Fred Berry is 55 years old now. He walks with an awkward, wide-legged gait. His speech is slurred and can be difficult to understand.

He is also the majority leader of the state Senate and the chamber's longest-serving member.
Sitting in his grand, oak-paneled office on the third floor of the Statehouse, Berry tells the story of his early prognosis to illustrate a point: He knows both the power of medical research and its limitations. He knows that medical technology has improved his life immensely and also that it has not cured him. And he knows that the doctors can be wrong — as they were that day in 1950.

It's a perspective that Berry brings to the Senate's debate on embryonic stem cell research, the controversial medical frontier that scientists believe could one day help to treat scores of disorders, including cerebral palsy.

"I look at how far we've come, and I'm heartened by that," Berry said. "I do have hope."
That hope is one of the reasons Berry supports stem cell research and the Senate bill that would legalize it.
"If stem cell research can help a generation in the future with cerebral palsy, that would delight me," he said. "When you see how challenging their life is, research kind of keeps the hope out there, and that's very important."

Berry's experience with cerebral palsy has affected more than his own view on the stem cell issue.
"Freddy is the most respected and senior member in the body, and his physical condition inspires people," Senate President Robert Travaglini said. "I would expect that some of my colleagues would look at Freddy as they consider this issue, and I would expect that that would have an impact on them."

Still, Berry said he thought long and hard before deciding to support the research. For one thing, he is a Catholic and the church is a leading opponent of stem cell research — although Berry has opposed church positions before. But his hesitation was not confined to the ethical concerns that have caused many people — including Gov. Mitt Romney — to oppose the research.

Berry also knows the complex psychology of living with a disability better than his Senate colleagues. Though he wants to find a cure for cerebral palsy, he also knows that his disability has shaped him in many ways.

"I recognize that growing up with this changed me," Berry said. "It's the variable that made me who I am."

Jobs, taxes, and lives

Ultimately, the opportunity to save lives and improve treatment overcame such metaphysical questions. Berry said he is now "100 percent for" stem cell research. But when he talks about the issue, he rarely talks about saving lives, choosing instead to focus on jobs and tax revenue and competing with other states and nations for biotechnology businesses.

California, he notes, recently put $3 billion of state money toward encouraging stem cell research. In Massachusetts, embryonic stem cell research remains in legal limbo and Berry said he fears businesses could leave the state.

The Senate bill falls well short of California's largesse — it would legalize embryonic stem cell research in the state while banning human cloning — but Berry said it would help.

"I don't see our industrial base coming back. I don't see Parker Brothers coming back or Sylvania," he said. "Do I see new biotechs coming out of the incubator at Salem State? Yes, I do. It's our future."

But Berry concedes that for him, the issue is about more than economics.

"My belief in this research goes a little deeper probably than most," Berry said. "I think about it on two levels."

He does not, however, have any hope that research would help him personally.

"I'm 55 years old," he said. "I don't see it really having any effect on my life. When I think about it, I think of future generations."

Berry said he considers the research a moral imperative. But he also said that politically, the economic argument may be more persuasive.

"I don't think that everyone has the personal feeling I might have," he said, "so I think the wiser approach is to discuss the wider benefits."

Emphasizing the economic side of the debate could also take attention away from the controversial ethical issues the research raises. Among the most powerful opponents is the Catholic Church, which opposes any research that destroys human embryos.

"That makes me sad, because I was brought up a Catholic," Berry said. "But I have disagreed with them before, and I do that because of my convictions."

Berry said the church's position wouldn't change his own. The basis for the church's opposition — the belief that life begins at conception, making research that destroys embryos tantamount to murder — is something Berry dealt with long ago, when he decided to support abortion rights.

"I just think that a woman has a right to choose, just because of the fabric of my morality," Berry said.
Berry said he would not underestimate the church's influence. But he also noted that opinions change, with or without the church. When he first ran for state senator in 1982, he said, he had four opponents in the Democratic primary and not one was pro-choice.

"Now I'm not sure if you can identify in any race a pro-life candidate," Berry said.

But if Berry doesn't side with his church on abortion or stem cells, he has his own concerns about the direction of scientific research. He opposes human cloning, he said. And he has deep concerns about research that aims to identify genetic diseases in fetuses — which could pave the way for selective abortions.

"That kind of scares me," he said. "I obviously believe that you don't have to be perfect to have a good life."

A quiet role

If that kind of testing becomes possible, Berry said, he will speak out loudly against it. But in the current debate, he will play a quieter role, content to work behind the scenes to support Travaglini. Nonetheless, Berry said he knows that many of his colleagues will look to him for guidance.

"It's very hard not to hear my voice on these issues," Berry said.

For his part, Travaglini said he is counting on Berry to help the bill win passage, especially because the Senate will need a two-thirds majority to override an expected Romney veto.

"I'll be relying on Freddy to take a larger and larger role as this bill moves closer to passage," Travaglini said.

There was a time when Berry was uncomfortable taking a prominent role on disability issues. When he was first elected to the Senate, he feared he would be labeled a one-issue politician, so he asked then-Senate President William Bulger not to name him to the Human Services Committee, which deals with disability issues.

"I didn't want that to be my legacy," Berry said. "I knew the job. I knew I had to bring home the bacon."
Besides, he said, being a spokesman for disability issues wasn't necessarily the best way to advance that agenda.

"I thought being a role model, being a player, would probably have the greatest results," he said.
But after more than two decades in the Senate, Berry said he is less worried about being pigeonholed.

"I (became) well-established as someone who knew how to play the game, who knew how to get things done," Berry said. "You become the spokesman in spite of your efforts."