Human Cloning Should Be Selectively Allowed Essay

Cloning is a scientific term referring to the scientific process of the method of replication of genes, and human cloning is also known as the Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT) (Pakhare, 2007). There are diverse views on the issue of acceptance of human cloning, which has given rise to an ongoing debate in the global community.

Those who oppose the cloning of humans are concerned over the issue of the health of women, considering the large number of eggs that would be required for the process of human cloning and affirm the interference this would have on the natural process of human growth and development. Proponents of cloning affirm that new ray of hope to childless couples, who can successfully have children, genetically and biologically related to them. The debate has attracted the attention of not only the scientific community but has garnered opponents and proponents from the educational, political, and religious communities as well. While the researcher aims to project both sides of the argument, the crucial aim would be to endorse the view that human cloning should be allowed selectively.

The researcher aims to propose that human cloning could have advantages as well as disadvantages; as such, it should be selectively permitted in cases where there is the unavailability of any other treatment or cure in sight.

The basic argument of the opponents of human cloning is the premise that SCNT is an inefficient technique for the cloning of ‘embryos’ (Norsigian, 2005). Women would be required in huge numbers to produce the eggs, which could result in the exploitation of their health as medication to increase egg production could prove hazardous to their health and may prove a risk to their lives.

Kass (1997) debates that cloning would result in the “commodification” of human beings where there would be a greater choice of traits and characteristics that would be preferred during the process of cloning. It is argued that human cloning is considered a threat to human ‘dignity as cloning could result in the fabrication of human beings as “commodities” rather than naturally produced beings (President’s Council on Bioethics, 2002). As such, the unethical nature of human cloning for reproductive purposes is therefore claimed to be an unethical process (President’s Council on Bioethics, 2002). The President’s Council (2002) also elucidates that the process of cloning could result in the reduction of the relationships of “humans to each other and their culture” and is a “dehumanizing” practice that could risk the entire society.

The issue of the risk to humans is the particular focus of the opponents of cloning who state that the health of women, in particular, will be at risk (National Academy of Sciences, 2002). According to the report, ‘Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning’ by the National Academy of Sciences (2002), Cohen (2001) has stated that there would be the need for innumerable eggs or embryos from women, the medications to acquire which, could pose serious threats to these women, more specifically the women from the lower strata of society. Cohen (2001) raises the concern that women will be given excessive drugs in order to facilitate the ovule production in their bodies, which could have serious implications on their health in the long as well as the short term.

There are also considerable risks to the health and well-being of children who are born due to human cloning. The American Medical Association (1999) states that reproduction by human cloning can cause “physical and psychological” harm to the resultant child and would give rise to problems of identity in the child, who would not be an original but a copy. Forwarding this argument, Feinberg (1992) states that children born due to human cloning would be denied of rights to an “open future.”

Richardson and Kurt A. (1998) have asserted that human cloning could have serious “psychological effects” since the children would be created from the gene of an already existing person and would be devoid of a distinct individual identity. This would obviously give rise to several legal problems concerning the rights and identity of the cloned individual who would be related to not only the biological parents but also additional humans, resulting in controversial relationships, for which there are no governing laws (Elster, 1999).

The multiplicity and diversity of the human race are considered to be a potential risk since cloning would give rise to identical humans with the same traits. This could further increase problems as humans are unable to distinguish the advantageous genes from the disadvantageous and harmful genes, making human cloning an extremely dangerous process (Kolehmainen, 1999). Kolehmainen (1999) also questions the seriousness of human cloning by stating that cloning would result in decreased tolerance power of humans towards each other who would prefer personalities of specified clones rather than original ones with distinct traits.

Not only would this restrict the variety of humans in the world, but it also results in biases and special preferences of some over others. This is turn, could potentially rip the human race and diversity off its variety with only clones of specific humans in the long run.

While social, moral, ethical, and scientific aspects of cloning are constantly debated, proponents of human cloning assert its importance and utility.

Human cloning is considered to be a boon to childless couples who can have biologically similar children with the help of cloning, and infertility would not manifest as a serious problem to couples who can have a child with similarities to one of the spouses (Orentlicher, 2000). Cloning is also believed to have tremendous potential in scientific research as it could expose the basic disease-causing genes of humans (Weissman, 2002).

Research and development in cloning are believed to be particularly beneficial to inherit and terminal diseases like cancer (Weissman, 2002). Proponents of human cloning also assert that stem cells have tremendous scope in the treatment of deteriorating diseases for which there is a lack of therapy and treatment available (Biotechnology Industry Organization). The researchers affirm that treatment and therapy by this method involve the use of stem cells from the body of the patient so that there is no potential harm to the body of any other human. The United Kingdom Department of Health (2000) thus advocates the selective use of cloning for therapeutic purposes in order to save the lives of “countless” humans.

Thus we see that while there are many disadvantages of human cloning, there could be some advantages as well. However, considering that the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages, the pros and cons of human cloning must be carefully evaluated before arriving at any firm conclusion. An option could be considered where human cloning could be selectively allowed for therapeutic purposes in the treatment of diseases for which there is no other available treatment.

References

American Medical Association, (2002). Cloning to Produce Children, Position Statement: E-2.147. Web.

Cohen, Cynthia, (2001). The Image of God, the Eggs of Women, and Therapeutic Cloning. 32 U. Tol. L. Rev.367.

Biotechnology Industry Organization. The Value of Therapeutic Cloning for Patients. Web.

Elster, Nanette (1999). Who is the Parent in Cloning? Hofstra L. Rev. 533.

Feinberg, Joel, (1992). The Child’s Right to an Open Future, in Freedom and Fulfillment. Philosophical Essays, 76-97.

Kass L., (1997). The Wisdom of Repugnance, NEW REPUBLIC: 17, 23.

Kolehmainen S., (1999). Human Cloning: Brave New Mistake, 27 HOFSTRA L. REV. 557, 563-64.

National Academy of Sciences, (2002). Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy, Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning.

Norsigian, Judy (2005). Risks to Women in Embryo Cloning. The Boston Globe.

Orentlicher, David (2000). Beyond Cloning: Expanding Reproductive Options for Same-Sex Couples. 66 Brooklyn L. Rev. 651.

Pakhare J., 2007, Human Cloning Benefits. Web.

President’s Council on Bioethics, (2002). Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry.

Richardson, Kurt A., (1998). Human Reproduction by Cloning in Theological Perspective. 32 Val. U.L. Rev. 739.

United Kingdom Department of Health, (2000). Stem Cell Research: Medical Progress with Responsibility: A Report from the Chief Medical Officer’s Expert Group Reviewing the Potential of Developments in Stem Cell Research and Cell Nuclear Replacement to Benefit Human Health. Web.

Weissman, I.L., (2002). Stem cells: Scientific, medical, and political issues. N. Engl. J. Med. 346, 1576-1579.