Mr. Reeve's larger attention to research and funding for a cure of spinal cord research — rather than a more aggressive disability rights stance — put him in an “Uncle Tom” sort of category for many, looking more toward blending with the majority than standing strong with the minority.

        For me, that political dividing line was a wavy one. Both sides made some sense: Using the status of Superman to generate dollars for spinal cord cure seems a logical use of an available resource. Acknowledging one's full claim to the human experience, with or without disability, is equally important. The key, in other words, was balance.

        The issue of stem cell research is even more blurry from the perspective of disability advocacy. It is also far more complicated.

Designer babies

        The notion of custom-designed babies — with hair and eyes and stature selected along with the absence of all “defective” genes — has always made me shudder. It is our diversity, our differences from one another, that lend flavor and music and hue to every family, small group, and community. To “terminate” one baby and “replace” it with a possibly more “perfect” one has always seemed to me barbaric and frighteningly reminiscent of Hitler's Germany.

        But the use of embryonic stem cells for research and healing is much trickier.

        By selecting the one embryo with the right gene material to heal a sibling, a handful of parents have found a cure for one child while adding another to their families. We have read of placental tissue curing one child's leukemia, bone marrow transplants adding years of life to a beloved grandfather, and grafting one's own stem cells as a cure for a variety of diseases.

        How can we not be excited when we learn of breakthroughs leading to possible cures for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or juvenile diabetes? On the other hand, how can we not be terrified by the prospect of an accelerated mass production of embryonic stem cells for the purpose of little human clones or body parts for harvesting? The potential of stem cells for healing can be staggering, but the potential for moral depravity is lurking somewhere in there, too.

Going too far

        The problem isn't science. The problem is human nature. Give us something wonderful, and we never know when to quit.

        Television is great — but not when drivers have it on their dashboards! Cell phones are marvelous tools for getting business done while commuting on a bus or train or keeping parents connected to their children. But now we hear them sounding off at weddings and funerals and are treated to the conversations of others in public restrooms and in hair salons.

        There are far graver examples of our tendency to push the science envelope just to see possibilities. Take the Holocaust, the atomic bomb and the work of suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian as horrific examples.

        Excess embryos exist in fertility clinics throughout the country. If, rather than being destroyed, these embryoscan be used to save lives or cure significant disabilities, that can only be a good thing. If we, as the insatiable undisciplined humans we are, can stop at using those cells created by infertile couples and quell the urge to make more just because we can — well, that's even better.

        Contact Deborah Kendrick by phone: 673-4474; fax: 321-6430; e-mail: dkkendrick@earthlink.net.
       

Over-the-Rhine through a lens
WBQC cable deal only a ceasefire
Jim Fox starts over, over the airwaves
He calls the shots for Madonna
Price Hill man at home in his own '50s diner
UC fashion grad has designs on New York
DEMALINE: Season's shining stars deserve standing ovation
Family films at top of festival list
MCGURK: Summer blockbusters went from boom to bust
Boys, reunited after rehab, wow Firstar Center
Hot opening acts endanger King's crown
Ask the critic
Hurrah for Lodi syrah, zinfandel
Remembering Rose Marie
KENDRICK: Stem cell research points out dangers, promise of science
Get to it