IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v39y2012i1p129-132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceiving ethical gamete and embryo research in a post-Dickey--Wicker USA

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa Campo-Engelstein
  • Candace Tingen
  • Sarah Rodriguez
  • Teresa K. Woodruff

Abstract

In a recent essay in Science, we advocated lifting restrictions on federal funding for research involving parthenogenesis, restrictions that have been placed by a rider, the Dickey--Wicker Amendment (DWA), to every budget for the US Department of Labor, Health, and Human Services, and Education since 1996. We concluded that contribution by calling for the reconsideration of the entire amendment and suggesting that it be removed from the budget. In this contribution, we outline how research using human parthenotes, embryos, stem cells, eggs, or sperm could be ethically funded if the DWA were to be rescinded in the USA. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa Campo-Engelstein & Candace Tingen & Sarah Rodriguez & Teresa K. Woodruff, 2012. "Conceiving ethical gamete and embryo research in a post-Dickey--Wicker USA," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 129-132, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:129-132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234212X13214603531888
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:39:y:2012:i:1:p:129-132. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.