Introduction
The word clone originated from a Greek term κλών, meaning “twig, branch”, which pertains to the method of creating or developing a new plant from a twig or branch. It refers to a new but identical collection of cells acquired from an original cell by the process of fission, wherein a cell divides itself forming two cells, or by the process of mitosis, wherein the nucleus of a cell undergoes division and chromosomes separate, after which is the formation of twin nuclei.
This process makes the genotype of an individual or organism to remain in existence. This process of duplicating an original copy of a DNA is called cloning. A clone will have the same copy of genes from the original genotype of the copied individual unless there are aberrations during the process of copying. The theory of in vitro or artificial fertilization for cloning involves changing an ovum’s nucleus by the cell’s nucleus from the individual that will be copied or cloned. The changed ovum then develops to an embryo. This process called reproductive cloning is done by implanting the embryo to a womb of a mother surrogate letting the embryo to fully develop and giving birth to a child.
Therapeutic cloning is done to stop further maturity of the embryo by freezing it and later used in the restoration of an injured tissue without the danger of rejection due to incompatibility. There are three classifications of cloning according to its usage. Reproductive cloning refers to multiplication of cloned embryos for the purpose of implanting them and letting them to grow and mature so that they foster into living individual. Next is the use of cloning for research studies. The cloned embryos will be gathered and later utilized for scientific researches. Lastly, therapeutic cloning is used in medical practice.
The role of cloning on assisted reproduction
Assisted reproduction is helpful in the cloning technology in the medical field. The most likely use is to benefit clients, wherein a significant number of birth and pregnancy had occurred from the extensive publicity of assisted reproduction using technologies. The utilization of in-vitro process of fertilization, donation of sperm or eggs and/or mother surrogates showed to be successful cure for infertility. Assisted reproduction can also be choice to persons or partners who do not want to have children by conventional ways. Through cloning, the partners or individuals may be permitted to have children with less genetic participation from a new party.
In taking into consideration for cloning as a new means to reproductive health, the medical field should assess if the ethical or moral involvement by these assisted reproductive breakthrough in technologies will be aggravated in cloning to the extent where they exceed the probable advantages to humans, families, and their children.
One type of cloning is termed as reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer and one public point of view regarding this type of cloning as unethical. This point of view values the natural way of conception or those forms of assistive reproduction such as insemination of donor, stimulation of ovulation, or test-tube baby but not cloning or human somatic cell nuclear transfer. This group sees the immorality that concerns the ideals and customs of a human.
With cloning, a child would be produced in an asexual manner and would be specified an identified genome. Because of this the making of a human is more precisely termed as duplication rather than of reproduction. In accordance with this line of thought, cloning would depreciate the uniqueness of each human individual’s genetic make-up. Furthermore, it would take away the curiosity of a child on the mystery related to where he or she originated (Annas GJ 1998). In addition, it would effect to immoral or unethical researches and studies on the child that may present danger to his or her wellbeing all through his or her existence, which may not entirely be acknowledged (Kass LR 1997).
On the other hand, the ethical point of view for reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer can be based on the following premises. This group based their argument on the perspective that reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer varies only with assistive reproduction in some degrees wherein the use of assisted reproductive technology has gained acceptance to a significant number of groups. Cloning, specifically somatic cell nuclear transfer can be done given that the process is guaranteed safety.
This method is important to the medical field such as those couples who are infertile who cannot be cured in any other way. In this case, if the scenario would be the male partner couldn’t produce spermatozoa, reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer with his own somatic cell would allow him to have a genetic bind with the offspring. This is also true if the female partner is infertile. She would have a biological bond to the child if she gives the recipient egg cells or gestates the offspring. If she cannot give child with her egg cell, the transfer of DNA of the nucleus from her somatic cell to an enucleated donor egg cell would let her to have a genetic bond to the offspring.
This point of view would make an infertile couple to have a contribution biologically for the development of an offspring. Also, it is important to couples that may have a possibility to transfer a severe genetic illness on to their offspring. Somatic cell transfer could be employed to use the unaffected partner’s somatic if the other partner carries an autosomal-dominant disease. If both partners are carriers of an autosomal-recessive illness character, only one of the partner’s somatic cell could be used to conceive.
Importance of cloning in tissue donation
Cloning may be possibly used to generate an individual with tissues that are compatible immunologically to another individual. One scene, which was studied regarding human cloning, is the probability of developing donor individuals. In this idea, donor individuals, who are human beings still in their beginning phases of maturity and development, are produced for the one and only function of getting their organs (Kass LR 1998).
Lawful and moral authority already prevent making use of cloned offspring as dispensable donor individuals. The ethics in medicine and health care is based in the ground of nonmaleficence, which is the prevention of injury or harm. Any act of a doctor involving purposeful harm of a child or offspring to get his or her organs would go against this principle in addition to committing murder which is considered as such.
The likelihood of utilizing the process of human cloning to develop an individual only for the function of donating an organ would still be questionable even if the clone would not be eradicated. This is simply due to the ethical principle of preventing the utilization of humans as a way to instead of as an end.
Nonetheless, even without the aid of human cloning, the observation of giving birth to another child so as to produce a compatible organ or tissue for an older sister or brother already exists. An example would be parents who were not able to get a compatible donor for a transplant in bone marrow of their child made a decision to bear another child hoping that he or she might have the same bone marrow type (Robertson JA 1994). However, a cloned individual would be born with guarantee of matched tissue or organ to his or her sibling, and maybe with the anticipation of tissue donation (ABC News Show 1997).
Ethics and the process of Cloning
Physical damages resulting from cloning
The Human Embryo Research Panel of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1994 conducted a research and recommended that embryos should only be moved to a woman if there is sensible self-assurance that the child born will not be injured. Currently, the guarantee that this act with human cloning would be implemented is not yet certain. The so-called somatic cell nuclear transfer was not yet proven on how it will contribute on its long-term effects.
The possibility of having illnesses related with cloning may pose an enormous concern. The danger of developing organisms or individuals with developmental abnormality is crucial and may inhibit the process of human cloning. The development of clones that are disabled would make a way for a responsibility to have higher degree of awareness, the probable medical treatment, and the unanticipated outcome that may occur from the process of human cloning. During the year 1950 and 1960 the public look at genetics studies as advantageous to humankind. Cloning presented the opportunity of actual scientific developments that could better and rescue lives.
However, presently, the likeness of human cloning not only for replacement of tissue but also for but also for donor babies has been bothersome for most. The organizations concerning activities in cloning such as the National Bioethics Commission and Congress in the USA and the Human Embryology and Fertilization Authority, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, the Human Genetics Advisory Commission and the Council of Europe in the UK have all suggested that human cloning should be prohibited. Therapeutic cloning, however, which is beneficial for tissue engineering has had less disagreement from the public.
In 2004, permit was given to develop a replica of human embryo in the belief of discovering a treatment for extreme illnesses. Also, consideration on the utilization of cloning as one way of rescuing species of animals that is in danger of extinction.
Psychosocial damage resulting from cloning
In an individual that is cloned who has identified genetic predisposition and environment, the cloned child’s genetic predispositions and environment will also be identified to a known degree. Currently, a child’s genetic predispositions can be anticipated to certain level if his or her parent’s genetic predispositions have also been identified. This may appear controversial since knowing a cloned child’s genetic predispositions promotes worry about the independence and best welfare for the child. There will be a danger of forestalling the cloned child’s later decisions in life, forgoing information of his genetic type, and the harm of ending his or her right to privacy.
Most probably, an individual would be involved in cloning himself or herself for another human being since that individual has pleasing personality that would be mirrored in the clone. For instance, an individual who cloned and copied a sports star would assume and hope that the child will also grow to sports star. If this child will not be able to perform successfully to these pressures or is incapable to utilize his given genetic gift, he or she could be considered a failure. As a result, the process of cloning might set a limited boundary the cloned child’s view of himself or herself and greater outside demand.
The effect of human cloning on family relationship and society
The impact of cloning on family poses concern about a person’s confidentiality and individuality. Questions that were asked would be the father-daughter connection if the child and wife were the same. This instance would demonstrate how the relationship among family members might vary with human cloning.
Furthermore, some difficulties are technical and lawful in nature. For example, cousins at birth could be considered genetic siblings, which may effect to a need to re-examine rules determining marital or conjugal qualification. To add, it would be hard to sort out parental human rights in the situation using the assisted reproduction technology. An example of this would be a child who was produced by utilizing assisted reproduction to have no legal parents in spite of having eight persons from which to pick (Kass LR 1998).
The dilemma continues in some groups wherein they believe that an embryo need not be given special attention because it is only considered a group of cells having DNA which is just like the cells that we get rid of. It has no organs or extremities. Furthermore they argue that human only develops later in gestation and considered human only if the fetus already looked like a human being. While other groups that would be against this belief would otherwise see embryo as a possible human that would be seen later as it matures and develops.
The result on the gene pool due to human cloning
Even though this is not considered to be the most forthcoming danger, alteration of the gene pool may be an effect of human cloning. However, this alteration would require an extensive activity of human cloning and these products would need to produce offspring. If this happens, the effect would be the decline in human genetic distinctiveness or diversity. As time goes by, this genetic diversity was the one responsible for having human beings that have developed immunity against disease leading to populace with a broad diversity of talents, which in turn have helped humans to live and thrive. Mostly, those human beings who are considered to acquire pleasing and attractive traits or do not have unwanted traits would be cloned.
To add, those groups who will be able to pay and can afford the assisted reproductive technologies will have access to these methods. This would probably be one entry point to alter the gene pool in the course of these more privileged social numbers of individuals (Kitcher P 1996). To add, because the somatic cell from where the clones came from, likely will have obtained gene anomalies, series of cloning would blend the buildup of aberrations that arise in somatic cells. Even if these anomalies may not be obvious at the term of cloning, problems on genes could become aggravated in next succession of generations.
Religious aspect and cloning
In February 2006, The World Council of Churches, consisting almost of 400 church groups globally, is against human cloning and cloning of embryos. Groups of some Christian churches have objected the process of human cloning including the multiplication of an individual’s embryo. This rooted from their belief that the life of a human being starts from the time a human egg is fertilized. The United Church of Christ, however, does not affirm this belief. Nevertheless they still are against embryonic cell cloning. Libertarians imply on the subject cloning that it is like abortion rights. That is, it is up to a human’s legal rights to perform such procedure.
But then, as studies and procedures in cloning progress, the doubts of safety and accuracy will also lessen. Some points of view in opposition to the process of cloning originated from different religious sectors wherein they believe that cloning itself opposes God’s creation of the natural organization of human life. Moreover, the result from cloning are usually portrayed as extra or reserve parts that provide organs to those humans needing organ replacement and not as individuals.
A House Bill No. 2736 also known as HB 2736, forbid the procedure of human cloning in the Kansas state. Anyone who will break this act will be charged corresponding civil and criminal punishments. There is no current Kansas law concerning human cloning. The intention of HB 2736 seems to make an effort to focus on the moral as well as ethical concerns going with human cloning. The argument basically focuses on issues if experimenters acting God through use of genetic engineering to human beings or introducing cloning as a treatment and avoidance of several illnesses. The main open intention of HB 2736 can be mainly defined as stopping man from exploiting the supposed natural organization of a human being (Staples et al. 1998).
Statistics on issues of cloning
A survey result in Massachusetts
The Hart Research involved 606 Massachusetts residents on cloning, which was done on March 7-9, 2005. The survey revealed the following statistics: there is a significant support for the state legislation to promote stem cell research showing 81-15%, with the statistics varied to 76-20% when subjects were given opinions on pros and cons about the topic. Those 81% of the legislation supporters consists of 82% Catholics, 85% independents, 66% Republicans, and an even 81% of rural communities and urban communities.
Embryonic stem cell studies approval is at 70-21%, which is on an independent basis, with 62% Catholics, 69% independents, 53% Republicans, and 73% rural communities, which is against a 68% in urban communities. Somatic cell nuclear transfer that plays a role for therapeutic cloning reveals a 62-30%, on an independent basis. When supplementary data is given, statistics increase to 80-13%. With supplemental information, there is strong approval from 76% Roman Catholics, 68% Republicans, 69% independents, and 78% rural communities, against 80% of urban communities. People of Massachusetts, however, do not accept the issue of human cloning, independently with 84-10% (Hart PD 2005).
US population survey on biotechnology
These comparative results of the survey have been gathered by the VCU Life Sciences, which reflect the societal opinion about biotechnology regarding cloning (VCU 2008).
Conclusion
Advantages on cloning
Cloning will help mainly in the advancement and progress of the quality in science and human life. It may give a better knowledge of why miscarriages happen. It may also lead to increased knowledge in genetics. Furthermore, it can be an option and be used by parents or couples who are at great danger of giving and passing on defected genes to their offspring that may affect his or her quality of life in the future. Also, an injury or damage to one’s nervous system could be cured through the use of cloning. Moreover, cloning will allow a woman to have a set of identical twins during pregnancy.
Disadvantages on cloning
Cloning decreases the variations in genetic traits which are needed to have different species of organisms and useful for survival. Currently, one inconvenience of this procedure would be because the method is considered a costly process. Moreover, while cloning should be used for the betterment, it may give a danger on the transfer of an illness. Another reason is that, all these studies regarding human cloning may be in the end tested on human beings. And this process may eventually be utilized to generate an ideal human.
References
ABC News Show 1997, ABC 20/20 (E.S.T.) 1997. “Born to Give.” Transcript # 97110604-j11.
Annas, GJ 1998, Why we should ban human cloning. N Engl J Med.; 339:122–5.
Chicago Tribune 1998. “Ethical questions raised by gene transfer for egg cell fertilization.” p. 16.
Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association. “Opinion 2.138: Genetic.
Hart, PD 2005, Research Associates, Inc. Survey: Four out of five Massachusetts residents support state stem cell research bill opposed in part by Romney. Web.
Kass, LR 1997, The wisdom of repugnance. New Republic;17–26.
Kass, LR 1998, “The Wisdom of Repugnance.” In: The Ethics of Human Cloning Kass, Leon R. and Wilson, James Q. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
National Institutes of Health 1994, Final Report of the Human Embryo Research Panel.
Robertson, JA 1994, “The Question of Human Cloning.” Hastings Center Report, 24(2): p. 6-14.
Staples, SM 1998, The Cloning Debate, washingtonpost.com: Cloning Special Report. Web.
Testing of Children 1998, ” Code of Medical Ethics: Current opinions and annotations. Chicago, IL.
The Associated Press 2002, Kansas Human Life Bills Advance, Topeka Capitol Journal.
Weiss, R & Connolly, C 2002, Experts Urge Ban On Cloned Babies, Washington Post, at A01.
VCU Life Sciences Survey 2008, VCU Survey finds support for genetic research, testing and government spending on scientific research. Web.
West, M 2001, Chief Executive, Advanced Cell Technology. & Weiss, R, First Human Embryos Are Cloned in U.S., Washington Post, at A01.