In less than three weeks, the University of Nebraska Board of Regents is expected to decide whether NU scientists should be allowed to pursue expanded embryonic stem cell research under newly relaxed federal guidelines.

Plenty of focus is on NU's five pro-life regents: Randy Ferlic and Howard Hawks of Omaha, Jim McClurg and Tim Clare of Lincoln, and Bob Phares of North Platte.

Those regents face an especially difficult decision:

Allow the research to expand, and they'll anger many pro-life advocates --notably Nebraska Right to Life, whose endorsements reach tens of thousands of key voters during each election cycle.

The pro-life regents answered "yes" when asked in the Nebraska Right to Life Political Action Committee survey whether they would support banning research on human embryonic stem cells, and they must be held accountable, said the group's executive director, Julie Schmit-Albin.

"Regents are all seasoned political veterans," she said. "They know what happens when they go back on commitments they made to large voting blocs whom they courted during their elections."

But if they restrict the research, regents would be acting against the recommendation of NU President J.B. Milliken, who told the board at its Oct. 23 meeting NU should be "appropriately engaged" in embryonic stem cell research if it wants to be a leading research university.

Milliken's comments were embraced by University of Nebraska Medical Center Chancellor Harold Maurer and University of Nebraska-Lincoln Chancellor Harvey Perlman. All three administrators agreed limiting the research would harm NU's ability to recruit and retain top faculty.

Milliken's position also was endorsed by the Nebraska Coalition for Lifesaving Cures -- not to mention NU Foundation trustees Richard Holland, a prominent Omaha philanthropist who founded the coalition, and Lynne Boyer, daughter of the late Charles Durham, for whom the medical center's twin research towers are named.

"We are 100 percent supportive of President Milliken's position," said coalition president Sanford Goodman.

"Certainly it's the right position from a scientific and medical research standpoint. And we think it's the right position from the moral and ethical standpoint as well."

So what will regents do?

Vote likely

Interviews with four of the five pro-life regents reveal at least one likely will introduce a resolution limiting embryonic stem cell research at the medical center to only the stem cell lines approved for study under former President George W. Bush.

Clare (pictured), elected to the board last year over an embryonic stem cell research supporter, wouldn't specify what his resolution might say, but he said his position -- that he supports noncontroversial adult stem cell research but not embryonic stem cell research -- hasn't changed.

"At the end of the day," he said, "I have to come up with what, in my mind, I can live with."

Clare's resolution is the one many pro-life advocates are rooting for, said Chip Maxwell, executive director of the Nebraska Coalition for Ethical Research.

"All parties are hopeful that the regents will do something definitive," Maxwell said.

Ferlic, a retired cardiac and thoracic surgeon who's strongly opposed to the research, made his intentions clear.

"I hope somebody will bring (a resolution) forth," he said. "If they don't, I will.

"I want it on the table, and I want it voted on."

Phares said he's not working on a resolution now but wouldn't rule it out for the future.

He added: "I'm not in favor of expanding embryonic stem cell research. ... If I had to vote today, that's where I'd be."

And McClurg (pictured) wouldn't speculate on how he might vote.

"It's my intention to listen to what people are thinking right up to the minute we vote, and then I'll decide," he said.

Hawks, who was traveling, couldn't be reached for comment.

The other three regents --Chairman Kent Schroeder of Kearney, Chuck Hassebrook of Lyons and Bob Whitehouse of Papillion --support embryonic stem cell research.

They want the board to retain its current policy, which says medical center scientists must abide by federal guidelines in their work.

Guidelines now have been relaxed under President Barack Obama. If regents do nothing when they meet later this month, the board's policy would remain, allowing medical center researchers the chance to compete for funding for research on new embryonic stem cell lines.

Such an opportunity excites supporters of the research, who believe it could lead to treatments for diseases such as Parkinson's and diabetes.

Supporters also note state law already forbids the creation and destruction of embryos at will. The embryonic stem cells used at the medical center would come from embryos left over from fertility treatments; those embryos generally are thrown away.

Scientists don't know which type of cell could lead to a medical breakthrough, supporters say, so researchers should use all types of cells, including both embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells.

Goodman, of the Nebraska Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, pointed to a recent announcement from the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine that it awarded $250 million to 14 teams of scientists doing stem cell research.

The winning teams --one of which included Lawrence Goldstein, a California scientist who came to Lincoln to urge regents to maintain their policy -- conduct research on both embryonic and adult stem cells, Goodman noted.

"We need all the pieces," he said. "(Medical research) is a big puzzle."

But opponents find embryonic stem cell research unethical because harvesting the stem cells requires destroying an embryo.

They believe other types of cells, such as adult stem cells, hold more promise.

Ferlic (pictured) said advocates of the research are too "zealous" in giving hope to those who suffer from chronic disease -- like the woman with Parkinson's and the young man with diabetes who offered emotional testimony in favor of the research during the regents' Oct. 23 meeting.

"It breaks my heart that (advocates) are holding out such promise when they have no real data to do that with," Ferlic said.

Goodman countered that the broad consensus in scientific circles is that embryonic stem cell research is critical.

The Nov. 20 regents meeting will follow regular procedures, meaning it's open to the public and will include time for public comments.

Regents could adopt a resolution limiting embryonic stem cell research to the so-called "Bush lines," do nothing, or pass a resolution affirming their current policy.

The last option is the one Milliken prefers.

Still, he and others know whatever the regents decide won't please everyone.

That comes with the job, regents on both sides of the debate said.

"The obligation one shoulders when you take on an elected position -- you are obligated to make decisions, not avoid them," McClurg said.

"If you're not prepared to accept that obligation, you are probably in the wrong spot."

Reach Melissa Lee at 473-2682 or mlee@journalstar.com.