Imagine, in the not-too-distant future, a baby in a glass laboratory that never cries. It has no father to worry about it, no mother to stay up all night by its side. It is not born from a bond of love or human intimacy. This infant is a product of formulas; created from stem cells, without sperm, without an egg—an image that might once have seemed like a far-off fantasy but is now inching closer to scientific reality.
Scientists have managed to create structures that bear a significant biological resemblance to human embryos in the early stages of development. These structures arise from stem cells and can mimic some of the initial developmental stages. This advancement is seen as an opportunity to better understand the fundamental processes of human formation and to study the causes of miscarriage or genetic diseases. Yet, simultaneously, it opens up new horizons of ethical and legal questions.
When we say science can create these entities, it means science is capable of imitating the initial stages of human formation. But the main question is not whether this is scientifically possible. In other words, this issue is less about scientific feasibility and more of an invitation to reconsider the meaning, consequences, and ethical boundaries of such progress.
From the perspective of human ethics—whether in religious traditions or ethical philosophies—there exist fundamental principles such as human dignity. A human being is not merely a collection of cells that can be constructed, modified, or discarded. When the beginning of human life becomes a laboratory process, there is a risk that humans could be turned into objects for experimentation or modification, rather than beings with inherent dignity and value.
One of the most complex aspects of this technology is its impact on the status of motherhood and family. Motherhood is not merely a biological role; it is an emotional and caregiving experience forged through responding to a child’s needs—crying, nurturing, cuddling, gaze, and attunement in a deep bond. When human birth is separated from the bond of human love, this fundamental experience is disrupted, and the emotional connection between mother and child may be weakened.
On the other hand, the family as a social institution, formed on the basis of human bonds and marital relationships, embodies emotional, cultural, and educational values—values that technology alone cannot replace. If a laboratory child is seen as a technological product, the family and the role of parents could be reduced to a technical contract rather than a human and emotional experience.
In addition to these, one of the critical challenges facing this technology is the legal vacuum. These structures are neither fully embryos nor mere cell masses; therefore, many current laws are either silent or ambiguous about them. This legal grey area could lead to abuse or neglect of ethical values.
Even in countries where research on these structures is conducted, there are specific limitations. For example, in many jurisdictions, researchers are only permitted to keep such structures for up to approximately 14 days, and beyond that is generally prohibited, as more complex aspects of development begin after that stage.
When clear laws are absent, ethical boundaries can also blur. Should these entities have the right to basic respect? Should researchers observe a specific limit? Who decides what actions are permissible and what are not? The answers to these questions are not just scientific; they are ethical, social, and cultural.
From a social perspective, if human reproduction technologies develop without the role of human intimacy, societal perceptions regarding the importance of the mother and family responsibility could change. This could, in the long term, lead to a shift in values concerning the status of parents, family solidarity, and even the cultural perception of a child’s birth and development—issues that are not clearly anticipated in any legal framework today.
Science cannot be the sole guide. If scientific progress moves without an ethical compass, it may itself become a new crisis instead of solving human crises. The crucial question is: Would a world where human birth is separated from human intimacy and the bond of love truly be more humane or not? This is the very point we must carefully and conscientiously examine before taking any step on the path of science—not only for human dignity but to preserve the values of motherhood and the foundation of the family.
Faeze Aghamohammady