TEACHING PACK
TEACHING PACK
TEACHING PACK
Aim of the pack
The purpose of this pack is to provide teachers with additional resources so that the film In Vitro can be
used as part of a teaching session. The material in the pack should enhance the educational
opportunities that the film provides. These resources can be used in any sequence and need not always
be used in conjunction with the film.
In Vitro’s portrayal of self-fertilisation using artificial gametes can be seen as an act of scientific
achievement or the opening of a modern “Pandora’s Box”. The film raises some fascinating moral,
scientific, and social questions. Is it right to create a child by means of an experimental technique? Does
a child need a parent of each sex? Is the use of artificial gametes the same as cloning? If not, what is the
difference? Should we expect Sofia to look exactly like Rachel?
Subject areas for which this resource pack may be relevant:
●
●
●
●
●
●
Biology
Science
Citizenship
Media Studies
Philosophy
Personal Social Health and Economic Education (PSHEE)
Learning outcomes
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Understand the role of chromosomes in gamete formation and reproduction
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in debate about ethical problems
TEACHING PACK
Table of Contents
Aim of the pack
In Vitro synopsis
Utopia vs Dystopia - teachers’ notes
Utopia vs Dystopia
Key Terms – teachers’ notes
Key Terms
Timeline - teachers’ notes
Timeline
Odd one out – teachers’ notes
Odd one out
Enhancements R Us – teachers’ notes
Enhancements R Us
The double-edged sword – teachers’ notes
The double-edged sword
Artificial gametes: 8 dilemmas – teachers’ notes
Artificial gametes: 8 dilemmas
A world of women? – teachers’ notes
A world of women?
Choices and questions – teachers’ notes
Choices and questions – part 1
Choices and questions part 2
Movie review – teachers’ notes
Movie Review
A media frenzy – teachers’ notes
A media frenzy
The science behind In Vitro – teachers’ notes
The science behind In Vitro
Debate – teachers’ notes
Debate
Glossary
TEACHING PACK
In Vitro synopsis
The time is the mid-21st century. Rachel is in her 60s. When she was younger, she had a high-profile and
controversial career as a scientist. She has a grown-up daughter, Sofia, who is seriously ill – we see that
she is breathing through an oxygen mask, and is on a drip. While Rachel is out collecting firewood, Sofia
stops breathing. Rachel returns and is distraught when she finds her daughter dead. Rachel then re-lives
some of her early choices and decisions, as she attempts to explain to her grand-daughter (Lilian, 19),
that Sofia, her mother, has died, and that her body has been taken away.
Rachel describes her frustration as a young scientist when she felt that her work was being passed over.
Her research focussed initially on differentiating stem cells to generate replacement heart, lung, liver
cells, etc, for cancer patients. However, she also discovered a way to make stem cells differentiate into
sperm and egg cells. Experiments in the use of such cells were heavily regulated, restricting her ability to
move forward with her research. Rachel says she wanted the world to sit up and take notice. She decided
circumvent the regulatory system by using her own cells in an experimental attempt to see if these
‘artificial gametes’ could result in a healthy pregnancy.
She extracted some of her own bone marrow, and isolated stem cells, which she manipulated so that
they could function as sperm cells. She then used these artificial sperm cells to fertilise one of her own
eggs. She got pregnant and had a child. This caused a huge media storm, and generated concern about
the health of her child. Sofia, Rachel’s daughter, was closely monitored throughout her life. Initially, there
was a widespread ban on the use of the technique that Rachel had pioneered, but as the years went by,
and no evidence of any major problems emerged, the ban was lifted. The technique that Rachel had
developed then became extremely popular and was used all over the world by people who were infertile,
or single, or in same sex relationships.
But when she was in her 30s, Sofia developed leukaemia and now she has died, at the age of 35. Her
body has already been taken away for analysis, and Rachel fears that Lilian, Sofia’s daughter, may in turn
come under scrutiny as the authorities try to establish whether artificial gametes caused Sofia’s illness.
TEACHING PACK
Utopia vs Dystopia - teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes
●
●
●
●
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
In this lesson the words ‘utopia’ and ‘dystopia’ should be displayed as the students enter. Students can
attempt definitions and discuss what the words mean and how people have different views about the
future. If students have read books like Brave New World or 1984 they can be encouraged to refer to
them.
After discussing concepts of dystopia and utopia, students can watch the film.
Initial discussion can then take place in an open way. A good approach would be to operate a community
of enquiry based on student reactions to the film. For those well versed in the P4C technique it may well
be necessary to allow more lesson time to address the issues raised.
The questions provided on the students’ handouts can then be addressed. Notes have been added where
it may be helpful for teachers to have additional information.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Why did Rachel go ahead with creating artificial sperm?
Why did Sophia die?
How old was she?
Why did Lily and Rachel want to leave the country?
Why is the film called In Vitro? [Teachers’ note: In vitro literally means ‘in glass’. The term is used
in science to describe something that happens outside the body, usually in a laboratory setting.
‘In vitro’ has come to be associated with ‘in vitro fertilisation’ or IVF, where sperm and egg are
fertilized outside the body. In the film, not only fertilization, but sperm formation too happens
outside the body.]
6. Why is the Genetics Research Organisation called Samsara? [Teachers’ note: Samsara refers to
the cycle of birth, life, death, and reincarnation that is a feature of some oriental religions and
philosophies. Stem cell research and reproductive technologies might be seen to resonate with
some aspects of these philosophies.]
Some questions about issues raised by the film:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Was the film putting forward a utopian or dystopian vision of the future?
What aspects of the film did you base your answer on?
To what extent is the creation of artificial gametes “progress”?
Is scientific progress unstoppable”?
Is the film fair in its portrayal of the future?
TEACHING PACK
Utopia vs Dystopia
What do you think ‘utopia’ and ‘dystopia’ mean?
Do you think the future will be utopian or dystopian? Why?
Can you think of any books, films or TV programmes that portray a utopian or dystopian image of the
future?
Now watch the film….
TEACHING PACK
Some questions for discussion about the film:
1. Why did Rachel go ahead with creating artificial sperm?
2. Why did Sophia die?
3. How old was she?
4. Why did Lily and Rachel want to leave the country?
5. Why is the film called In Vitro?
6. Why is the Genetics Research Organisation called Samsara?
7. Was the film putting forward a utopian or dystopian vision of the future?
8. What aspects of the film make you think this?
9. To what extent is the creation of artificial gametes “progress”?
10. Is scientific “progress” unstoppable”?
11. Is the film fair in its portrayal of the future?
TEACHING PACK
Key Terms – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand the processes involved in in vitro fertilisation
Understand the role of gametes in reproduction
Understand the role of genes in inheritance
Explain the distinction between therapeutic and reproductive cloning
The key terms glossary can be used for general discussion as a hand out. This could be used either
before watching the film, to set the scene and establish some basics. Alternatively, it can be used after
students have seen the film, as a way of gauging their understanding of the story.
Another suggestion is to show students the glossary before the film, and ask them to note which terms
they think they know and which they don’t. Then they can see whether the film helps them to understand
terms they are not sure of.
Students can also be set a more formal activity of matching up the key terms with their definitions. Their
answers can then be judged in class using the correct answer sheet.
Gene
A section of DNA containing information that
determines physical and other characteristics.
Stem cell
A cell that has the capacity to differentiate into one
or more other types of cell
Genome
The entire genetic make-up of a species
Clone
An organism that is genetically identical to another
DNA
Deoxyribonucleic acid – a molecule that carries
genetic information
IVF
In vitro fertilisation: where an egg and sperm are
fused outside the body
Gamete
Egg or sperm: a specialised form of cell containing
23 rather than 46 chromosomes.
Mutation
A random alteration in an organism’s DNA that may
cause damage or disease.
Nucleus
The centre of a cell, where the DNA is stored.
Enhancement
The process of ‘improving on nature’, eg by genetic
engineering to increase IQ
Chromosome
A strand of DNA carrying a number of genes tightly
coiled into a clump. Normal human cells contain 46
of these coils. Sperm and egg cells have only 23.
TEACHING PACK
Key Terms
See if you can write the appropriate definition of each term in the box next to it
Gene
Stem cell
Genome
Clone
DNA
IVF
Gamete
Mutation
Nucleus
Enhancement
Chromosome
TEACHING PACK
Timeline - teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes
●
●
●
●
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand the processes involved in in vitro fertilisation
Understand the role of gametes in reproduction
Understand the role of genes in inheritance
Discuss the role of regulation in scientific research
Explain the distinction between therapeutic and reproductive cloning
The timeline exercise is fairly straightforward and works best as group activity. It would work well as a
starter exercise. It may be unlikely that students will know the answers straight off, but they should be
able to work out that some must come after others. Discussing answers could allow for some explanation
of scientific techniques, terminology and developments.
1866 – Mendel’s early research into genetics of pea plants
1944 – Avery, Mcleod & McCarty suggest DNA is responsible for heredity
1953 – Double helix shape of DNA established by Crick and Watson
1956 – First successful bone marrow transplant
1960 – Discovery of stem cells in bone marrow
1978 – Louise Brown, first IVF baby, is born
1989 – Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis developed (removal of a cell from an IVF embryo + testing for
genetic disease)
1990 – Human fertilisation and embryology act is passed in Britain. It allows human embryos to be
created and destroyed for research, and IVF to be carried out under licence.
1996 – Dolly, the cloned sheep, is born
1998 – First human embryonic stem cells created from leftover IVF embryos
2004 – Researchers in Korea claim to have cloned human embryos and obtained stem cells from them
(‘therapeutic cloning’). The claims are later found to be false.
2005 – News reports announce that scientists are progressing towards the creation of ‘artificial gametes’
2009 – Karim Nayernia and his team at Newcastle announce the creation of artificial sperm from human
stem cells
2020?
2030?
2040?
2050?
3000?
TEACHING PACK
Timeline
In Vitro suggests the shape of the future in 2044. How realistic do you think it is? What might be the next
big step in science?
Here is a selection of significant events in genetics, stem cell science and reproductive technology over
the past 150 years. But they are all muddled up. See if you can match the event with its date by writing
the correct number in the empty column next to the appropriate year. There are some extra years at the
bottom of the table – these years are yet to come. Think about what science might achieve in the future,
and write your predictions next to the blank years.
1866
1. Dolly, the cloned sheep, is born
1944
2. Researchers in Korea claim to have cloned human embryos and obtained stem
cells from them (‘therapeutic cloning’). The claims are later found to be false.
1953
3. Human fertilisation and embryology act is passed in Britain. It allows human
embryos to be created and destroyed for research, and IVF to be carried out under
licence
1956
4. Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis developed (removal of a cell from an IVF
embryo + testing for genetic disease)
1960
5. First human embryonic stem cells created from leftover IVF embryos
1978
6. Mendel’s early research into genetics of pea plants
1989
7. Avery, Mcleord & McCarty suggest DNA is responsible for heredity
1990
8. News reports announce that scientists are progressing towards the creation of
‘artificial gametes’
1996
9. Karim Nayernia and his team at Newcastle announce the creation of artificial
sperm from human stem cells
1998
10. Discovery of stem cells in bone marrow
2004
11. First successful bone marrow transplant
2005
12. Louise Brown, first IVF baby, is born
2009
13. Double helix shape of DNA established by Crick and Watson
2020?
2030?
2040?
2050?
TEACHING PACK
Odd one out – teachers’ notes
The Odd one Out starter activity can be used at any stage. Students are asked to silently choose the odd
one out and be prepared to explain their choice. There is no correct answer as such but it is a good way
to start discussion. All the examples given might be regarded as some kind of enhancement. This task
could be paired with the ‘enhancements are us’ activity that follow in this pack.
NB: the pictures represent plastic surgery; the ‘enhanced’ runner who has artificial lower limbs, and
genetically modified pigs.
TEACHING PACK
Odd one out
TEACHING PACK
Enhancements R Us – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes:
●
●
●
●
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in debate about ethical problems
Genetic enhancements aren’t a direct focus of the film but are very much a part of the broader issues
relating to biotechnology so it might well be appropriate to consider them here. The enhancements
exercise works well as a role play. Equally students can use word processors to produce a glossy
brochure if IT is available.
Fertility treatments are often regarded as being fairly straightforward medical procedures if they are made
available to heterosexual couples of normal reproductive age. However, it is when they allow for
reproduction outside these parameters that they become controversial. Arguably, this is because they are
seen as ‘enhancing’ human beings (ie by allowing postmenopausal women to have children) rather than
meeting medical needs per se. However, the exact distinction between therapeutic intervention and
enhancement can be tricky to articulate.
It is interesting to consider the story of Oscar Pistorius here, the South African Sprinter who has no lower
legs. The “blades” he uses to run have, it has been argued, allowed him to run faster than an able bodied
runner of the same build because of the extended stretch he is able to achieve. There is still a debate as
to his involvement in mainstream athletics. How does his situation compare with the possibility of genetic
enhancements?
TEACHING PACK
Enhancements R Us
Stage 1
Imagine that you are a company specialising in human enhancement. You originally began by developing
remedies for genetic diseases but now you have developed a range of genetic enhancements. These are
modifications that can do a number of things. Improving IQ might be one. You could also produce genetic
alterations to increase people’s stamina and strength. A genetic treatment to reduce the amount of sleep
a person needs might appeal to military personnel, as well as people who work night shifts, and perhaps
also the average person who would like to find more time in the day.
You understand that the “white heat” of genetic technology allows for some creative thinking about the
future. Your task is to produce a brochure or presentation to advertise your services. In your
brochure/presentation what enhancements would you offer? Who would you promote them to, and how?
Stage 2
Your brochure/presentation has caused some consternation in the media and you have been invited onto
the “One Show” to explain yourself. How would you argue that what you are proposing was acceptable?
Prepare what you would say and deliver your message to the rest of the class.
TEACHING PACK
The double-edged sword – teachers’
notes
●
●
●
●
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in a debate about ethical problems
The double edged sword activity would be a suitable way of completing the topic in preparation for debate
or essay preparation. The arguments used here are quite basic and without much explanation. Students
could be given the opportunity to research more arguments or to develop them further. They could be
given the blank sheet to fill themselves. This task might be a useful starter for one of the other activities in
this pack, eg the 8 dilemmas, or the interpretation activity.
TEACHING PACK
The double-edged sword
Good
Bad
TEACHING PACK
These are some of the arguments that might be used in a debate about the issues in
the film. They demonstrate the way in which biotechnology can be a double edged
sword: it offers negatives and positives. The same might be said about nuclear power; it
may produce a reliable power source but may also result in waste that is extremely hazardous.
Look at the points listed below and place them either side of the double edged sword. Use the arguments
to have a formal debate on the issues you have been studying.
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Infertile couples will be able to have children
Couples will be able to choose the sex of their children
Parents will be able to choose the physical characteristics of their children
Deceased siblings can be replaced with identical copies
Genetic disorder will be eradicated
Jobs will be created
People will live longer
We will know more about our health prospects
Insurance companies will adapt premiums
Employers will use genetic information when recruiting
Genetic information can be used and stored
Some corporations will make lots of money
Clones may be discriminated against
A new underclass might develop
Transgenic disease might be created
God might punish us
New genetic diseases might be created
New mutations might be introduced
Clones might feel that their future is determined too clearly
A mistake in genetics will have consequences that go on for ever
New technologies will be expensive, and the gap between rich and poor will increase
New human organs could be made for people with heart, lung or kidney failure
TEACHING PACK
Artificial gametes: 8 dilemmas –
teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes:
●
●
●
●
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in debate about ethical problems
These scenarios offer different ways of exploring the implications of artificial gametes. Students can be
asked to tackle the scenarios in pairs, and then compare their results with other pairs. They can then be
gradually encouraged to explore reasons why there may be different answers, and why people may have
different feelings about these possibilities. It may be useful to try altering details of the suggested cases,
to see if that changes people’s views. Would it make a difference if the people concerned were older or
younger? What about their previous lifestyle – does this make a difference as to whether they should be
allowed to use artificial gametes?
Leading on from this, it should be possible to start a more in depth discussion about what kind of
consideration is important, and how differences of opinion should be dealt with. In particular, does it
matter when individuals’ opinions differ? What about when scientists’ views differ? What about policymakers, etc? How should the law decide whose view has most weight? Or should everyone be able to do
whatever they like….?
Role play
This exercise can also be done as a role play: a spokesperson for each case can put their claim forward,
while another student plays the part of the decision-maker.
Extension work: some additional points to discuss
●
What about consent? Two of the cases here involve people who can’t consent. One is a child.
Does that make a difference?
●
Who pays? Should people have to pay for this treatment themselves, or should it be provided by
the National Health Service?
●
Why artificial gametes and not donated sperm or eggs? In some of the cases described here,
donated gametes could be used. Why might people prefer to use artificial ones? Should this
make a difference when deciding whether it should be allowed?
Some of these cases involve the use of a surrogate. Is this OK in some, all or none of the cases?
Why/why not?
TEACHING PACK
Artificial gametes: 8 dilemmas
You have been asked to decide whether these people should be able to use artificial gametes or not. Do
you think any, or all of them should be allowed? What reasons will you give for your decision?
Steve, 47 and Gordon, 39, have been together 3 years. They want to have a child genetically related to
them both. Gordon will provide a cell that will become an egg. Steve will provide his own sperm. They will
need a surrogate mother.
Samantha is 62. She spent years working for charity. Her partner died when she was 38, and she’s been
single ever since. She is past the menopause. But using artificial gametes, she could develop sperm and
egg cells from her bone marrow to have a child.
Samir is 4 years old. He is an only child. He is brain-dead after a car crash. His parents ask doctors to
take bone marrow cells from Samir before the life-support machine is turned off. They hope to have the
cells turned into sperm so that one day they will have a grandchild.
Elise is 35. She is a member of the Opus Dei religious community. As part of her religious vows, she has
sworn to remain a virgin for life. With artificial gametes, she could have a child without ever having to
have sex.
Peter is a scientist working on embryonic stem cells. He wants to use artificial gametes to create embryos
which he will use in his research. He plans to create the artificial gametes using bone marrow cells that
members of the public have donated for research.
Martin is 62. He has been in and out of prison a lot, and had a drugs problem but is doing much better
now. He wants to find a clinic where he can have his bone marrow extracted and used to create egg cells
that he can fertilise with his own sperm.
Tawanda is 26. He and his wife, Joy, 27, want to have a family, but Tawanda suffers from a congenital
problem that means he cannot produce sperm. He hopes to have sperm manufactured from his bone
marrow so that he and his wife can have a child who is genetically related to them both.
Gillian has heard of a clinic where skin cells can be developed into artificial sperm or egg cells. Tony, her
husband, always refused to have children with her. Tony recently left Gillian for another woman. Gillian
plans to collect Tony’s discarded cells from his toothbrush or clothes, get them turned into sperm, and
have his child.
TEACHING PACK
A world of women? – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes:
●
●
●
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in a debate about ethical problems
Much of the media attention that has centred on the prospect of artificial gametes seems to focus on the
idea that men may become redundant if their sperm is no longer required for reproduction.
For this task, students should try to imagine a future where the need for men in the process of human
reproduction has been removed. They can then discuss their ideas in class.
TEACHING PACK
A world of women?
In the film a woman is able to fertilise her egg with sperm created from her own bone marrow. This
suggests that it might be possible to dispense with the male contribution to reproduction altogether. If we
don’t need men for reproduction, do we need them at all? Might they simply become outdated, and
redundant? Would they gradually die out? What implications would that have to the way in which we live
our lives? What would such a world be like? In each of the boxes below indicate a way in which things
might change in the featured areas.
Relationships
Politics
Warfare
Business
The media
Home life
The workplace
The welfare state
TEACHING PACK
Choices and questions – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes:
●
●
●
●
●
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in a debate about ethical problems
The quotes provided here may offer good stimulus for discussion. Students can then consider some of
the questions on the following sheet. This could be used as a starter or plenary activity. The additional
questions and material can be used independently of the quotes or in conjunction with them.
TEACHING PACK
Choices and questions – part 1
“We do not have to accept any of these future worlds under the false banner of liberty, be it that of
unlimited reproductive rights or of unfettered scientific enquiry. We do not have to regard ourselves as
slaves to inevitable technological progress when that progress does not serve human ends. True freedom
means the freedom of political communities to protect the values they hold most dear, and it is that
freedom that we need to exercise with regard to the biotechnology revolution today.”
An edited extract from Our Posthuman Future by Francis Fukuyama.
“The fuss about cloning is rather silly, I can’t see any essential distinction between cloning and producing
brothers and sisters in the time honoured way.”
Stephen Hawking
“Stem cell research holds the promise of hope for 100 million people living with incurable diseases from
diabetes to heart conditions to Alzheimer's to Parkinson's, ALS, MS, and spinal cord injury.”
Christopher Reeve (the actor who played Superman before an accident that left him paralysed from the
neck down.)
“What we must repeat with force is the equal dignity of every human being, for the sole fact of having
been brought to life. One's biological, psychological and cultural development and health can never
become an element for discrimination."
Pope Benedict XVI
“It’s a law of the universe...you can’t undo what you have done...if you are going
to mess with the fundamentals, you had better make sure you’re on solid ground”
Rachel, In Vitro
TEACHING PACK
Choices and questions part 2
●
●
●
How would you feel if you were created from artificial gametes?
How might it affect your relationship with your mother/father?
How similar would your future be to theirs?
In the film the Samsara organisation seems to have legal rights that extend into the life of Sophia, even
beyond the grave.
●
●
●
If private firms had a part to play in our genetic construction, what rights over us should they
have?
Should they have any rights over our own genetic make-up?
Can any organisation own the rights to DNA?
The UN declaration of human rights states clearly that humans share basic rights:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and
conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
●
●
●
●
●
●
Can you envisage a time when there might be a distinction made between people based on how
they were conceived?
Would it be fair that some people might be born with genetic advantages that had been paid for?
Is it right that people like Lily’s mother suffer as part of the scientific process of genetic
experimentation?
Is having a child a fundamental right?
How do religious believers respond to these questions?
Will the law offer society suitable guidance?
TEACHING PACK
Movie review – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes:
●
●
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Understand the role of chromosomes in gamete formation and reproduction
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
As well as giving students a chance to consider the issues raised by the film, writing a review offers a way
of assessing students’ ability to summarise and present the scientific concepts presented in the film. The
In Vitro review could be written in the lesson or set as homework. The suggested films also offer
opportunities to explore an array of related issues such as cloning, designer babies and artificial
intelligence.
TEACHING PACK
Movie Review
There a number of films that have been seen in the nation’s cinemas that cover aspects relating to the
issues raise in In Vitro. You might have a copy of one of them at home. Your task is to write a film review
for one of them. If you can watch it, do so.
Your review must include commentary on the main issues and questions raised in the film. Here are some
good examples. Notice that In Vitro is first on the list.
In Vitro
The Island
The Boys From Brazil
AI
Robots
Bicentannial Man
Gattaca
A movie review should briefly summarise the plot, but without giving too much away about how it ends.
The review should tell the reader what genre of film is being discussed. It should enable the reader to
know what was good about the film, and what was not so good. The review should highlight the questions
that a particular film explores. (Not all films necessarily explore questions in this way, but all those listed
above certainly do!) A review may also compare films within genres. All these elements help readers to
decide whether it sounds like their kind of film.
TEACHING PACK
A media frenzy – teachers’ notes
This material can be used as part of an initial briefing or it can be used as material for debate and
discussion later in the programme. It relates specifically to the production of artificial gametes in 2009 and
the surrounding controversy.
TEACHING PACK
A media frenzy
The making of In Vitro coincided with a controversial 2009 report in the Scientific Journal “Stem Cells and
Development”. The report was an account of how Professor Nayernia of Newcastle University had
created human sperm from the stem cells taken from an embryo (artificial gametes). The stated aim of
such research was the ability to allow infertile men to still produce their own genetic offspring. Since the
publication there has been discussion as to the nature of the artificial gamete and the extent to which it
can be classified fully as human sperm. The picture below was published in the national press at the time
and is a magnified image of the creation.
A media storm surrounded this publication. If you go on-line you will find plenty of articles about the
research and resulting controversy. In this pack, we have included two articles that cover the topic of
artificial gametes.
Read the Daily Mail article that follows, and:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Summarise the main points made in the article.
Make a list of the facts that the author uses.
Make a list of assumptions that are made?
What opinion does the article offer?
In your judgement, are the arguments good?
Write a page replying to this article is if you were one of the following characters:
○ Professor Nayernia
○ Rachel
○ Lilly
○ The Managing Director of Samsara
○ The director of In Vitro
Compare the Daily Mail article with the one from The Independent.
Which do you think is better, and why?
Are they both trying to do the same thing?
TEACHING PACK
Are we on the brink of a society without any need for men?
Michael Hanlon. Daily Mail. 8th July 2009
Despite all the twists and turns taken in the new world of reproductive medicine, the news that a scientific team is
trying to make the male human redundant is still profoundly shocking. For the first time, the possibility of
'parthenogenesis' - or 'virgin reproduction' - has come within scientific reach. Put at its crudest, we now face the
possibility of a world where women do not need men to make babies - with all of the immense moral, ethical and
philosophical questions that raises. Certainly, from a scientific point of view, the very fact that Newcastle University
scientist Karim Nayernia has apparently succeeded in producing artificially-grown human sperm from stem cells is
groundbreaking.
His stated aim is to one day use this technique to help infertile men to have children. But the fear must be that this
opens the door to a whole new era of 'assisted reproduction' that is of an entirely different scientific order from
anything we have seen before. Professor Nayernia has so far already used his technique to create baby mice, using
sperm created in the laboratory from mouse stem cells. He has also used the same technique to create human sperm.
Though this sperm has not been used to fertilise a human egg, the nightmare is simply that we now stand on the
brink of a new era where the whole business of bearing children has nothing to do with a biological mother and
father at all.
For example, the cells of a gay woman could be used to create sperm with which to fertilise her partner's egg. In an
even more extreme scenario, a woman could, in theory, one day be both mother and father to her own child. The
possibilities are mind-boggling.
But first, the caveats. Professor Nayernia is not (so far) able to use stem cells from female embryos to produce
sperm (though he has certainly tried to do so). His technique only worked using stem cells taken from male
embryos. That alone would appear to rule out, for the time being, the science-fiction scenario of a world where men
become reproductively redundant and women would be the supreme biological beings.
Secondly, no one (so far) is testing the new technique to make human offspring at all, only human sperm. After all,
to do so would not only be foolish and immoral, but illegal in Europe, America and most civilised nations.
Moreover, the health risks are enormous. Although live baby mice were produced using the artificially created
'sperm', the unfortunate offspring were far from healthy, suffering from various growth and respiratory problems.
But these caveats notwithstanding, there is no denying that the genie is now well and truly out of the bottle and we
must now ask ourselves where this technology could one day take us. Combined with the inevitable advances in
(related) cloning techniques which are sure to emerge from shady and unregulated labs, a bizarre future beckons, a
future in which the wealthy and unscrupulous will be able to create offspring using any number of artificial means.
It is important to stress that such techniques are of a wholly different order to the assisted reproduction methods
routinely used in IVF laboratories around the world today. IVF, in reality, amounts to no more than giving nature a
helping-hand. You still need sperm, made by adult men, and eggs, made by adult women.
The sperm and/or the eggs can be donated, as can the wombs used to grow the foetus, but the fundamentals of sexual
reproduction remain unchanged. But if - and it is still a big if - scientists could one day use cells from female
embryos to produce sperm, or perhaps even DNA extracted from an adult's skin or cheek-lining cells, then we truly
would be living in a terrifying new era.
TEACHING PACK
The prospect of all-female conception
By Steve Connor, Science Editor. The Independent. Friday, 13 April 2007
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-prospect-of-allfemale-conception-444464.html
Women might soon be able to produce sperm in a development that could allow lesbian couples to have their own
biological daughters, according to a pioneering study published today. Scientists are seeking ethical permission to
produce synthetic sperm cells from a woman's bone marrow tissue after showing that it possible to produce
rudimentary sperm cells from male bone-marrow tissue.
The researchers said they had already produced early sperm cells from bone-marrow tissue taken from men. They
believe the findings show that it may be possible to restore fertility to men who cannot naturally produce their own
sperm. But the results also raise the prospect of being able to take bone-marrow tissue from women and coaxing the
stem cells within the female tissue to develop into sperm cells, said Professor Karim Nayernia of the University of
Newcastle upon Tyne.
Creating sperm from women would mean they would only be able to produce daughters because the Y chromosome
of male sperm would still be needed to produce sons. The latest research brings the prospect of female-only
conception a step closer. “Theoretically is it possible,” Professor Nayernia said. “The problem is whether the sperm
cells are functional or not. I don't think there is an ethical barrier, so long as it's safe. We are in the process of
applying for ethical approval. We are preparing now to apply to use the existing bone marrow stem cell bank here in
Newcastle. We need permission from the patient who supplied the bone marrow, the ethics committee and the
hospital itself.”
If sperm cells can be developed from female bone-marrow tissue they will be matured in the laboratory and tested
for their ability to penetrate the outer “shell” of a hamster's egg - a standard fertility test for sperm.
“We want to test the functionality of any male and female sperm that is made by this way,” Professor Nayernia said.
But he said there was no intention at this stage to produce female sperm that would be used to fertilise a human egg,
a move that would require the approval of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.
The immediate aim is to see if female bone marrow can be lured into developing into the stem cells that can make
sperm cells. The ultimate aim is to discover if these secondary stem cells can then be made into other useful tissues
of the body, he said.
The latest findings, published in the journal Reproduction: Gamete Biology, show that male bone marrow can be
used to make the early "spermatagonial" stem cells that normally mature into fully developed sperm cells. “Our next
goal is to see if we can get the spermatagonial stem cells to progress to mature sperm in the laboratory and this
should take around three to five years of experiments,” Professor Nayernia said.
Last year, Professor Nayernia led scientists at the University of Gottingen in Germany who became the first to
produce viable artificial sperm from mouse embryonic stem cells, which were used to produce seven live offspring.
His latest work on stem cells derived from human bone marrow suggests that it could be possible to develop the
techniques to help men who cannot produce their own sperm naturally.
“We're very excited about this discovery, particularly as our earlier work in mice suggests that we could develop this
work even further,” Professor Nayernia said.
Whether the scientists will ever be able to develop the techniques to help real patients - male or female - will depend
on future legislation that the Government is preparing as a replacement to the existing Human Fertilisation and
Embryology Act.
A White Paper on genetics suggested that artificial gametes produced from the ordinary "somatic" tissue of the body
may be banned from being used to fertilise human eggs by in vitro fertilisation.
TEACHING PACK
The science behind In Vitro – teachers’
notes
Learning outcomes
●
●
Understand the concept of stem cells
Understand the role of chromosomes in gamete formation and reproduction
Students can be asked to answer these questions on the basis of what they have seen in the film, or they
can be asked to research the answers. Answers are included here so that non-science teachers can also
make use of this activity.
1. What are stem cells? How are they different from other cells?
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Many cells in the body are specialised to perform particular tasks, eg muscle cells, or blood cells.
Stem cells are not yet specialised and they have the potential to differentiate into other cell types.
Why might stem cells be helpful in fighting cancer?
If stem cells could be ‘reprogrammed’ to become lung cells it might be possible to replace
damaged cells with newly-developed cells that are free of the disease.
Why might it be possible to create sperm or egg cells from stem cells?
If stem cells can be used to develop into all other cell types, then they could develop into gametes
(sperm or egg cells)
How are gametes different from other cells in the body?
Sperm and egg cells have only 23 chromosomes. All other cells in the body have 46. This means
that when a sperm and egg fuse, the resulting fertilised egg now has the requisite 46 genes, 23
from each parent.
What aspects of Rachel’s technique might be risky, and why?
Sperm created from stem cells doesn’t go through the same processes of gamete formation as
normal sperm cells. We don’t know whether this might be risky.
Rachel used her own stem cells, so the sperm comes from ‘female’ cells. It is possible that this
could result in ‘imprinting’ errors. IE, usually not every gene contained in a chromosome is
‘expressed’. Whether a gene is expressed or not depends partly on whether it’s inherited from the
father or the mother.
Rachel fertilised her own egg. In reproduction between close family members, there is a higher
risk of duplications of recessive conditions. Rachel’s technique is analogous to reproducing with a
twin sibling.
How is Rachel’s technique different from cloning?
In cloning, the entire nucleus from an adult cell is injected into an empty egg cell. There is no
‘fertilisation’ per se. Rachel’s technique involved an artificially-created sperm and a natural egg.
Both the sperm and the egg had 23 chromosomes, so fertilisation was much more like what it
would be in normal reproduction.
In cloning, the offspring would be genetically identical to the parent. But the creation of gametes
involves a ‘reshuffling’ of genetic information. This is why for example, children of the same
parents are not identical to each other. Each egg and each sperm is genetically unique. So
although Rachel only used her own genetic material to create gametes, they are still ‘reshuffled’
and her child is therefore not an exact replica of her.
TEACHING PACK
The science behind In Vitro
1. What are stem cells? How are they different from other cells?
2. Why might stem cells be helpful in fighting cancer?
3. Why might it be possible to create sperm or egg cells from stem cells?
4. How are gametes different from other cells in the body?
5. What aspects of Rachel’s technique might be risky, and why?
6. How is Rachel’s technique different from cloning?
TEACHING PACK
Debate – teachers’ notes
Learning outcomes
●
●
●
●
●
Understand why research into genetics and stem cells may be controversial
Recognise the role of regulation in scientific research
Discuss the controversial aspects of research into reproductive technology
Recognise areas of ethical dispute
Be able to participate in debate about ethical problems
Two questions are suggested for a debate here. Students can be divided into two groups – one to argue
each side of the question. Each group must draw up an argument to support its case. One student from
each group should present the argument at the end. The class can then vote on which argument they
found most convincing.
We have included some suggestions for issues to consider. Teachers may find it helpful to draw on these
if students are getting stuck.
1. Was Rachel wrong to create Sofia from sperm made from her own bone marrow?
Motivations and intentions: Rachel was arrogant. She wanted people to pay attention. She wanted to
make a name for herself. We might think this argues against what she did. But we should also ask
whether scientists should have the willingness to take risks and probe at boundaries. Perhaps
developments in science are dependent on scientists having some arrogance and ambitious motivations.
If so, then to manage these characteristics, we might think that we need to have systems in place to limit
what scientists can do.
Outcomes: Can we say that the outcomes have been bad? We know that Sofia is dead, but we do not
know for sure whether Sofia’s leukaemia was caused by what Rachel did. Sofia might have been glad to
have been alive even if she did die early. Who decides whether a life is worthwhile? We also need to
remember that Lilian has been born as a result of Sofia’s birth. If Rachel had not conceived Sofia, Lilian
would not have come into existence. Does this count as a positive outcome or not?
In the film, we are told that many other people have used this technique. Rachel says that single women,
same-sex couples, etc. have all used artificial gametes. The film implies that – as yet – there have been
no adverse effects to anyone else.
2. Should there be regulations to stop people from experimenting with artificial gametes today?
Some people might argue that tampering with natural processes is inherently wrong. But does this mean
that nearly all of modern society and medicine is wrong as well…? If not, how can we show which things
are wrong and which aren’t?
Some people think that children need two parents, one of each sex, and that it’s wrong to create children
knowing that they won’t have this. But is it worse to be born with only one parent, or with two same sex
parents than not to be born at all? Does this comparison even make sense? Do we know for a fact that
children really need both a father and a mother?
TEACHING PACK
Debate
Below are two questions that relate to the film In Vitro. See if you can draw up a convincing argument for
your side. Some tips have been given to help you identify aspects of each question that need to be
addressed.
1. Was Rachel was wrong to create Sofia from sperm made from her own bone marrow?
○
Think about motivations and intentions
○
Think about the outcomes of Rachel’s act. Can we say that the outcomes have been
bad?
2. Should there be regulations to stop people from experimenting with artificial gametes today?
○
Think about the role of regulation in scientific research. What is it for? Are there some
things you think scientists definitely shouldn’t be allowed to do.
○
Is there a difference between avoiding risk and preventing unethical behaviour?
■If artificial gametes were shown to be safe, should they be illegal on other grounds?
■What other factors might be thought to make it immoral to use artificial gametes?
TEACHING PACK
Glossary
BIOTECHNOLOGY: the use of microorganisms such as bacteria or biological substances
such as enzymes, to perform industrial or manufacturing processes
BIOETHICS: the moral debates surrounding developments in biological science
CHROMOSOME: A DNA-containing body, located in the cells of most living things,
that holds most of the organism's genes.
CLONE: a group of identical cells that share a common ancestry, meaning are derived
from the same mother cell.
CLONING:
Therapeutic: Creating clones for the development of gene based medical treatment
Reproductive: Creating clones for reproduction only
CONGENITAL DISORDER: An abnormality of structure or function or a disease that
is present at birth. Congenital disorders also are called birth defects.
DNA: Deoxyribonucleic acid, a molecule in all cells, and many viruses, that contains genetic
codes for inheritance.
DOMINANT: In genetics, a term for a trait that can manifest in the offspring when inherited
from only one parent.
EUGENICS: the study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding
(especially as applied to human mating)
GAMETE: A mature male or female germ cell that possesses a haploid set of chromosomes
and is prepared to form a new diploid by undergoing fusion with a haploid gamete
of the opposite sex. An ARTIFICIAL GAMETE is a gamete created or developed through scientific
processes.
GENE: A unit of information about a particular heritable trait. Usually stored on chromosomes,
genes contain specifications for the structure of a particular polypeptide or protein.
GENE THERAPY: Genetic engineering used to treat genetic disorders.
GENETIC ENGINEERING: The alteration of genetic material by direct intervention in
genetic processes.
GENETIC FINGERPRINT: A sample of a person's DNA that is detailed enough to
distinguish it from all other people's DNA.
GENETICS: The area of biological study concerned with heredity, with hereditary traits
passed down from one generation to the next through the genes, and with the variations
between organisms that result from heredity.
GENOME: All of the genetic material in the chromosomes of a particular organism.
HEREDITY: The transmission of genetic characteristics from ancestor to descendant
through the genes.
HFEA: The Human fertilization and Embryology Authority, the organization that formulates
the rules for all issues relating to fertilization and the use of embryos.
IVF: In Vitro Fertilisation - the process whereby the egg is fertilized outside the womb
(in vitro literally means ‘in glass’)
MUTATION: Alteration in the physical structure of an organism's DNA, resulting in a
genetic change that can be inherited.
NATURAL SELECTION: The process whereby some organisms thrive and others
perish, depending on their degree of adaptation to a particular environment.
NUCLEUS: The control center of a cell, where DNA is stored.
RECESSIVE: In genetics, a term for a trait that can manifest in the offspring only if it is
inherited from both parents. The opposite of dominant.
STEM CELL: a blank cell that has the potential to develop into any type of human cell
SYNTHESIZE: To manufacture chemically.
ZYGOTE: A diploid cell formed by the fusion of two gametes.