Imagine yourself in a society in which individuals with virtually incurable diseases could gain the essential organs and tissues that perfectly match those that are defected through the use of individual human reproductive cloning. In a perfect world, this could be seen as an ideal and effective solution to curing stifling biomedical diseases and a scarcity of available organs for donation. However, this approach in itself contains many bioethical flaws and even broader social implications of how we could potentially view human clones and integrate them into society. Throughout the focus of this paper, I will argue that the implementation of human reproductive cloning into healthcare practices would produce adverse effects upon family dynamic and society due to its negative ethical ramifications. Perhaps the most significant conception of family stems from a religious conception of assisted reproductive technologies and cloning and their impact on family dynamics with regard to its “unnatural” approach to procreation. Furthermore, the broader question of the ethical repercussions of human reproductive cloning calls to mind interesting ways in which we could potentially perceive and define individualism, what it means to be human and the right to reproduction, equality and self-creation in relation to our perception of family.
In recent years, the development of cloning technology in non-human species has led to new ways of producing medicine and improving our understanding of development and genetics. But what exactly is human reproductive cloning and how has this technology been developed? The term “cloning” refers more specifically to a process known as somatic cell nuclear transfer. In this process, the DNA from the cell of ...
... middle of paper ...
...on International, 24 Feb. 2010. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.
Golombok, S. and MacCallum, F. (2003), Practitioner Review: Outcomes for parents and children following non-traditional conception: what do clinicians need to know? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44: 303–315.
Golombok, S., Murray, C., Brinsden, P. and Abdalla, H. (1999), Social versus Biological Parenting: Family Functioning and the Socioemotional Development of Children Conceived by Egg or Sperm Donation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40: 519–527.
Caulfield, Timothy. "Human Cloning Laws, Human Dignity and the Poverty of the Policy Making Dialogue." BMC Medical Ethics. BioMed Central Ltd., 29 July 2003. Web. 18 Nov. 2013. .
"Colossians 1:16." The Holy Bible. New York: American Bible Society, 1992. N. pag. Print.
Therapeutic cloning is the process whereby parts of a human body are grown independently from a body from STEM cells collected from embryos for the purpose of using these parts to replace dysfunctional ones in living humans. Therapeutic Cloning is an important contemporary issue as the technology required to conduct Therapeutic Cloning is coming, with cloning having been successfully conducted on Dolly the sheep. This process is controversial as in the process of collecting STEM cells from an embryo, the embryo will be killed. Many groups, institutions and religions see this as completely unacceptable, as they see the embryo as a human life. Whereas other groups believe that this is acceptable as they do not believe that the embryo is a human life, as well as the fact that this process will greatly benefit a large number of people. In this essay I will compare the view of Christianity who are against Therapeutic Cloning with Utilitarianism who are in favour of Therapeutic Cloning.
The first argument in support of human reproductive cloning is that it could be used to provide children to those who cannot have them through biological means. Infertile or same-sex couples who wish to have children face a dilemma: other people must always be involved in order to have a child. Adoption is the obvious choice, but the child is not genetically related to either parent. Those who wish to have a ...
The objective of this essay is to inform the reader(s) about human cloning. I believe that human cloning is morally wrong because one should not have the right to avoid daily responsibilities by getting someone else to handle them. There will be four sections of this paper that will be discussed. Firstly, there is an argumentative section, which will have premises along with a conclusion for an argument made against human cloning. Secondly, an explanation section, which explains how the argument against human cloning obeys the rules for a good argument. Thirdly, an objection section to where there are arguments that violates mine in order to demonstrate how objectors might object to the argument. Lastly, there will be a conclusion where I discuss
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
In conclusion, with the development of cloning technology, public have different attitudes towards it. On one hand, serious diseases, like liver cancer, are likely to be cured by transplanting healthy cells and scientists have more access to medical research. It brings hope for infertile families to obtain a baby. On the other hand, it has raised public concerns about security risks due to high failure and malformation rate, and ethical issues about dignity, which are mainly caused by productive cloning. Hence, therapeutic cloning should be enhanced to minimize its potential safety risks in order to be put into clinical application, while reproductive cloning ought to be prohibited worldwide without the agreement on moral issues.
Cloning is a procedure of creating genetically indistinguishable organisms through nonsexual means (Devolder 2008). After years of countless research and experimenting, scientists successfully cloned their first mammal using a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). In Devolder’s paper she states, “Somatic cells are any cells other than the reproductive system cells” (Devolder 2008). Scientists realized they could take fully developed somatic cells from any part of the body and, through the SCNT system, use the cells to make a genetic copy of the cell. This growth in cell research is binding scientists in a race to establish their findings so they could be the first in the finish line. This pressure to be renowned has driven scientists to attempt to control the very natural process of life. Our world is plagued by disease, an increase in population and poverty with limited resources to satisfy the basic needs of mankind, so cloning is often regarded as the solution. Cloning for reproduction and therapy has improved drastically displaying a lot of potential uses but is vastly outweighed with larger risks.
It is essential that human cloning is outlawed. It is salacious to perform, research, and promote these experiments on human subjects; it is neglectful, and shrewd to make the presence of this objective technology legal, let alone obtainable. Not only is human cloning hazardous and illogical, but morally incorrect and greatly dishonorable. The most alarming thought referring to human cloning is that it has the power to alter the foundation, that we as a nation, are assembled upon. What occurs after we take things too far and lose control? What happens when we are no more satisfied in simply seeking education of the physical universe? We will cross the line between natural and synthetic. What will differentiate God from man? Do we have the authorization to change the evolution of life? Science has proven that we can reproduce humans both naturally and unnaturally, but that does not mean that mean we should stop questioning whether or not we should scientifically reproduce humans.
Have we as a society come too far too fast? This is a very applicable question recently asked by senator Roger Bennett, from Michigan, before the Senate on the topic of human cloning. It is speculated that we as a human race have the technology to make a clone of any given human (Jackson 2). If this is done, at what cost is it done? If cloning is allowed it will come at the cost of misguided effort, the creation of a process known as gene selection, and loss of individuality and diversity.
Have you ever imagined what life would be like if we could eliminate human problems? This is the question that arises when the issue of human cloning or human cloning of the organs is brought up. Cloning is the process where organisms, cells, or microorganisms are copied to produce an almost identical genotype. In other words, the cloning process involves taking a cell from the tissue of a live animal or human, inserting all or some of the genes from that cell into an embryo, which is then placed in the womb of a living creature. There, this embryo is hoped to reproduce into a child, and be born as a clone of the living being from which the cell is taken. Cloning is also called "somatic cell nuclear transfer," it is the transfer of a nucleus of a somatic cell to an egg that has had its nucleus removed. Cloning is beneficial to humanity, and it can help solve organ limitations, cure diseases, and take a giant step toward immortality (Anderson, 60).
Cloning Will Have a Negative Effect on Society. The definition of a clone is an organism that has the same genetic information as another organism or organism. Scientific and ethical studies of cloning, prove that. cloning will have a negative rather than a positive effect on society.
Even though cloning is a huge step in the future there are many reason, concerns, and questions that need to be answered before they continue the research. There are questions like what’s going to happen, or what are you going to do with clones, or why are clones needed. The main concern is what are they going to do with the clones. Many people think that a clone is exactly like what they are cloning. False it starts off a baby its just like making a baby but in a very hard way which is unnecessary. Yeah it may receive more traits from the cloned human but its not needed. They also can not say they will use them for scientific research or testing because it is a live, breathing, and a HUMAN being. Thats just like taking someone off the streets and doing test on them without consent. This is serious and it should be stopped!
Automatically when people talk about human cloning that tend to be negative. Most reaction is people shouldn't play god or interfere with nature. Of course there are negative consequences that could come from cloning. On the other hand there is so many positive things that could save more lives than it would cost. Yes Cloning involves risky techniques that could result in premature babies and some deaths. That is why public policy needs to be changed on cloning. The medical possibilities are endless if federal money is given to research and develop cloning techniques.
Ever since the successful birth of Dolly on July 5, 1996, the scientific community as well as the public have been engulfed in the idea of reproductive cloning, its benefits, and its potential threats. This well-publicized event was a giant steppingstone in understanding and using the techniques of gene cloning and reproductive cloning. By using a technique known as Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, scientists at the Roslin Institute removed the nucleus from an oocyte (unfertilized egg), and then fused this newly enucleated cell with a donor cell (with complete nucleus). This new embryo was then implanted into the womb of a surrogate mother ewe. In total, out of 277 fused cells, 29 successfully developed into embryos, while only one of these resulted in a successful live birth (a total success rate of 0.4%) (Wong, 202). Dolly was the first living mammal to be cloned by this fast and accurate process of somatic cell nuclear transfer, but was by no means the first animal to be cloned. The first...
If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.
Lauritzen, Paul. Cloning and the Future of Human Embryo Research. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001. Google Books. Web. 12 Feb. 2014. source 12 (google books)