» Articles » PMID: 37902931

Potentiality Switches and Epistemic Uncertainty: the Argument from Potential in Times of Human Embryo-like Structures

Overview
Specialty Medical Ethics
Date 2023 Oct 30
PMID 37902931
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Recent advancements in developmental biology enable the creation of embryo-like structures from human stem cells, which we refer to as human embryo-like structures (hELS). These structures provide promising tools to complement-and perhaps ultimately replace-the use of human embryos in clinical and fundamental research. But what if these hELS-when further improved-also have a claim to moral status? What would that imply for their research use? In this paper, we explore these questions in relation to the traditional answer as to why human embryos should be given greater protection than other (non-)human cells: the so-called Argument from Potential (AfP). According to the AfP, human embryos deserve special moral status because they have the unique potential to develop into persons. While some take the development of hELS to challenge the very foundations of the AfP, the ongoing debate suggests that its dismissal would be premature. Since the AfP is a spectrum of views with different moral implications, it does not need to imply that research with human embryos or hELS that (may) have 'active' potential should be completely off-limits. However, the problem with determining active potential in hELS is that this depends on development passing through 'potentiality switches' about the precise coordinates of which we are still in the dark. As long as this epistemic uncertainty persists, extending embryo research regulations to research with specific types of hELS would amount to a form of regulative precaution that as such would require further justification.

Citing Articles

20 Years Since the Enactment of Italian Law No. 40/2004 on Medically Assisted Procreation: How It Has Changed and How It Could Change.

Vergallo G, Marinelli S, Napoletano G, De Paola L, Treglia M, Zaami S Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025; 22(2).

PMID: 40003521 PMC: 11855168. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph22020296.


Ethical considerations on the moral status of the embryo and embryo-like structures†.

Pennings G, Dondorp W, Popovic M, Chuva de Sousa Lopes S, Mertes H Hum Reprod. 2024; 39(11):2387-2391.

PMID: 39344432 PMC: 11532601. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deae228.

References
1.
McCormick R . Who or what is the preembryo?. Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1991; 1(1):1-15. DOI: 10.1353/ken.0.0028. View

2.
Nicolas P, Etoc F, Brivanlou A . The ethics of human-embryoids model: a call for consistency. J Mol Med (Berl). 2021; 99(4):569-579. PMC: 8026457. DOI: 10.1007/s00109-021-02053-7. View

3.
Denker H . Autonomy in the Development of Stem Cell-Derived Embryoids: Sprouting Blastocyst-Like Cysts, and Ethical Implications. Cells. 2021; 10(6). PMC: 8230544. DOI: 10.3390/cells10061461. View

4.
Piotrowska M . Research guidelines for embryoids. J Med Ethics. 2021; . DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106493. View

5.
Veenvliet J, Lenne P, Turner D, Nachman I, Trivedi V . Sculpting with stem cells: how models of embryo development take shape. Development. 2021; 148(24). PMC: 8722391. DOI: 10.1242/dev.192914. View