A difficult moral question.

Jo McGowan's column on stem-cell research was a great disappointment. I usually find her work to be well-written and insightful, but this latest column was, to my mind, a silly flight of fancy that bordered on the uncharitable. Proponents of stem-cell research are by and large not looking for the secret to ageless skin or the quick repair of a torn fingernail. Most are faced with frightening, debilitating, and often terminal conditions. Though we may have moral questions about the sources of stem cells, the economic cost of such research, and the uses to which it might be put in our for-profit world, simply dismissing the moral complexity of the issue with flippant high-horsery serves no good purpose. As many Catholic moral theologians have pointed out, the moral demand to alleviate human suffering deserves consideration, even as we continue to explore and debate the moral status of human embryos.

Does McGowan want to take the argument about embryonic stem-cell research down the dead-end path the abortion debate has led us? Will a useless exchange of jargon and vitriol, slippery-slope imaginings, and snide rhetoric help resolve this difficult moral question? When I read her essay, I couldn't help feeling--as I do when faced with much anti-abortion rhetoric--that, although I tend to agree with her underlying principles, I find her style lacking in compassion. Commonweal's editors should have sent this one back for a rewrite.

MATTHEW HARRIGAN

Chicago, Ill.

THE AUTHOR REPLIES:

I am sorry to have offended. Black humor seems to me an appropriate way to address an issue that I believe is an absurd and appalling use of scientific talent. The Dickinsons complain that my treatment of the embryonic stem-cell research was shallow; but what they really seem to be objecting to is the depth of my conviction that the use of embryos for such purposes is evil. Thoughtful readers may disagree without being accused of ignorance.

Matthew Harrigan's letter was more disturbing because of its personal nature. I approach the subject of embryonic stem cells as the mother of a child who was nearly aborted by her birth mother and who now suffers from a severe neurological disorder. The irony that stem cells from a child not so lucky might help cure her condition is part of what makes me believe we are probably in the middle of a science-fiction movie and just don't know it.

Mr. Harrigan says that people interested in the "promise" of stem-cell research are not talking about repairing torn fingernails but about serious, life-threatening diseases. Granted--at least for the moment. My guess is it won't be long before the cosmetics industry gets into the act. But regardless of how debilitating or painful the conditions are--and believe me, I live with this reality every day: the diapers, the convulsions, the tube feeds, the wheelchair--we cannot consider using human lives to alleviate them.

I believe embryonic stem-cell research is part of a greedy culture that wants everything, including perfect health and eternal life right here on earth and will stop at nothing to get it. We are all going to die one day and while we have a duty to relieve suffering when we can, we cannot do so without regard to the cost. As Catholics, we know that perfection is not possible this side of the resurrection and that this life is not all there is. Everything we believe rests on this promise. I do not think there was anything snide in my essay. True compassion cannot spring from the destruction of an innocent life.

JO McGOWAN