Editorial: Boosting stem cell research

Tuesday, Aug. 14, 2001 | 9:22 a.m.

President Bush gave the green light Thursday to federal funding for a limited venture into stem cell research, but the debate over the president's decision continues into this week. Some anti-abortion groups have come out against the president's important decision, saying that it's morally wrong to use stem cells for research even if the embryo already has been discarded. But on the other side are scientists who say that Bush didn't go far enough, that by limiting research to only existing stem cell lines, the president may prevent medical researchers from discovering breakthroughs that could lead to the cure of some diseases.

Despite the criticism, the president chose the sensible path on this controversial scientific endeavor that is fraught with ethical questions. On balance, Bush's decision allowed federally funded research to go forward in what scientists say is a promising area. His nationally televised address last week also showed that he had wrestled with the issue and understood its far-reaching implications. And for a president who has been dogged by accusations that he isn't a deep thinker, he showed that wasn't the case with this issue.

Bush also had to be mindful of the political considerations, especially since his father was hammered for violating his "no new taxes" campaign pledge after he won the White House. George W. Bush had vowed during the campaign that he wouldn't support federal research of this testing that involved "live" human embryos. By supporting research only for those embryos that have been destroyed -- but whose stem cell lines are still intact -- Bush was able to back federally funded research without breaking his word.

As the intervening days since the president's announcement have shown, this decision will be controversial for some time. For instance, what happens if a few years from now a cure for a disease such as Parkinson's appears within the grasp of scientists, but that all the existing stem cell lines have been used? What will Bush -- or his successor -- then decide? Will he go forward because of the potential to help millions? Or will he honor his pledge to not harm the life of the embryos?

This obviously isn't going to be the end of the debate, but it is heartening that Bush understood that scientific questions aren't bereft of moral distinctions. It is hoped that Congress, which now will have to weigh Bush's recommendation, also reviews this matter with the same gravity that it deserves.