Ethical Aspects of Human Cloning

The Birth of Dolly (a cloned sheep) opened the door for widespread speculation regarding human cloning. Public opinion was faced with a vision of the future when human cloning is not science fiction but a fact of life. Should we be embracing this scenario with its possible benefits as a remedy to old ills? Or maybe we should be wary of the future when producing children genetically identical to the cells of a donor and creating embryos for research or therapeutic purposes is just one of the industries regulated only by economic factors?

Fact that many people react with mistrust and anxiety when confronted with such a scenario may indicate the presence of moral intuition that can't be easily ignored. Considering the issue from scientific point of view, resistance to cloning is ill - founded and pathological. Concerns about potential damages to society and individuals are dismissed by scientists prioritizing freedom of research and scientific progress. They insist on a division between science and ethics as a way of assuring the continuity of this progress.

Both types of cloning (therapeutic and reproductive) can involve creating of human embryos that are later destroyed. There are three methods of creating embryos and the differences between them are important from an ethical point of view.

The technique involved in processing stem cells taken from embryos results in production of tissues and organs genetically identical to the donor of the cells. Whereas transfer of a nucleus and embryo splitting leads to creation of genetically identical person.

Public debate on human cloning must necessarily address the issue of the status of an embryo. Some argue that since embryos contain everything needed for its development into a human, it deserves a full moral status and any procedure leading to destruction of an embryo should have the same ethical significance as a murder. Creating embryos for research is morally wrong because it expresses lack of respect for human life.

According to opponents, because an embryo lacks conscious awareness it can be only of human origin, not a human yet and although respect is due, using it for research is fully justified.

Reaching a compromise on the issue seems very unlikely considering cultural (religious) and historical circumstances. In spite of that, certain solutions are being discussed. One of them postulates to acknowledge human life as a 'religion of humanity', giving it a superior value in a moral and social order. Since cloning doesn't recognize the unique value of human life, it possesses a threat to individuals and society as a whole.

There are also opinions that our responsibility toward future generations should be sufficient reason to abandon human cloning. We are entrusted with the protection of the human gene pool, and we are expected to pass it unaltered to future generations as human heritage. Genetic uniqueness (leaving aside identical twins) supports an idea of the superiority of human life and ensures that a social order is maintained.

In an attempt to find a common ground on the issue, Unesco acknowledges all the difficulties and concerns raised and offers alternative approach to the problem. The right of the individual to autonomy and self - determination should be (according to the organization) modified by the common good of society. However, whilst cloning can be beneficial in addressing infertility problems or giving hope to those who suffer from incurable diseases, it does more harm than good to society undermining the status of human life and its superior position in the social structure.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Adam_Gallamore
http://EzineArticles.com/?Ethical-Aspects-of-Human-Cloning&id=5047249