SEARCH · Search PubMed
Results for “Warnock Committee”
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
UK agonizes on embryo research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Voluntary authority set up.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
British government hedges bets on embryo research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Deciding about embryo research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
IVF: regulation or prohibition?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Changing minds about embryo research.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Discourse on embryo science and human cloning in the United States and Great Britain: 1984-2002.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Test-tube embryology in the dock.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Attempts to tighten up surrogacy law.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Sperm and ova as property.
To whom do sperm and ova belong? Few tissues are produced by the human body with more waste than the germ cells. Yet dominion over the germ cells, and over the early embryo that results from their union in vitro, is behind much of the emotion that modern reproductive intervention can engender. The germ cells differ from other human tissues that can be donated or transplanted because they carry readily utilizable genetic information. Eventual expression of the germ cells' genetic potential is the legitimate concern and responsibility of their donors, although in the right circumstances the responsibility can by agreement be entrusted to institutions administering gamete or embryo donor programmes; these institutions, in turn, may need to assume responsibility for decisions if, in the case of embryo storage, the wishes of the two donors conflict. The fact of sperm and ovum ownership (and the genetic potential that goes with it) before individuals part with these tissues is beyond dispute. Some contentious issues may be clarified if this area of human dominion, namely control over genetic expression among offspring, is acknowledged to be the legitimate persisting concern of those who have produced sperm and ova after storage commences.
Research on human embryos--a justification.
The philosophical debate surrounding the moral status of the embryo has reached the public arena. The author of this paper examines some of the common arguments against embryo experimentation, including an influential article by Professor Ian Kennedy. He concludes that these arguments do not succeed in demonstrating that the intentional creation of embryos for research purposes is wrong, unless they also succeed in demonstrating that contemporary liberal abortion laws are also wrong. The author also criticises the conclusions of the Warnock Report, and suggests that the reasons for permitting embryo research must be given a wider public audience.
Biological processes and moral events.
It is often argued that the continuity of the processes of embryo development precludes the establishment of morally significant boundaries, once development is under way. These arguments typically claim that marking out any moral boundaries requires identifying particular significant events, and that in such circumstances this is either impossible or arbitrary. In this paper it is argued that arguments of this kind are not cogent. The paper concludes by indicating where the real problems lie.
Cryobanking and A.I.H.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Experiments on embryos: do they have rights?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Galileo and the embryos: religion and science in parliamentary debate over research on human embryos.
Confrontation between science and religion was a significant feature of the lengthy public appraisal of research on human embryos in Britain during the 1880s. The series of formal debates over embryo research in the House of Lords is chosen as a particularly appropriate setting to study this confrontation. It is shown that religious opposition to embryo research was repeatedly attacked in these debates by means of a stereotyped contrast between religious and scientific styles of thought. Leading figures in the movement for embryo research attempted to discredit their opponents by claiming that, whereas their own case was built upon reasoned assessment of the facts, the other side relied on religious dogma, clerical authority and faith. It is shown that, although there were genuine differences between those critical of embryo research on religious grounds and those supporting such research on grounds furnished by scientists, this account of the differences is inaccurate: dogma, reliance on authority and faith were as characteristic of the discourse associated with science as they were of that associated with religion. It is argued that these features were not generated by the presence of religious or scientific beliefs as such, but by the struggle between advocates of science and religion for intellectual and moral dominance.