Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective

Name: Desiree Mae B Jacinto
Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective
Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of an existing, or

previously existing, human being or growing cloned tissue from that individual. There are
many unknowns when it comes to human cloning, or the production of a genetic copy of
a person. Keep in mind that human cloning can refer to human reproductive cloning,
where the embryo is transferred to a human womb and brought to term, whereas human
non-reproductive cloning is the creation of an embryo that is not allowed to develop
beyond a cluster of cells and is not implanted into a womb.
Defenders of “liberal eugenics” argue that parents should be free to enhance the
genetic traits of their children for the sake of improving their life prospects (Agar,et al.). In
the United States today, no federal law prohibits human cloning, either for purposes of
reproduction or for purposes of biomedical research. This is not because most people
favor reproductive cloning. To the contrary, public opinion and almost all elected officials
oppose it. But there is strong disagreement about whether to permit cloning for biomedical
research.
The social issues of cloning tend to focus on human clones in terms of both availability
of cloning technology and integration of clones into society. Reproductive cloning raises
the question of cost and who should have access. However, the biggest social argument
is that cloning negates a person's right to individuality and ignores the potential
psychological effects of such a parentless and de-individualized identity ( Andras, 2017)
According to Cahill ( 1999), It will be possible in time to develop all-male or all-female

genetic lineages; it will be possible for female lineages to proceed without any male
contribution at all; and it will be possible for one woman to create her own child, using her
own ovum and deoxyribonucleic acid ("DNA"). A second intrinsic difference between
other reproduction technologies and cloning is that the existence of genetic "doubles" (not
new in itself) is moved to a new location in the family or kinship structure: the clone's
genetic twin would be older. A third difference is that, in cloning, the DNA of an existing
individual is selected deliberately and in its entirety to be the source of a new individual,
without leaving anything to the chances inherent in ordinary conception. case in nature,
more pre-determination of the result, and hence more danger of an overt or tacit
expectation that the product of the process will look or function in a certain way.
Human cloning might become a practically feasible. It is no longer a thrilling wisdom

of science fiction. The technique is available. The question is whether it would be ethically
and socially acceptable including the potential concerns that might be associated with
cloning humans. Compared to a natural embryo, which has a genome resulting from the
mixture of six sources, a cloned genome would essentially have a single source. This
would certainly rob off the unique characteristics a natural child possesses. Its short- and
long-term effects, however, are unknown. Cloning research on human cells has the
potential to revolutionize the treatment of several medical problems in the future. The
Worldwide responses to human cloning have been mixed. It has been banned by several
countries and declared unacceptable by the Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Buddhist
faiths.
There are essentially two techniques. First, cells taken from an adult or an embryo
are grown in a flask under conditions that encourage them to divide and increase their
numbers, and to trick them into reverting to a non-specialized state with the potential to
form an entirely new individual. Second, the nucleus of a donor cell is transferred to an
egg from which the nucleus had been removed (nuclear transfer) (Taylor, 1998). The
result is an animal that is essentially an identical twin of the donor animal, although the
cloned offspring has a small genetic contribution – the mitochondrial genome – from the
animal providing the enucleated egg cell (Stephenson, 1997).
Furthermore, some concerns have been expressed that if a cell used for cloning
contains accumulated mutations acquired during years of cell division in the individual
donating the nucleus, the resulting clone may begin life with a predisposition to ageing
and age-linked diseases (e.g. cancer) ( Stephenson, 1997). Dolly, the sheep, has already
shown signs of premature ageing. During the life-time several mutations in the DNA
sequence occur along with epigenetic changes. They could be adaptive, triggered by
environmental changes. This could then be passed on to the offspring. Concerns have
been expressed about the transmission of the impact of manipulations associated with
cloning to future generations as well (Vines, 1998).
At a certain point in time, it was considered as a profound achievement in biology,

but this is no longer the case these days, as the number of its opponents are increasing,
making such technology quickly becoming a heated topic in debates from all over the
world. Dr Wilmut's comments come after a team of South Korean scientists recently
managed to derive stem cells successfully from a cloned human embryo. This
breakthrough could aid Dr Wilmut's plans to clone human cells in order to research motor
neurone disease.
Most controversially, he argues that cloning techniques could be combined with

genetic engineering to cure hereditary disease. For example, couples who did not want
to pass on a genetic disease could first produce an embryo through in vitro fertilisation.
The embryo would then be screened for the genetic abnormality. Stem cells from the
embryo would be taken, and a genetic engineering technique developed last year by
Thomas Zwake and James Thomson (Nature Biotechnology 2003;21:319-21) would be
used to correct the genetic abnormality. The corrected stem cell nucleus would then be
placed in an egg to form a new embryo that would be implanted into the mother's womb.
The resulting foetus would essentially be an identical twin of the original embryo but with
the abnormal gene corrected in every one of its cells. It would still be a clone—but of a
new individual produced by both its parents and not a clone of just one parent. In addition,
Dr Wilmut , acknowledged that far too little is known about the technology and the safety
implications. His current support for human cloning contrasts with his views three years
ago, when he saw "no ethical or moral reason" to clone humans. At the time he wrote, "If
human cloning is attempted those embryos that do not die early may live to become
abnormal children and adults; both are troubling outcomes"(Science 2001;291:2552).
Cloning research on human cells has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of
several medical problems in the future. There are, however, some concerns about cloning
a human. Even if it became feasible and safe (in relation to the health of the individual
produced) in the future, the long-term effects of bypassing fertilization, on evolution in
particular, would be interesting.
References
Andras, T. (2017).The Ethical, Social & Legal Issues of Cloning Animals & Humans.
Retrieved from https://classroom.synonym.com/the-ethical-social-legal-issues-of-
cloning-animals-humans-12086859.html
Cahill, L. S. (1999) No Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4841/c1b855535d79c64384d1f96cc456c8392a24.pdf
Stephenson J (1997) Threatened Bans on Human Cloning Research Could Hamper
Advances. JAMA 277(13): 1023-1026.
Taylor R (1998) Super humans. New Scientist 160(2157): 25-29
Vines G (1998) Hidden inheritance. New Scientist 160(2162): 26-30.

Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name: Desiree Mae B Jacinto

Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective

Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of an existing, or

According to Cahill ( 1999), It will be possible in time to develop all-male or all-female

Human cloning might become a practically feasible. It is no longer a thrilling wisdom

At a certain point in time, it was considered as a profound achievement in biology,

Most controversially, he argues that cloning techniques could be combined with

Cahill, L. S. (1999) No Human Cloning: A Social Ethics Perspective.

You might also like