Ethical Debate on Human Cloning - Essay Example

Ethical Debate on Human Cloning The issue of human cloning has developed into one of the biggest debates in the contemporary world and this has been mainly because of its being a field that is yet to be fully tested. Human cloning has raised an ethical debate not only within scientific, but also religious and societal circles with each side of the debate raising pertinent points. The ability of human beings to have clones of themselves created is considered the next step in the scientific study of the human body. This is the reason why there are individuals who fully support it while there are others who oppose it with the intention of ensuring that the process of human cloning is stopped before it even begins. This paper seeks to make an examination of some of the arguments that have been raised over the ethical debate on human cloning. One of the arguments that have been made in support of human cloning is that it is a means through which scientists can be able to learn how to renew damaged organs through growing and replacing them (Kfoury, 2007). This argument has been substantiated through the claim that cloning technology can be used as a means of ensuring that human beings are able to live longer because of their having their organs replaced. It has been argued that one of the purposes of scientific study is to ensure the betterment of the lives of individuals in society and because of this, it is essential that all scientific discoveries be put into use in helping those who need them. Therefore, those who support human cloning state that it is the best way through which individuals can ensure that they achieve near immortality through having new organs grown for them so that they can be used to replace those that have been worn out. It has been argued that to deny human cloning would be to reject the ethical responsibility that physicians and scientists have in making sure that human life is not only protected, but also preserved since it is precious. Through human cloning, it would be possible for human beings to live their lives to the fullest because they will always have a ready supply of organs that they need to replace those that have been worn out or damaged (Subba et al. 2013). Furthermore, through human cloning, it would be possible for those individuals whose conditions are terminal as a result of their not being able to get organ donors to have hope since they can have their organs replaced with those that have been developed from their own DNA. In this way, it would be possible for what are currently considered terminal illnesses to be cured and this would ensure that human beings are able to live better lives. Another argument that has been made in support of human cloning involves its allowing individuals to genetically create organs, which are identical to theirs. This is because it is the only way through which they can be guaranteed the replacement of damaged organs that are compatible and which their bodies will not reject (Pence, 1998). Under such circumstances, the problems that are faced by patients and health professionals concerning whether bodies will reject donated organs will be outdated because human cloning will allow for the creation of new organs from the DNA of the patient involved. For example, through the development of bone marrow for transplant through human cloning, it will be possible for such diseases of leukaemia to be effectively treated because those patients involved might not have to undergo the painful process of radiotherapy after their own bone marrow has been replaced (National Cancer Institute, 2010). In addition, the need for individuals to donate organs for either their relatives or other people will no longer be necessary because the cloned organs of patients themselves will replace organs. This will not only be beneficial for the health of patients but will also ensure that the vice of organ trafficking is brought to an end because human cloning will lead to the elimination of organ donors as a factor in organ replacement. Therefore, supporters of human cloning argue that since it is the duty of scientists to protect human life, it is essential for them to be allowed to go ahead with this practice because it is the only feasible way through which human life can be guaranteed. The legalisation of human cloning would make it possible for scientists to study fully all the most essential aspects of cell differentiation during the cloning process and this will help them in furthering their research concerning how best to deal with potential genetic effect before they actually happen (Cummings et al. 2005). In this way, scientists will be able to work towards helping in the eradication of diseases and other medical conditions within the human population. An argument has been made that it is only through human cloning that it is possible for individuals who are sterile to have children of their own who possess their genetic information (Singak, et al. 2007). This is one of the biggest arguments in support of human cloning because it is stated that this process allows for the bringing of joy to those couples, which would have otherwise remained childless. Human cloning allows couples who are not able to have children to have hoped that they will one day be able to become parents of children of their own rather than opting for adoption. One of the reasons why human beings have children is to ensure their own immortality through having children of their own who will transmit their genetic information into the future by also having children. Therefore, for some sterile couples, adopting children is not always a viable option and this is the where human cloning comes in. Using the genetic information from these couples, the human cloning procedure will enable them to have children of their own who will be able to transmit their DNA to others in future (McGee, 2011). These couples will not only end up experiencing the joys of parenthood, but will also have the privilege of raising their own children without having to undergo the rigorous process of adoption. Moreover, through the legalisation and advancement of human cloning, it will be possible for genetic defects and other problems in clone children to be detected early and corrected and this in such a way that these problems do not come to surface later in the lives of the children (Watson, 1971). This is a situation that is not only encouraging for these couples, but also for the future of children whose lives begin through the cloning process. Despite the advantages that have been named above, those on the opposing side of the ethical debate on human cloning state that this process ends up creating identical genes. The creation of identical genes means that there would be an interference with the process of gene diversity because individuals might opt to have clones of themselves as children rather than mixing their genes with others to create newer and stronger genes (Hopkins, 1998). It is argued that gene diversity is the reason why human beings are able to combat numerous diseases as well as ensure that other medical conditions such as mental instability are kept at bay. Therefore, cloning is likely to prevent gene diversity and this creates a situation where genetic problems cannot be easily combated because the clones are more likely than not to inherit medical conditions from their parents and this would prevent them from enjoying their lives to the fullest as a result. Moreover, the lack of or reduction of diversity in genes also reduces the ability of the clones to adapt to their environment. This creates numerous problems such as their ending up feeling out of place as a result of not being able to participate in some abilities or because they have serious medical conditions that prevent them from being active. Furthermore, it has been stated that cloning is detrimental because because of a lack of gene diversity, it leads to the inhibition of the beauty that comes with diversity, as opposed to the coming to life of human beings through natural means where diversity is guaranteed. Those opposed to human cloning state that the beauty of the human race comes from its diversity and if human cloning inhibits this process, it might result in the loss of what makes human beings unique. It has also been argued that human cloning will create a situation where there develop human beings who have undesirable characteristics and these characteristics might end up in the general population (Appel, 2009). Under such circumstances, these undesirable characteristics might involve a prevalence of genetic diseases, which would have been kept under control naturally through the process of natural selection. However, through cloning, the natural process will not be given a chance to work and this will be to such an extent that those undesirable characteristics that would have been got rid of end up becoming prominent in the population. These genetic diseases, once the clones reproduce, will end up being transmitted to their children and in turn to the general population, creating a problem where the intention was to develop solutions. Therefore, the benefits of human cloning will end up being only short-term because as time goes by, it will create a scenario within the human population where people come to suffer from genetic conditions, which could have been prevented through natural selection and genetic diversity. A justification for this argument has been that human beings have largely adapted to their environment through natural selection and this has allowed only the best and most diversified genes to survive within the population. However, human cloning is likely to change all that because it will allow for the survival of undesirable genes, which might end up putting a significant portion of, if not the entire population in danger. Such a scenario will likely happen because of replicating undesirable genes in clones, creating a situation where despite having cloned children, sterile couples might end up having problems with the cost of taking care of these children from a very young age because of their genetic problems. It has been argued that those who support human cloning do not put into consideration the technical and economic barriers involved in the process. This is mainly because despite the agitation for this process to be legalised, the technology needed to ensure a successful cloning process for human beings has not been achieved or perfected and if such an attempt were to be made, it is most likely that the clones produced will end up being defective (General Assembly, 2005). Because clones themselves will essentially be human beings, this might be considered a violation of their rights because the defects with which they will be born will be as result of a faulty procedure. Furthermore, the cloning process is extremely expensive and if legalised would be beyond the reach of most of the population. Only a few individuals would be able to take advantage of this technology and this would result in an environment where only the most privileged individuals in society have access to advanced cloning and medical technology, further increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. It has been proven that the cloning process has a low fertility rate with the clone testing in animals resulting in more miscarriages than live births and for the most part, even these live births tend to be quite weak compared to their parents. Therefore, the entire process would end up being extremely expensive especially when one considers the many trials before the cloning is successful. Another argument that has been raised against human cloning is based on religion with both Christians and Muslims declaring that it is against their religious tenets. This argument is made because of the belief that cloning human beings would be the same as creating them and this would be a usurpation of the power that belongs only to God (Bainbridge, 2013). Religious leaders have stated that the power to create belongs only to God and if human beings were to attempt doing so through cloning, it would create a situation where the clones created would not have the perfection that God has placed on other human beings. The cloning process involves the replication of genes and to do so would mean the end of the world, as we know it since it would end up descending into chaos because of the creation of beings that would likely be unstable. In conclusion, the discussion above has sought to make an examination of some of the arguments that have been raised over the ethical debate on human cloning. One of the arguments that have been raised in support of human cloning is that it is a means through which scientists can be able to learn how to renew damaged organs through growing and replacing them. Furthermore, it is a process that allows individuals to genetically create organs which are completely identical to theirs. Moreover, it has been argued that it is only through human cloning that it is possible for individuals who are sterile to have children of their own. However, among the arguments against human cloning that has been discussed is that the process ends up creating identical genes, which is undesirable in society. In addition, human cloning might lead to a situation where there develop human beings who have undesirable genetic characteristics that might interfere with their adaptation to their environment. It has also been argued that those who support human cloning do not put into consideration the technical and economic barriers involved in the process since it is extremely expensive. Finally, it has been argued that human cloning is is against the religious tenets of Christians and Muslims as well as other religions since it is believed that it might lead to the usurpation of the power of God. References Appel, J.M., 2009. “Should We Really Fear Reproductive Human Cloning?” Huffington Post. [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-m-appel/should-we-really-fear-rep_b_183308.html [accessed 31 Jan. 2015] Bainbridge, W.S. 2013, “Religious Opposition to Cloning.” Journal of Evolution and Technology, vol. 13. Cummings, B.J., Uchida, N., Tamaki, S.J., et al., 2005, "Human neural stem cells differentiate and promote locomotor recovery in spinal cord-injured mice". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, vol. 102, no. 39, pp. 14069–74. General Assembly. 2005. United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning. [Online] Available at: http://www.jura.uni-augsburg.de/de/forschung/institute/medizinrecht/medienverzeichnis/pdf_datein_fuer_downloads/uno_klonkonvention.pdf [accessed 31 Jan. 2015]. Hopkins, P.D. 1998, “Bad Copies: How Popular Media Represent Cloning as an Ethical Problem.” The Hastings Center Report, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 6 – 13. Kfoury, C. 2007, “Therapeutic cloning: promises and issues.” Mcgill Journal of Medicine, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 112–120. McGee, G. 2011, "Primer on Ethics and Human Cloning". American Institute of Biological Sciences. http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/mcgee.html National Cancer Institute . 2010. Bone Marrow Transplantation and Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation. [Online] Available at: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Therapy/bone-marrow-transplant [accessed 31 Jan. 2015]. Pence, G.E. 1998. Who’s Afraid of Human Cloning? Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Singak, I. et al. 2007, “The Leading Edge of Stem Cell Therapeutics.” Annual Review of Medicine, vol. 58, pp. 313-328. Subba, R.M. et al. 2013, “Thinking outside the liver: induced pluripotent stem cells for hepatic applications.” World J Gastroenterol, vol. 19, no. 22, pp. 3385-96. Watson, J.D., 1971. “Moving Toward the Clonal Man.” The Atlantic. [Online] Available at:http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1971/05/moving-toward-the-clonal-man/305435/ [accessed 31 Jan. 2015]. Read More