References Abstract Dolly, the sheep, was the first mammal cloned from a somatic cell using a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer. The announcement of her birth in sparked a heated debate about the ethics of human reproductive cloning, resulting in most countries legally banning it.
It is a very controversial issue, with many opposing viewpoints. While some people may find it acceptable, others object for religious reasons. A big concern is the possibility of abuse of this new technology.
One of the biggest questions is "Where will we stop?
Manufacturing human bodies for spare parts? No one can be sure where it will stop. The Supreme Court says that everyone has the right to make their own reproductive decisions without government interference, but now it is proposing bans on human cloning.
These bans prevent the very research needed to make cloning safe Eibert. So, it seems that the government is not giving human cloning a chance. There are many benefits to cloning in the fields of fertility, organ transplants, and fighting disease.
Although there are many benefits, is it possible that the effects and moral considerations are too great for us to continue experimentation.
Scientists and ethicists alike have debated the implications of human and non-human cloning extensively since when scientists at the Roslin Institute in Scotland produced Dolly. No direct conclusions have been drawn, but compelling arguments state that cloning of both human and non-human species results in harmful physical and psychological effects on both groups.
The possible physical damage that could be done if human cloning became a reality is obvious when one looks at the sheer loss of life that occurred before the birth of Dolly.
Less than ten percent of the initial transfers survive to be healthy creatures. There were trial implants of nuclei. Nineteen of those were deemed healthy while the others were discarded. Five of those nineteen survived, but four of them died within ten days of birth from sever abnormalities.
Dolly was the only one to survive Adler If those nuclei were human, "the cellular body count would look like sheer carnage" Kluger Even Ian Wilmut, one of the scientists accredited with the cloning phenomenon at the Roslin Institute agrees, "The more you interfere with reproduction, the more danger there is of things going wrong" Expert Opinion.
The psychological effects of cloning are less obvious, but none the less, very plausible. In addition to physical harms, there are worries about the psychological harms on cloned human children. One of those harms is the loss of identity, or sense of individuality. Many argue that cloning creates serious issues of identity and individuality and forces humans to consider the definition of self.
Gilbert Meilaender commented on the importance of genetic uniqueness not only to the child but to the parent as well when he appeared before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission on March 13, He states that "children begin with a kind of genetic independence of [the parent]. They replicate neither their father nor their mother.
That is a reminder of the independence that [the parent] must eventually grant them To lose even in principle this sense of the child as a gift will not be good for the children" Expert Opinion.
Others look souly at the child, like philosopher Hans Jonas. He suggests that humans have an inherent "right to ignorance" or a quality of "separateness. Human cloning can be damaging to the clone and to the family of the cloned as well.Moral Arguments in Favour of Human Cloning Dr.
Josephus J. Brimah School of Education Njala University Sierra Leone One argument that has been offered in favour of human cloning is that the method could be used to replace a dead to make their case better and in support of making use of the technology, a similar case of germ cell.
I have three arguments against reproductive cloning (that is, the ‘Not IVF’ Argument, the “Unacceptable Medical Risks” Argument, the ‘Psychological Harms’ Argument), and one objection against a Clonaid website argument – I’ll refer to that objection as my “Anti-.
Cloning organs for organ transplants is one of the major practical reasons that cloning should be allowed. There is always a high demand for organs.
Some argue for the cloning of humans to create spare body parts. Others talk of just wanting to clone an organ to replace a defective organ.
Rejuvenation is also a key argument for advocates of cloning. For the medical field cloning human cells is a cure-all formula for mankind's pain and suffering.
Advanced Cell Technology This technology platform therefore has unusually broad applications in . It is undisputed that cloning is currently an untested technology. Safety is the only valid argument against human cloning. If any technology is unsafe, it should not be .
The primary biomedical benefits of cloning stem more from the use of this technology in the genetic modification of animals rather than from making identical copies, however.