embryo was 'fully formed', at around 40 days or so after conception

•Even before ensoulment, not morally equivalent to a nonhuman animal.–Due respect and protection

Christian positions

•Mainstream protestant “Church of Scotland” view?

•Early embryo worthy of respect and protection–Potentially human

•Some tightly circumscribed embryo experimentation permitted–Alternative routes preferred

Church of Scotland

•Deliverance of 2006 General Assembly–"oppose the creation for research or therapy of parthenogenetic human embryos, animal-human hybrid or chimeric embryos, or human embryos that have been deliberately made non-viable.”–“urge Her Majesty’s Government to encourage research into stem cells derived from adult tissues and placental cord blood, and to work to find therapeutic solutions which avoid embryo use."

Beginning of life?

•None of the “proof texts” cited actually say that life begins at conception

•When does ensoulment occur?–At conception–Post- 14 days (implantation)–Later in development

•Err on the side of caution?

“Frankenbunnies”•Initial indications were that human- animal hybrids would remain outlawed in new HFE Bill•Scientific community: difficulty in obtaining suitable human oocytes–Potentially useful source of stem cell material for research into diseases such as Parkinson's

© The Economist 2007

•Following consultation, the HFE Bill was changed to allow licensed creation of human- animal cybrids–“A well-orchestrated debate by the science community has made it clear that the government took the wrong position”

Prof. John Burn, Newcastle University

–“61% of the public agree with the creation of human- animal embryos, if it may help understand diseases”

Prof. Martin Rees, President, Royal Society

Revised HFE Bill

•Allow the creation of human embryos that have been physically mixed with one or more animal cells–Chimeras

–Cytoplasmic hybrids (“cybrids”)

•True human- animal hybrids, made by the fusion of sperm and eggs, remain outlawed.•In all cases it would be illegal to allow embryos to grow for more than 14 days or be implanted into a womb.

A Christian consideration

•Christianity is not anti- science

•An ethical framework for all aspects of human endeavour is required

•Sensitive area: what may previously have been controversial now widely accepted?–e.g. IVF for childless couples

Opposing views

•“This is just cells, just for science. No animal is ever going to be created.”

Prof. Chris Shaw, King’s College, London

•“We believe such entities would undermine human dignity, ….and would cross an ethical line by creating something fundamentally new.”

CMF submission on HFE Draft

Ethical considerations

•Potential usefulness of stem cells in treatment of human disease

•Do the techniques being considered involve “just cells”?–Germline cells differ from somatic cells–Embryos have potential to develop–Fundamental mixing of human and animal material

•Undermining of human dignity–Human uniqueness–“image of God”

•Utilitarianism–“Saviour sibling” children for “spare parts”–Psychological/ emotional consequences

•Setting the boundaries–“at a general level, scientists should be trusted to follow the law subject to the usual regulatory and other controls that scientists follow, including research ethics committees and the process of peer review”

John Gillott, www.spiked-online.com, March 2007

•What is the moral/ legal status of a human- animal hybrid? What protection is due in law?–Experimentation on humans or animals has different ethical and legal basis–Is hybrid human or animal?

•Do they fall under remit of HFEA at all, as they are not “fully human”?