FutureofWorking.com

20 Advantages and Disadvantages of Cloning Humans

Numerous science fiction movies have examined the idea of cloning humans. Some of them take an approach that suggests it’s a way to save the world, like in The Fifth Element, when Leeloo is a clone of what must be combined with four other elements to save the world. In The Island, two clones escape from a research facility after learning that their fate is to be surrogates and organ suppliers.

Even a campy comedy like Twins shows us that there are dangers to consider when cloning humans. You might be able to take cells from a guy like Arnold Schwarzenegger, but scientists might end up with a result closer to Danny DeVito.

The advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans often look at the concept from a spiritual or ethical standpoint. We must also examine the scientific risks that occur when undertaking this procedure. It is also notable to point out that several countries have formally banned this practice, and many more have passed laws that prohibit human reproductive cloning.

List of the Advantages of Cloning Humans

1. Cloning humans could help us find new ways to recover from trauma. Interventional orthopedics is a non-surgical possibility that uses a patient’s cells to help fix an injury that occurs during a traumatic event. Strains or sprains to ligaments typically heal in 6 weeks or less with rest. When a tear happens then the primary treatment option is to apply a tissue graft – especially with ACL injuries. Doctors place the new ligament at a steeper angle to support the healing process.

The current method increases a patient’s risk of cartilage damage and osteoarthritis later in life. Through the practices of human cloning, the cells could begin to repair themselves. This science imagines an opportunity for a speedier recovery because doctors can duplicate the exact cells that the body requires.

2. It could help couples resolve problems with fertility. Couples who are unable to conceive naturally could create children through human cloning to have an authentic genetic relative. Infertility could become a problem of the past because physicians could take the hereditary portrait of each parent, introduce it into an embryo outside of the body, and conceivably grow the fetus in a laboratory setting.

This method could help countries like Japan who are struggling with low birth rates. The Japanese culture could see a reduction of up to 40 million people by the year 2060 without the introduction of cloning measures.

3. Cloning humans could lead to new advances in medical science. The human cloning process could help to generate new advances in medical science. The possibility of sharing genetic material could help to prevent or cure diseases that may harm that person’s life by creating a duplicated individual. It could also create a new line of research that is equal to what we see now with embryonic stem cell therapies.

4. Cloning humans would allow us to explore the potential benefits of modifying genes. Nazi Germany took the approach of euthanasia and forced sterilization as a way to improve their genetic profile. Scientists could look at gene modification without causing harm to others because of the science of cloning.

Human cloning requires a precise form of genetic engineering. Using our current technologies, we would implement enzymes from bacteria to locate genes within our DNA to create the necessary modifications for duplication. This technology has been in place since 2015, which means it is not something from which we are entirely unfamiliar.

5. Cloning humans could reduce the impact of diseases in ways that vaccinations cannot. Human cloning could help us to begin curing genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis or thalassemia. Genetic modification could also help us deal with complicated maladies such as heart disease or schizophrenia. This scientific process could help us to discover new ways to combat the natural aging process, including possible opportunities to stop it.

Babies would no longer need to go through a genetic lottery before birth to know what their human potentiality would be during their lifetime. Human cloning could even begin to reduce the overall cost of disease treatments around the world.

6. Cloning humans could help us correct today’s conditions for tomorrow’s generation. Human cloning processes would help the medical community discover and correct the reasons for many of today’s physical and mental conditions. About 1 in 10 children in the United States and Europe currently take a medication like Adderall to help with attention-deficit disorders. Their poor self-control decisions can lead to educational deficits that can impact them throughout their lives. It creates a natural inequality that can set their children back because they are not in the same socioeconomic groups as “normal” people.

7. Cloning humans would help us to eliminate defective chromosomes and genetic profiles. If a person has an extra chromosome or one is missing, then that condition is called “aneuploidy.” There is an increased risk of a genetic disorder when women have children later in life. Several different conditions can result from this outcome, such as Patau and Edwards syndrome, where there is an extra chromosome on the 13 or 18. Most children born with Trisomy 13 or 18 die within the first year of life, and severe congenital disabilities may result in a stillbirth.

Human cloning would provide us with technologies that could prevent these outcomes from occurring. It could also help when something like Turner syndrome appears, which happens when a damaged or missing X chromosome affects girls.

8. Cloning humans would allow us to create stem cells ethically. Many of today’s stem cell lines were created over 20 years ago for research purposes. Although there is no degradation in the quality of the work, more scientists could look for breakthroughs if there were more strands available. Human cloning would allow us to replicate the existing cells into multiple lines without the need to impact the potentiality of life. Cloning is a way to create genetically identical cells that could help to create better health outcomes for people, especially if they suffer from a rare genetic disease.

9. Cloning humans could make people more resilient to disease. Human cloning processes could help to replicate a natural resistance to illnesses, ailments, and conditions when discovered in the general population. There have been a select group of people who have a natural resistance to specific diseases for as long as diseases have impacted humanity. When the CCR5 gene mutates, it creates a natural resistance to HIV.

Researchers have found a group of women in West Africa had a natural immunity to the Ebola virus despite repetitive exposures to it. Cloning humans allows us to take advantage of these natural immunities to create a new level of resiliency against the diseases that affect us each year.

10. Cloning humans could help us to be ready for global warming. Evolutionary processes allow us to begin adapting to the changing circumstances on our planet, including global warming issues. Future generations could benefit from human cloning because it would speed up the developmental cycles as natural selection attempts to give humanity more strength. We could take the genetic profile from the most resilient people, apply it to new births, and build a civilization that is ready for the potential challenges ahead.

11. Cloning humans would allow our best and brightest to continue impacting the world. Imagine a world where the smartest, most influential people in every category of research could continue working because of human cloning. What would we know if Albert Einstein were still alive today? How would our civilization change if Leonardo da Vinci could work with modern tools instead of what was available in his time?

Art, science, literature, manufacturing, and every other industry could see massive gains in innovation if human cloning were allowed. It wouldn’t allow for immortality, but this process could help us to guarantee more outcomes instead of relying on chance.

12. Cloning humans could lead us toward organ development or regeneration. About 10,000 people on any given day in the United States are waiting on a list to receive a critical organ. Many of them will stay in that position for several months. The waiting time can even be years in some situations. Through the processes of human cloning, we could learn how to duplicate organ tissues from existing resources to help provide more positive outcomes in this area. Instead of waiting for a random donation, doctors could proceed with cells taken from each patient.

List of the Disadvantages of Cloning Humans

1. Cloning humans might always be an imperfect science. When we look at the success rate of animal cloning, a successful embryo gets created about 1% of the time in the best of circumstances. Scientists have tried to bring back species from extinction using harvested cells without much success, with most offspring dying minutes after they are born – if they even reach that stage in the first place. Dolly the Sheep might be a success story, but this disadvantage is the reason why several governments around the world have made it illegal to try this approach with human cells.

2. Cloning humans would be a technology initially priced only for the wealthy. Human cloning would create more classism in our societies instead of equality, especially in the early days of this technology’s release. Our socio-economic divides would still be in place because those with money could afford more characteristics, add-ons, or processes for their clones than those who are fighting to put groceries on their table. Even if everyone could afford to make clones one day to support their families, the people who could adopt this tech early would still have significant advantages over those who did not.

3. Cloning humans might create a rapidly aging population. The information that cells obtain as they age gets designated within their material structures. When a child begins to grow, they create genetic data that their genome keeps. We know that cloning is possible, but what we do not understand yet is how the information contained in our DNA would change through this process.

If age imprinting happens on a genetic level, then providing embryos with mature cells could create concerns with unanticipated aging. This process could lead to new genetic syndromes and an increase in the risk of premature death.

4. Cloning humans could alter our perceptions of individuality. Cloning humans would create at least two individuals with the same genetic profile. Each person would have their brains and bodies so that they would be like any other person with a genome profile. Each person would develop uniquely based on their circumstances, but there would also be concerns with individuality due to the physical similarities involved.

The people who do not embrace the idea of cloning humans could start to treat those who do differently. This outcome would end up creating a world that’s potentially similar to what the movie Gattaca portrayed.

5. Cloning humans would reduce the diversity of our genetic makeup. When there are only a handful of unique genetic specimens remaining in a species, then this creates a “bottleneck” where their survival is greatly endangered. We need diversity within our genome to reduce the risk of disorders forming due to our close relationships with one another. The health needs of people in the Ashkenazi Jewish population is evidence of this potential disadvantage.

Several conditions are more likely to occur when humans stay within the same genetic profile. Spinal muscular atrophy, Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis, and other long-term conditions can arise at a risk rate of 10% when a genetic bottleneck occurs in humans.

6. Cloning humans would lead to the exploitation of women. The only way that we can begin to clone humans is to have enough viable embryos available for scientists to use. IVF centers have over 400,000 of them in storage in the United States, but the need would be much higher than this. Scientists would need to produce enough cloned fetuses to create a sufficient quantity of viable stem cell lines. Women would receive medication injections that would help them to ovulate rapidly. Then there would be a requirement to undergo an invasive procedure to extract eggs to begin the embryo-making process.

Even under today’s best practices circumstances, up to 5% of women experience hyperstimulation when they begin IVF treatments. It is a side effect that leads to ongoing abdominal pain, reproductive health concerns, and infertility in rare cases.

7. Cloning humans would turn people into potential commodities. Even individuals who support the advancement of stem cell and embryonic research are against the idea of creating embryos specifically for research purposes. The danger we have when looking at the science of cloning humans is that society might try to produce medical outcomes for others.

Activated cells are still part of the human experience. Therapeutic human cloning might contribute to medical information that we can use in the future, but the costs may be too high to notice any benefits happening from this approach.

8. Cloning humans would change how we approach grief and unexpected loss. We live in a world where about 15,000 children under the age of 5 die every day. This figure has dropped dramatically since the 1990s when it topped 34,000, but it is still way too high. One child under 15 dies at an average of every five seconds, and the rate is 60 times higher in the highest mortality countries compared to those with the lowest rates. The idea of cloning humans would change how these parents approach grief because science could provide them with an exact duplicate.

It wouldn’t be the same child, but the new offspring would look and possibly act in the same way. If the parents give this clone the same name, it might feel like that initial loss never happened. This approach to life could eventually devalue it to the point where we shrug apathetically if something terrible happens. You can just go make a replacement.

Cloning humans often creates a “Sixth Day” debate about ethics. Many of our creation stories suggest that a deity produced two humans to begin populating our planet. This scientific process would change that process so that natural reproduction wouldn’t be the only way to have children. Anyone could potentially copy themselves with some cell collection and a laboratory setting that can grow a fetus.

When we examine the advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans, we’re asking ourselves the deeper theological questions that may not have answers. Would each copy have a soul? Does consciousness transfer into the new body?

Does a human clone age faster than offspring that are produced from more natural methods?

These are questions we might not need to answer just yet, but the science of cloning is advancing. We may need to address these critical points soon.

Sciencing_Icons_Science SCIENCE

Sciencing_icons_biology biology, sciencing_icons_cells cells, sciencing_icons_molecular molecular, sciencing_icons_microorganisms microorganisms, sciencing_icons_genetics genetics, sciencing_icons_human body human body, sciencing_icons_ecology ecology, sciencing_icons_chemistry chemistry, sciencing_icons_atomic & molecular structure atomic & molecular structure, sciencing_icons_bonds bonds, sciencing_icons_reactions reactions, sciencing_icons_stoichiometry stoichiometry, sciencing_icons_solutions solutions, sciencing_icons_acids & bases acids & bases, sciencing_icons_thermodynamics thermodynamics, sciencing_icons_organic chemistry organic chemistry, sciencing_icons_physics physics, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-physics fundamentals, sciencing_icons_electronics electronics, sciencing_icons_waves waves, sciencing_icons_energy energy, sciencing_icons_fluid fluid, sciencing_icons_astronomy astronomy, sciencing_icons_geology geology, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-geology fundamentals, sciencing_icons_minerals & rocks minerals & rocks, sciencing_icons_earth scructure earth structure, sciencing_icons_fossils fossils, sciencing_icons_natural disasters natural disasters, sciencing_icons_nature nature, sciencing_icons_ecosystems ecosystems, sciencing_icons_environment environment, sciencing_icons_insects insects, sciencing_icons_plants & mushrooms plants & mushrooms, sciencing_icons_animals animals, sciencing_icons_math math, sciencing_icons_arithmetic arithmetic, sciencing_icons_addition & subtraction addition & subtraction, sciencing_icons_multiplication & division multiplication & division, sciencing_icons_decimals decimals, sciencing_icons_fractions fractions, sciencing_icons_conversions conversions, sciencing_icons_algebra algebra, sciencing_icons_working with units working with units, sciencing_icons_equations & expressions equations & expressions, sciencing_icons_ratios & proportions ratios & proportions, sciencing_icons_inequalities inequalities, sciencing_icons_exponents & logarithms exponents & logarithms, sciencing_icons_factorization factorization, sciencing_icons_functions functions, sciencing_icons_linear equations linear equations, sciencing_icons_graphs graphs, sciencing_icons_quadratics quadratics, sciencing_icons_polynomials polynomials, sciencing_icons_geometry geometry, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-geometry fundamentals, sciencing_icons_cartesian cartesian, sciencing_icons_circles circles, sciencing_icons_solids solids, sciencing_icons_trigonometry trigonometry, sciencing_icons_probability-statistics probability & statistics, sciencing_icons_mean-median-mode mean/median/mode, sciencing_icons_independent-dependent variables independent/dependent variables, sciencing_icons_deviation deviation, sciencing_icons_correlation correlation, sciencing_icons_sampling sampling, sciencing_icons_distributions distributions, sciencing_icons_probability probability, sciencing_icons_calculus calculus, sciencing_icons_differentiation-integration differentiation/integration, sciencing_icons_application application, sciencing_icons_projects projects, sciencing_icons_news news.

  • Share Tweet Email Print
  • Home ⋅
  • Science ⋅
  • Biology ⋅
  • Molecular Genetics (Biology): An Overview

The Pros & Cons of Cloning

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Advantages & Disadvantages of Cloning

As far as anyone really knows, scientists have yet to clone a human being, and there are no federal laws against it in the United State. However, seven states prohibit it altogether, and 10 states only allow it for biomedical research. While more than 30 countries formally ban cloning for reproductive purposes, China, England, Israel, Singapore and Sweden do allow cloning for research, but disallow reproductive cloning.

Cloning Definition

The definition of a clone as explained by Encyclopaedia Britannica is a cell or living thing, an organism, that is "genetically identical to the original cell or organism" from which it comes. The word itself comes from the ancient Greek word "klon," which means twig. Single-cell organisms like some yeasts and bacteria naturally reproduce clones of parent cells via budding or binary fission. Individual body cells within plants and animals are clones that occur during a cell-reproduction process called mitosis.

Cloned Animals

In 2017, scientists in Shanghai succeeded in cloning two genetically identical long-tailed macaques, small brown and black monkeys with body lengths of 16 to 28 inches. The last successful cloning of a primate was in 1998, but scientists have also cloned about 20 different types of animals including dogs, pigs, frogs, mice, cows and rabbits since the first cloned animal in 1996.

The First Cloned Animal: Dolly the Sheep

The first successful animal cloning occurred over 22 years ago, after a Scottish Blackface sheep surrogate mother gave birth to Dolly on July 5, 1996, at the Roslin Institute, part of the University of Edinburgh. Cloned from a six-year-old Dorset sheep, scientists analyzed her DNA at her first birthday and discovered that the telomeres at the end of her DNA strands (think eraser on a pencil head) were shorter that they should be for her age. As animals and humans age, these telomeres become shorter. The average age for sheep runs between six to 12 years. Dolly died when she was six, and though she had shortened telomeres, she lived an average life and produced multiple offspring through natural methods, but she also developed diseases in her later years.

Human Cloning Pros and Cons

The pros or advantages of human cloning include:

  • ​ Infertility: ​ Infertile people or same-sex couples could have children made from cloned cells.
  • ​ Organ replacement: ​ A clone, like in the movie, "The Island," could be a source for transplant organs or tissue. (There are ethical issues that arise from this, however.)
  • ​ Genetic research: ​ Cell cloning could assist scientists in gene editing and research.
  • ​ Selective human traits: ​ After editing or removing bad genes, cloning could lead engineered humans for specific traits.
  • ​ Human development: ​ Cloning could enhance and advance human development.

The cons or disadvantages of human cloning raise moral, ethical and safety issues:

  • ​ Reproductive cloning: ​ The negatives of human cloning including the making of designer babies.
  • ​ Human cloning: ​ Could be a violation of the clone's individual human rights.
  • ​ Embryonic cloning: ​ Cellular degradation occurs when too many clones are made from embryos.
  • ​ Unique identities: ​ Cloning raises the question of a moral or human right to an exclusive identity.
  • ​ Societal impacts: ​ Human cloning could produce psychological distress for the clone and society.

Effects of Cloning

While the purpose of cloning is to create an exact replica – if scientists cloned a human that appears identical to the original – it raises the questions as to whether the cloned human is an individual separate from the original and is due the same rights as any other human. Human cloning research and techniques could subject the clone to unacceptable risks such as a shortened life, bad health or other unknown problems. In the end, legalizing cloning on a wide-scale basis could lead to a disrespect for human life and the individual worth of a person, which might ultimately diminish all humans in the end.

Related Articles

Who invented cloning & when, gene editing is not about making designer babies, what makes dna fingerprinting unique, pros & cons of cloning plants & animals, pros and cons of recombinant dna technology, ethics research paper topics, a list of five characteristics of chromosomes, the importance of studying human dna genetics, how to write a notation of a karyotype, when is a mutation in a dna molecule passed to offspring, difference between recombinant dna & genetic engineering, how do i compare frankenstein & cloning, what are the differences between pcr and cloning, the production of recombinant human growth hormones..., what is embryo cloning, four major types of chromosomes, the differences in fraternal & paternal twins, recombinant dna technology for vaccine development, how are genes on sex chromosomes inherited.

  • CNN: Monkey See, Monkey 2: Scientists Clone Monkeys Using Technique That Created Dolly the Sheep
  • Encyclopaedia Britannica: Macaque
  • The University of Edinburgh: The Life of Dolly
  • North Carolina State Extension: Sheep Facts
  • Georgetown University: Cloning Human Beings
  • Johns Hopkins University: Ask an Expert: How Close Are We to Cloning Humans?
  • The New Atlantis: Appendix: State Laws on Human Cloning
  • Encyclopaedia Britannica: Clone

About the Author

As a journalist and editor for several years, Laurie Brenner has covered many topics in her writings, but science is one of her first loves. Her stint as Manager of the California State Mining and Mineral Museum in California's gold country served to deepen her interest in science which she now fulfills by writing for online science websites. Brenner is also a published sci-fi author. She graduated from San Diego's Coleman College in 1972.

Find Your Next Great Science Fair Project! GO

We Have More Great Sciencing Articles!

  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Search this website

Fung Institute for Engineering Leadership

A taxidermied sheep viewed through glass.

Op-ed: The dangers of cloning

May 11, 2020 by Berkeley Master of Engineering

Satomi Angelika Murayama, MEng ’20 (ME)

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

“Sometime, somewhere, someone will generate a cloned human being.”  — Ronald Green for Scientific American, 1999

Background on cloning

A diagram showing the cloning process.

The low success rate of cloning and its medical complications

A mismatch of the public’s expectations with reality.

“We need to realize that cloning would produce a baby, not an adult.”

The ethical and moral concerns that surround cloning humans

“Cloning humans could lead to serious violations of human rights as well as human dignity, and it is up to authorities, laws and institutions to make sure to protect cloned individuals from being exploited.”

Concluding remarks

About the author:.

  • “Eugenics — HISTORY.” October 28, 2019. Accessed November 1, 2019.
  • Green, Ronald M. “I, Clone — Scientific American.” September 3, 1999. Accessed November 1, 2019.
  • Savulescu, Julian. 1999. “Should we clone human beings? Cloning as a source of tissue for transplantation”. Journal of Medical Ethics. 25:87–95.
  • “Therapeutic Cloning | Definition of Therapeutic Cloning at Dictionary.Com.” n.d. Accessed November 4, 2019.
  • Weintraub, Karen. “20 Years after Dolly the Sheep Led the Way — Where Is Cloning Now? -Scientific American.” July 5, 2016. Accessed November 1, 2019.
  • Weintraub, Karen. “Cloning’s Long Legacy — And Why It’ll Never Be Used on Humans|DiscoverMagazine.Com.” April 29, 2019. Accessed November 1, 2019.
  • Weldon, Dave. “Why Human Cloning Must Be Banned Now | The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity.” March 31, 2002. Accessed November 1, 2019.
  • “What Is the Difference between Reproductive and Therapeutic Cloning? | NYSTEM.” n.d. Accessed November 1, 2019.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Mudd Hall 1798 Scenic Avenue Berkeley, CA 94709

(510) 642-0633 [email protected]

  • Job Opportunities

Copyright © 2024 Accessibility • Nondiscrimination  • Privacy • Sitemap

berkeley_engineering

Prospective MEng Students

Sign up for our mailing list to receive program news and updates including information sessions, class visits and opportunities to connect with an admissions advisor.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • World J Plast Surg
  • v.5(3); 2016 Sep

Cloning: A Review on Bioethics, Legal, Jurisprudence and Regenerative Issues in Iran

Seyedeh leila nabavizadeh.

1 Legal Office, Vice Chancellor of Management Development Resource Planning, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

Davood Mehrabani

2 Stem Cell and Transgenic Technology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran;

Zabihallah Vahedi

3 College of Law, School of Art, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran

Farzad Manafi

4 Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

In recent years, the cloning technology has remarkably developed in Iran, but unfortunately, the required legal framework has not been created to support and protect such developments yet. This legal gap may lead to abuse of scientific researches to obtain illegal benefits and to undermine the intellectual property rights of scientists and researchers. Thus to prevent such consequences, the attempts should be made to create an appropriate legal-ethical system and an approved comprehensive law. In this review we concluded that the right method is guiding and controlling the cloning technology and banning the technique is not always fruitful. Of course, it should be taken into accounts that all are possible if the religion orders human cloning in the view of jurisprudence and is considered as permission. In other words, although the religious order on human cloning can be an absolute permission based on the strong principle of permission, it is not unlikely that in the future, corruption is proved to be real for them, Jurists rule it as secondary sanctity and even as primary one. If it is proved, the phenomenon is considered as example of required affairs based on creation of ethical, social and medical disorders, religious and ethical rulings cannot be as permission for it, and it seems that it is a point that only one case can be a response to it and it needs nothing but time.

INTRODUCTION

The word “cloning” is referred as “making an identical copy” which has a Greek origin of “Asexual replication of an organism”. Cloning has been used in various fields of biology while the DNA molecule of cells with genetically identical structure is known as a clone. Honey bees propagate by cloning as the queen bee mates once during her life and the eggs propagate in the queen up to thousands of eggs that are further hatched into bees. 1 Although Joshua Lederberg advocated cloning and genetic engineering as a subject of speculation in 20th century, scientists and several authorities started to take the prospect seriously in the mid-1960s. 2 James D. Watson was the person who publicized the potential and the perils of cloning in 1971. 3 With the cloning of a sheep by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) called Dolly, the idea of cloning of human has become a hot debate subject. 4 Advanced Cell Technology in November 1998 by using SCNT created the first hybrid human clone. A nucleus was taken from a man’s leg cell and was introduced into a cow’s egg while its nucleus was removed. The hybrid cell was cultured, and developed into an embryo and after 12 days, the embryo was destroyed. 5

In 2004 and 2005, pluripotent, embryonic stem cells were successfully harvested from a cloned human blastocyst using SCNT and eleven different patent-specific stem cell lines were created as the first breakthrough in cloning of human. 6 In January 2008, the first five mature human embryos using SCNT were created while each embryo was created by taking a nucleus from a skin cell and inserting it into a human egg from which the nucleus was removed. The embryos could be developed only to the blastocyst stage, and were destroyed later. The “holy grail” that was useful for therapeutic or reproductive cloning was used to generate embryonic stem cell lines. 7 - 9

In 2011, the New York Stem Cell Foundation could generate embyronic stem cell lines, resulting in triploid cells, which were not useful for cloning. 10 - 12 In 2013, embryonic stem cells were created using SCNT. Four embryonic stem cell lines were derived human fetal somatic cells using oocytes from the same donor, ensuring that all mitochondrial DNA inherited was similar. 10 Advanced Cell Technology reported replication of Mitalipov’s results and showed the effectiveness by cloning adult cells using SCNT. 4 , 13 So cloning has attracted attention of physicians, medicolegal specialists, and other scientific circles as it has opened a new window to the human with its therapeutic advantages but with some concerns too. 14

The UNESCO declaration on human genome, the human rights of 1997 and the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Strasburg) proposed concerns with this scientific phenomenon and the experimentation on human. 15 After the emerge of human cloning, the legislature passed laws regarding requirements, structures, resources and the evolving capacities of civil rights and the future legal researches, resulting in irreparable consequences; especially, for concerns about human rights and criminal law in the third millennium. 16

In recent years, the cloning technology has remarkably developed Iran, but unfortunately, the required legal framework has not been created to support and protect such developments yet. This legal gap may lead to abuse of scientific researches to obtain illegal benefits and to undermine the intellectual property rights of scientists and researchers. Thus to prevent such consequences, the attempts should be made to create an appropriate legal-ethical system and an approved comprehensive law. 14

Law and ethics are basic and fundamental concepts in this area and according to 4 th principle of constitution law stating that all laws should be in the framework of Islamic regulations and as there is not any specific law related to human cloning in the country, we should refer to accredited judicial decree or ethics. On the other hand, based on principle 177, constitution law, it is an unchangeable principle and it has been constant after all reviews. Although in bioethical and jurisdictional point of view, the status of reproductive and therapeutic cloning is analyzable, and sanction is the legal status of the matter to be required and of great importance. 17

Therefore, legislators should take actions toward criminalization of the issue with respect to principle of legality of crime and punishment. One of the primary and certain principle of criminal law is the principle of legality of crimes and punishments; that is, briefly: first, no action is a crime unless it is already known and attributed as a crime by the legislator; second, no punishment is possible to be ruled unless it is already passed to be executed for the crime by the legislator. 17 The major objective of this review is the legal analysis of the subject. However, the related bioethical and jurisprudential aspects will be discussed.

APPLICATIONS OF CLONING

Work on cloning techniques has advanced our knowledge on  developmental biology , especially early human development. Basic understanding on  signal transduction  together with genetic manipulation within the early human embryo has the potential to respond to many developmental diseases and defects requiring aesthetic and regenerative medicine to enter the field. 18 Cells created by SCNT are beneficial in research of the causes of diseases, and as model systems for  drug discovery 19 , 20 Cells produced with SCNT could eventually be used in  cell transplantation, 21  or for  creation of organs  in transplantation, called  regenerative medicine . Stem cell therapy is cell transplantation in treatment or prevention of a disease or condition. 22  Bone marrow transplantation  is a widely used form of stem cell therapy. 23  The potential use of stem cell therapy in treatment of several diseases is underway. 24 , 25  Regenerative medicine would allow autologous transplantation of stem cells, and removes the risk of organ transplant rejection by the recipient. 26  For instance, in liver diseases, a new liver may be grown using the same genetic material and transplanted to remove the damaged liver. 27  Human pluripotent stem cells have been promised as a reliable source to generate human neurons, with the potential for regenerative medicine in brain and neural damages. 28

HISTORY OF CLONING

Cloning is the outcome of the hard works on use of genetic engineering in animal breeding, treatment of hereditary diseases in human and replicating organisms. 16 In 1901, transfer of nucleus of a salamander embryonic cell to a enucleated cell was successfully undertaken. During 1940-1950, scientists could clone embryos in mammals. In 1956, Spemann’s hypothesis was proved and in 1962, mature frog was produced by transferring nucleus of intestinal cells of tadpoles into the eggs while their nucleus were removed. 29

Sheep cloning from embryonic cells was performed in 1984. In 1994, bovine cloning was conducted from embryonic cells of another cow. In 1996, first cloned animal called Dolly was produced in Scotland using mature cells of mammary glands of a mature sheep. The importance of Dolly was for its production from differentiated cells of mammary glands while the previous cloned animals were produced from embryonic cells. The birth of Dolly led to undermining the impossibility of simulation by differentiated and specific cells. In the late 2000, scientists cloned 8 species of mammals. In 2003, the first cloned mule was produced by the American scientist. In 2005, the first cloning of a dog called Snoopy was carried out. In 2006, the Iranian scientists succeeded to clone a few sheep among the Middle East countries. 29

Bonyana was the first cloned calf in Iran. The birth of this calf was the outcome of a series of researches from 2003 to produce various livestock by IVF. Cloning and genetic engineering lead to the birth of Royana, the cloned sheep and Hanna, the cloned goat. 30 Tamina was the second cloned calf in Iran and it was cloned from the cell origin similar to Bonyana, the first cloned calf. This calf was born with the weight of 70 kg by Caesarian operation in Foka Animal Breeding Complex affiliated to Social Security Organization after the 280-day pregnancy period but after a few hours died due to an acute brucellosis, while Tamina also showed the signs and symptoms of some anatomic disorders at birth. 30

HUMAN CLONING

Reproductive Cloning

Reproductive cloning is the process where the asexual cells are transferred to an egg while its DNA has been removed and after the development of an embryo, it is placed into the recipient uterus. This process can result in production of a human while the cloned individual would totally be identical to the genetic donor. 15

Therapeutic Cloning

The therapeutic cloning also known as embryonic cloning is actually used to produce human embryos for research purposes. The objective of this type of cloning is not the production of a cloned human but the culture of cells is used in human researches and for treatment purposes in regenerative medicine. These cells are very important for biomechanics researchers because they can be used to produce any types of cells of human body. These cells are extracted from embryo after 4 days of cell division. The process of extraction ruins the embryo and this issue creates a lot of ethical concerns. The researchers hope to replace the cloned cells for the cells destroyed by diseases such as Alzheimer’s, cancer, etc. 31

Advantages of Cloning

The cloning technology may have positive and negative effects with advantages as well as disadvantages and even can be with fatal effects. The most important advantages of cloning can be (i) Replicating and propagating plants and animals, (ii) Recreating and replicating extinct or going to extinct animals, (iii) Propagating genes and saving newborns from hereditary diseases, (iv) Helping to discover treatment methods of infertility, (v) Dividing the developed embryo into several cloned embryos so that in case of probable incidents happening to one of them, the other clone can replace it, (vi) Using it to reproduce the ambulated limbs and replicating them to culture and replace the destroyed organs such as liver, heart. One of the advantages can be that the cloned limbs have full genetic adaptation with the recipient individual who is the donor of the stem cells, (vii) Helping to control population regarding shortages of male or female sex due to incidents such as war and earthquake, and (viii) Helping to reduce sorrows and pains of people suffering from the death and absence of their loved ones by cloning them. 32

Disadvantages of Cloning

Because this technology is new and its outcome is not public and common yet, the damages and losses are sometimes resulted as internal damages by nature of the operation and the process of cloning. Sometimes, there are external damages imposed on the cloned society or individual after the cloning operation. Internal damages may be (i) The cloned living organism may encounter genetic problems and complications in long term, (ii) The more the cloned people are in the society, the more their extinction probability will be; because there are about one million four hundred thousand nucleotides in the body of every human and this remarkable variety is the origin of human generation survival; while the decrease in the genetic variety of individuals in a society, which is the result of cloning– highly increase the probability of their death by a special virus or a pathogen, (iii) 99% of attempts to clone human may result in creation of monsters, (iv) Biological disorders such as cancer, (iv) Premature aging: Dolly, the sheep, aged soon after cloning and the cloned baby will age at birth; because if the genetic donor is fifty-year-old, the new born will be a fifty-year-old one, thus, it will be suffering from premature aging like Dolly. 32

External damages can be (i) Belief damages, (ii) Human moral damages, (iii) Cloning propounds a way to stop family establishment and perseverance against the related difficulties and it leads to satisfying sexual instinct and contenting oneself with cloning to have a child, (iv) Cloning is against divine nature. The nature of human and other living things is based on marriage tradition and the Holy Quran frequently emphasized on the creation of human based on the marriage tradition, but cloning is independent of either one of the couples. Besides, marriage has advantages and useful effects such as comfort, friendship, kindness and love in addition to reproduction and propagation of generation and such emotions ruins in cloning. 32

(v) Cloning can result into harmful side effects for the individual like other unnatural methods in medicine. The use of powder milk for breast milk, Caesarian operation for natural delivery, etc. has brought a lot of problems for the individuals and they are not recommended unless required. Cloning will have the same side effects and problems and because there is not a necessity for its operation, and bearing such health and social damages are not scientifically justifiable. A healthy body can affect mental health as proper nutrition does on physical health too. Therefore, regarding children nutrition, it can indirectly be useful to improve mental and spiritual health. It is very important to consider breast feeding for children because breast milk has lots of antibodies and it is easily digested by the newborn increasing the chance of her or his survival. In the verse 233 of Baqarah, Holy Quran, it is stated: mothers should feed their children two years. 32

(vi) Development of cloning and existence of the cloned people in the society can lead to complications arising from the failure to recognize and distinguish; such as failure to recognize students, distinguish criminal from innocent, or recognize wife and husband among similar people and it is obvious that such complications result in anarchy and legal difficulties, and (vii) Cloning human with exceptional physical strength or intelligence and benefiting from them in aggression and oppression of others can be another harmful effect that can provide the background for modern slavery and exploitation of human. 32

Bioethical Issues in Cloning

Bioethics as one of the new branches of “applied normative ethics” is a new field of research which reviews and analyzes challenges caused by using innovations and technologies in bioscience and biomedicine, and also regulates the does and does not in this area in the interdisciplinary space systematically. 33 Considering bioethics in cloning, it refers to different ethical issues especially from religious and secular points of views even human therapeutic and reproductive cloning are not presented commercially, but animals are currently cloned and the technique is used in livestock production. In therapeutic cloning, generate tissue generation takes place to treat patients who cannot obtain transplants, 34 resulting to avoidance of the need for immunosuppressive drugs, 35  and to stave off aging effects. 36  In reproductive cloning, parents who cannot procreate are advised to have access to the cloning technology. 35

The protest against therapeutic cloning is just on the use of embyronic stem cells, which is related to the abortion debate. 35 Regarding reproductive cloning, there are concerns that cloning is not yet highly developed to confirm the safety of the technology, and could be prone to abuse and concerns about how cloned individuals could integrate with the society. 37 - 40 In 2015, about 70 countries declared banning of human cloning. 41

Principles on Elimination of Damages in Cloning

The first principle states that nobody has the right to damage others and has no moral justification. Elimination of damage; especially, next to the principle of equality and non-discrimination will have more importance regarding ethical and human right interpretations. Considering human cloning, it is believed that the only type of cloning that may eliminate these harmful effects can be therapeutic cloning. In other words, the principle of elimination of harm states that the researches on cloning should not harm other humans and or cloned individual. Although cloning may have advantages to human generation such as prevention from genetic disorders and diseases, it may also result in reproduction of humans with specific capabilities and cause the abuse of the cloned individuals by others and its producers as tools. In this way, the cloned individual may suffer from unwanted harms while he basically plays no roles in accepting or refusing the harms. 42

Principles of Usefulness of Cloning

This principle is considered as the second fundamental principle in the bioethics and it is stated that the hidden assignments in this principle prevent imposing harms and losses on others and it is close to conservative views of legal documents and moves toward promotion of goodness; but therapeutic cloning is not opposed in this area. In fact, it can be said that this principle is along with principle of elimination of harm. In other words, the researches should not harm the cloned individual and other people but work on his and other’s favor. Of course, the answer to what advantages the cloning can have for the cloned individual is not clear because the human existence differs from doubtful identity and relative is not considered as special advantage for the individual. If the difference is due to a specific capability, it seems that the specific capability is reproduced more for the benefits of others than the cloned individual himself. 42

Human End-in-Itself in Cloning

Based on this principle which is stated as the third principle, all humans end in themselves and they have a dignity as a human. Thus, we are not authorized to disregard individuals to the level of devices and even animals to satisfy our research objectives in the area of biotechnology. 14 Based on Kant’s formula of end-in-itself, any actions that cause to use humanity as a mere means not as end-in-itself, are forbidden and immoral. There are various interpretations of humanity end-in-itself: not to do anything about a human without his knowledge; respect his freedom, will and independency; help his happiness; and respect others’ humanity. Thus, based on Kant’s formula of end-in-itself, any cloning operations which disrespect the humanity of humans as a mere means for other purposes are forbidden. 29

Therefore, the cloning is forbidden to reproduce and replicate a large group of the cloned humans for the purposes of war or in peace time, such as: hard and overwhelming works, reproduction of useful humans for the society such as the genius of science, politics, and military, and to reproduce children of desired genotypes, and to replace newly-dead spouse, children or relative. In such cloning, humanity of the reproduced humans is not the purpose, but the developing of the society and the meeting of demands of other humans. It seems that the cloning to reproduce a child for infertile couple and the therapeutic cloning (providing that the beginning of humanity and human dignity is not considered from the time of fertilization and conception) to reproduce transplanted organs, is authorized because humanity is not a mere means. 29

In therapeutic cloning, because the current technology is used for welfare, treatment and generally, for serving human and humanity, it is human who is the purpose and it does not conflict with Kant’s formula of humanity fundamentals; (Of course, if we do not consider the embryo as a human), because we solve the problem of some of humans and use some others as a mere means (because all humans do not need this technology). It can be stated that all humans are not used as a mere means, but it should be taken into accounts that Kant’s purpose of not dealing with human as a mere means is quantitative and qualitative. He emphasized on the fact that humanity is not quantitative and should not be acted as a tool. In addition, he forbid the use of human as a tool even by the person himself. 43

The respect to human dignity is in a manner that it is highly considered in the international rules and declarations; for example, in the introduction and some of the articles of International Declaration on Human Genetic Data, 2003, observing the human dignity is a must and also the first article of International Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights, 11 November 1997, the human genome is considered as part of human heritage and it declares that human genome is the principle of fundamental unity of all members of the human family and the need for recognition of their inherent dignity and distinction and the article 11 of the declaration knows the human reproductive cloning in contrary to human dignity. 44

Principles of Reciprocity in Cloning

Generally, this principle states that “Act others as you desire to be acted”. Kant’s formula of the universal law regards the same notion. In fact, the formula of human end-in-itself together with this principle can improve normative system of Kant’s ethics. The principle corroborates ban of experiments on human cloning supposing that the clone is considered as human, but it is not believed that other types of cloning is in contrary with this principle. Of course, it is noteworthy that the principle encounters a basic challenge in the area of cloning; because basically, the possibility of reciprocity between the cloned individual and the researcher who reproduces it, is negated; that is, they both are not on equal terms providing reciprocity for both, but the cloned individual unintentionally becomes the objective of the research and the outcome is his different presence in the world of existence. 42

Violating the Principle of Informed Consent in Cloning

One of the main principles of bioethics is the principle of consent. The individual’s consent is one of the issues of cloning operation. The issue considers the consent of the cloned product; that is, whether the cloned individual is satisfied with the cloning operation and permits the unnatural creation method? Obviously, the answer to the question is unknown because the clone does not exist at the time of cloning operation and he cannot state anything on the matter and after birth, the operation is completed and finished. Perhaps, some say that in the natural process, the newborn does not play any role in his birth and creation. In reply, it should be asked how the issues related to the many physical damages and hidden and unknown mental risks in the method of abnormal birth of the cloned child compared with the method of natural birth can be justified? 45

Therefore, pursuant to ethical principles and potential risks of cloning operations, further contemplations are needed on the technology and it should be avoided at least until its hidden aspects are clearly revealed. In regard to consent of the cloned child, the consent and permission of the donor of oocyte, the pregnant mother and even the donor of the somatic cell are also considered and it is an issue which can be harassed and abused. 45

With a review on the mentioned principles, we conclude that the researches on reproductive cloning should include the following six features: (i) Be advantageous to society and impossible for any other methods, (ii) Previously operated on animals, (iii) Operated in a manner that all types of unnecessary physical and mental pains are prevented, (iv) If death or deficiency of the clone is probable, the operation is prevented, (v) Actions taken to protect the individual against damages, deficiency or death, and (vi) The experiments should be stopped if the responsible researcher believes at any phase of the research, continuation of the researches may result in damage, deficiency or death of the tested individual. 42

Bioethical Analysis of Therapeutic Cloning

The subject is more complicated about the therapeutic cloning. By using this technology, it is possible to obtain tissues immunologically compatible with the recipient and it is considered as a definitive treatment for diseases such as Huntington’s, Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis, Myocardial Infarction, etc. Millions of patients around the world benefit from such researches but on the other hand, making such researches requires reproduction and then destruction of the developing embryo. Is it possible to reproduce a human embryo for one’s purpose, but it should be remembered that such embryos are the initial point of life of all human being. It is not right to cut the string of life of the cell collection at the beginning of life for the purpose of medical research. 46

Anyway, assessing the advantages and disadvantages of this technology is complicating and difficult because on one hand, it is a promise of the great probable advantage to the humanity and on the other hand, it causes several moral doubts and concerns at the level of society. What adds more complications to this subject is that: first, it is not certain that scientists achieve what they claim. Second, there might be other alternatives with the same advantages and without the mentioned ethical issues. Such alternatives have already been proposed such as using adult stem cells. The most concerns made by the opposition about litigation of therapeutic cloning are on two axes. 46

The first issue is the destruction of the initial embryos which is considered as disrespect of the newly-reproduced human and the initial point of human life. Second, there is the fear that if the reproductive cloning is banned and the therapeutic cloning becomes free, whereas the initial procedures and techniques of both of the methods are similar, the freedom is abused in this regard and the embryos are developed for the purpose of human cloning. This concern is so serious that the American government strongly criticized to United Nations in a declaration on putting therapeutic cloning out of control and knew it a way to operate reproductive cloning. 46

Because the research institutes which clone the human embryo are able to use it for any purpose; for example, transferring the human embryo to a hired uterus and reproducing it to a human fetus. In spite of all respect for the new life in the frame of human embryo, supporters of therapeutic cloning believe that human dignity and legal status of the six-day embryo is never equal to a mature human and therefore, the moral problems arising from damage of the embryo are fewer than what the opponents claim. They consider an average value for human embryos and believe that using the human embryo at the first stage of development is not objected if cloning is operated in the precise legal framework. 46

Some others believe that embryo is a string of cells and it is worth as much as other cells in a body; thus, doing researches on ancestral cell and therapeutic cloning are the same as other cellular and molecular biology researches and they do not have any types of moral problems. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that the purpose of reproduction of embryos is not “their destruction” but it is to serve life of humans and progress of medical science. To prevent from long-term culture of embryo and future abuse from it, the experiments will be done on embryos of less than 14-day-old. At this stage, organs are not differentiated yet. Supporters agree with the laws which put therapeutic cloning operation in the certain framework and by controlling the process of cloning operation prevent from any abuse and violation from the related regulations. They believe that the benefits of therapeutic cloning are so many that the technology cannot be ignored due to ethical problems. 46

Jurisprudential Analysis of Reproductive and Therapeutic Cloning

This subject is important because reproductive and therapeutic cloning is considered a new technology and is different and various related aspects should be recognized and studied and put into the legal content. 17

JURISPRUDENTIAL ANALYSIS OF REPRODUCTIVE CLONING

Jurisprudence of Sunni Scholars

They discussed cloning with reasons such as interfering in God’s will, corruption on earth, changing tradition, variety, creation and breaking Muslims’ believes, and they expressed their comments by issuing Fatwa, resolutions and declaration. In idea of the religious intellects consider the sanctity of the matter to be so obvious that the opportunity for criticism and discussion of the followers in this area is closed. Some of Sunni scholars exceptionally authorize it in some cases such as treatment of infertility, providing that the technology is guaranteed to be harmless. To keep sanctity of human cloning, some declare the doubtful speech that the cloning process changes the creation process by God and it is an act of evil and forbidden. This challenge is stated by some of the Sunni scholars. They refer to some of the verses and cited comments to emphasize on sanctity of changing creation. Accordingly, change of creation is the temptation of Devil and Devil also tempts to corruption, prostitution and sins; thus, changes in creation is prohibited. 47

Shia Jurists

Generally, the views of Shia scholars on human cloning can be classified in four categories of (i)

The total permit for human cloning: Some of jurists and scholars allow the cloning due to lack of specific documents and clear evidence on the sanctity of cloning and according to the principle of permissibility. For example, Ayatollah Sistani and Ayatollah Fazel Lankarani considered human cloning not to be problematic if is limited to reconstruction of tissue damages. Also, Ayatollah Moosavi Ardabili believes that there is no strict reason for sanctity of human cloning and this operation is permissible if is limited to reconstruction of tissue damages. 17

(ii) Limited permission on human cloning: Based on available documents and according to the first principle in this case, some authorities have allowed human cloning but they believe that if it is widely operated, it would be problematic; such as, recognizing the cloned individuals from one another, therefore, they give authorization by case and they do not allow it at large scale. According to reports by Professor Hassan Javaheri, there is no problem on cloning happening in nature, but it is not legal to be undertaken at large scale. (iii) Secondary sanctity of human cloning: Some of the Shia Jurists believe that human cloning is not a problem in nature based on their arguments, but operating it in laboratories may lead to inevitable corruption such as intervention in natural system. 17

Therefore, to prevent from such corruption, the human cloning is considered as the secondary prohibition. Ayatollahs Seyed Kazem Haery, Sheikh Javad Tabrizi, Seyed Sadegh Shirazi, Yoosef Sanei and Naser Makarem Shirazi supported this statement. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi responded to an exception in this issue: “Based on religious rules, it is not naturally forbidden but with respect to its probable side effects that may lead to disorders in the human society and they are obvious for experts, its operation will would be problematic. 17

Ayatollah Yoosef Sanei also stated that normalizing and legalizing the cloning in a manner that it is considered the same as having children by marriage, is absolutely not compatible with Islamic regulations and jurisprudence and it results in corruptions which must necessarily be avoided legally, socially, ethically and developmentally. He has declared that the prevention and punishment of its perpetrators and attempters is a must and a rational and religious assumption for all humans especially, legal and executive authorities and propagators. However, he allowed human cloning in rare cases and necessities when it is beneficial for human health and also the use of its scientific aspects; such as the cloning of organs for treatment purpose. 17

(iv) Ultimate prohibition of human cloning: The owners of this attitude basically prohibit human cloning as a sanction action and consider it as the ultimately illegitimate. According to changes in creation and based on the principle of non-possession of body for human and therefore, the danger and necessity of permissibility in this regard showed the ultimate prohibition of human cloning. Despite the four categories and disagreements, most of the jurists banned human cloning. In other words, although according to the principle of presumption of innocence, initially, most of the Islamic intellects ruled on its natural permissibility and those who agreed and prescribed the cloning mentioned some of the applications and functions of this technology.

But ultimately, a large number of the Muslim jurists considered it as the secondary prohibition despite its primary and natural permissibility. Considering the consequences of such abuse, potential and actual corruptions and due to the necessity of life protection and respect to human dignity and the reputation of “the principle of no harm”, they emphasized on the necessity of prohibition of prescribing the process until clearance of all aspects of the issue and safety against probable risks and enough assurance in this regard. 17

Jurisprudential Analysis of Therapeutic Cloning

The significance of jurisprudential analysis of therapeutic cloning is due to the unique features of the technique which play a crucial and exclusive role in treatment of incurable and deadly diseases. Despite such a wonderful role, whose aspects reveal development of scientific researches everyday, it is required that the jurisprudence has comment on the mentioned problem, the problem which is referred as the loss of ethical dignity and human right on the embryo. When embryo is developed, three actions can be undertaken including, (i) To allow to be destroyed, (ii) To place it in uterus where it develops into a human similar to the donor of the cell in terms of growth, and (iii) T use it to obtain stem cells. 48

The operation is the third stage of therapeutic cloning which is described later. It should be known that which one of the three stages of therapeutic cloning is permitted and which is not? Naturally, if only one of the stages is considered prohibited, it is not possible to give fatwa of permission for therapeutic cloning which includes all the stages. The permission of therapeutic cloning is subject to permissibility of all the stages. Now to review the three stages: The first stage is the use of the cell from human body which is automatically not objected. If there is a problem, it is in the next stages which are not related to this stage. 48

In the second stage, the cell is processed and developed for the next stage when the cell is at 6 or 7-day of age. In this process, three actions should be done: (i) Enucleation of cell, (ii) Placing it into the enucleated oocyte, and (iii) Simulating the oocyte by chemical or electrical current to start cell division. This type of manipulation in this stage is not prohibitive itself. The only problem is that it might be banned as the point of prohibition. Of course, this initial point is the time when we know that if the operation begins and due to loss of control, the opportunity of abuse in the situation is available and the development of human embryo becomes inevitable. 48

If human cloning, either as primary or secondary, is a prohibited operation, the operation as the starting point of prohibition will be prevented. But, the third stage is the extraction of the hidden cell mass in the embryo for culturing and obtaining stem cells. This problem caused a serious disagreement in Christianity and Islam in this stage. The problem is the extraction of cell mass which results in disappearing and killing of the fetus and its potential to become a human. To rule out therapeutic cloning, it should be reviewed in three aspects of (i) To review the judgment as “fetal homicide”, (ii) To review the judgment as “sanctity for destruction of the embryo regarding the development in the murder case in the view of the judge and not regarding the customary murder”, and (iii) To review the judgment as “a mere prohibition of embryo destruction”, not prohibited regarding the murder. 48

Naturally, there is a difference between the three categories. The category of sanctity for murder is more severe than the sanctity for the second and third categories. In the third one, the most important rule can be performed easier and more; that is, based on this theory, it can be said that although embryo destruction is banned, whenever a human is suffering from a severe illness and sometimes leading to death, with respect to the more importance of the human life, the embryo is allowed to be destroyed to obtain the stem cell to treat the patient. 48

Legal Analysis of Reproductive and Therapeutic Cloning in Iran

As cloning is not still very common and is in the stage of development and has not been tested after birth, the countries with cloning technology do not have a complete and codified law for it. Human cloning may legally cause problems, including the reproduced individual that will be completely similar to the genetic donor, even his fingerprints, and it is exclusive for everybody and considered as the major factor to arrest the offender. So the genetic owner can commit a crime and escape from law, and allocate his action to the cloned individual or vice versa. Thus, the rights and freedom of both of them will be withdrawn. 31

In addition, the real culprit will not be identified and the rights of the accused person will be ignored. The cloned human does not have a father (because it is not from the male sperm) and a mother (because it is not by composition of gamete) and a sister and a brother and a relative, and it is grown in the uterus which is not of his mother but the surrogate mother. In brief, he is an individual with no relativity. If a virgin woman has a child by cloning of her sexual cell, is her pregnancy legitimate or not? And is the born baby her clone or sister or daughter? Who does the cloned individual inherits? If somebody kills the cloned individual, what are the rules for compensation or retribution? And who is responsible for alimony and custodianship of the cloned individual? There are some other legal problems too. 31 It should be taken into accounts that any anti-science law cause the scientists and researchers to emigrate to other territories and societies with less strict laws. One of the tens of reasons for brain drain is lack of right and proper laws to protect scientists and intellects. 49

At the time of writing the review, it is unlikely that individuals or centers in the country, process the idea of the human cloning and perhaps, they have made arrangements and taken into action in this field. This idea and the probability of its occurrence have revealed the lawful Iranian responsibility more than before and showed the necessity of taking immediate action to fill this legal gap. 17 On the other hand, now when the researches in the field of cloning have started, it is not possible to revert to or ban or ignore them instead, the right action is to direct the researches on cloning and pass the required rules of law for this field. 42

It seems that the prospects of every country about therapeutic cloning are dependent on the worth of human embryo in the legal system. The truth is that even in the countries where abortion is considered as the criminal act and punishable, and exceptionally, the mother’s life is in danger or the fetus is malformed or even the embryo is a result of adultery rape, abortion is predicted. Undoubtedly, therapeutic cloning which is the final solution for the treatment and health of human leads to the destruction of embryo and cannot be placed among any of the aforementioned exceptions because the cloned embryo is merely destroyed for other’s health and not its existence endangers other’s life. Certainly, in the countries where the value of embryonic and fetal is not considered equal to life or even health of the human and due to different reasons, abortion is not legally banned, the therapeutic cloning encounter less challenges. 15

To clarify the criminal liabilities of physicians and law of human cases in genetic experiments and new therapeutic methods such as cloning, the Iranian criminal laws should be studied. Unfortunately, the law of Iran has not changed along with developments and progresses in medical sciences, and Iran is one of the countries where law has not passed about cloning. The only available regulations in our country codified by consultative committees are affiliated to the research institutes include two documents and despite that they are called by laws, the executive bylaws of ethical principles in researches of medical sciences and ethical guides of researches on gametes and embryos, they lack legal standards and sanction and as their titles suggest, they should be called ethics doctrine. Thus, only those cases of Islamic penal code approved in 2013 and law on method of donating embryos to infertile couples approved in 2003 are to be responsive to new challenges. 17

Therefore, if an individual or individuals engage in human cloning, in terms of the legal fundamentals and legal principles, it is not legally possible to prosecute them because with respect to constitution law principle of “legality of offenses and penalties”, it is not possible to consider an act as a crime without a legal element and no punishment is considered for it and the action or leaving of the action can be considered as a crime that a law is passed for it and the action and leaving of the action is considered as a crime by the law and the related punishment is determined. 45

Some might argue that based on principle 167 constitution law states that the judge is bound to endeavor to find the ruling on every case in the law and if not found, according to Islamic sources or fatwa, would issue the ruling. They cannot refuse handling of the case and issuing the ruling under the pretext of silence or deficiency or brevity or conflict of laws. The rule of law can be derived if required, a legal action can be taken into account. In reply to such cases, it should be said that on one hand, the principle mostly includes the civil cases and if its content is accepted in criminal issues, case issues not phenomenon to this extent, would be with effective outcome. The prospects of scholars and views of Islamic jurists and different fatwas and often conflicting responses with uncertainty in dealing with various issues of this technology, are additional reasons to the inadequacy of the response. 45

Although mostly after the emergence of the phenomena and the related challenges, legislators take actions to pass and approve laws with respect to requirements and structure and sources and development capacities of civil rights and future legal researches, if the time gap lengthens between the phenomena and provision of the necessary related law, it causes corruption and irreparable consequences; especially, on the critical and vital issues which have created great concerns about human rights and criminal laws for the human of the third millennium. 17

If person or persons practice human cloning, what legal acts are there to deal with them? Are there any rules considered in the related laws to take legal actions against the operators and users of the technology? If yes, to what extent are they expressive and comprehensive and if not, what should be done against the practice and the perpetrators? If any person or persons practice human cloning, what legal actions are there against them? Some of the practical policies which should be done include public education, description of probable risks and disadvantages of human cloning and placing religious and ethical scholars next to researchers of cloning. 17

Therefore, we can conclude that the right method is guiding and controlling the cloning technology and banning the technique is not always fruitful. Of course, it should be taken into accounts that all are possible if the religion orders human cloning in the view of jurisprudence and is considered as permission. In other words, although the religious order on human cloning can be an absolute permission based on the strong principle of permission, it is not unlikely that in the future, corruption is proved to be real for them, Jurists rule it as secondary sanctity and even as primary one. If it is proved, the phenomenon is considered as example of required affairs based on creation of ethical, social and medical disorders. Religious and ethical rulings cannot be permission for it, and it seems that it is a point that only one case can be a response to it and it needs nothing but time.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • Search Menu
  • Advance Articles
  • Clinical Case Studies
  • Journal Club
  • Clinical Chemistry Podcasts
  • Clinical Trainee Council
  • Special Issues
  • Clinical Chemistry Guide to Scientific Writing
  • Clinical Chemistry Guide to Manuscript Review
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submission Site
  • Self-Archiving Policy
  • Call for Papers
  • Why Publish?
  • About Clinical Chemistry
  • Editorial Board
  • Advertising & Corporate Services
  • Journals on Oxford Academic
  • Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

  • < Previous

The Cloning Debates and Progress in Biotechnology

  • Article contents
  • Figures & tables
  • Supplementary Data

Paul L Wolf, George Liggins, Dan Mercola, The Cloning Debates and Progress in Biotechnology, Clinical Chemistry , Volume 43, Issue 11, 1 November 1997, Pages 2019–2020, https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/43.11.2019

  • Permissions Icon Permissions

The perception by humans of what is doable is itself a great determiner of future events. Thus, the successful sheep cloning experiment leading to “Dolly” by Ian Wilmut and associates at Roslin Institute, Midlothian, UK, compels us to look in the mirror and consider the issue of human cloning. Should it occur, and if not, how should that opposing mandate be managed? If human cloning should have an acceptable role, what is that role and how should it be monitored and supervised?

In the February 27, 1997, issue of Nature , Ian Wilmut et al. reported that they cloned a sheep (which they named “Dolly”) by transferring the nuclear DNA from an adult sheep udder cell into an egg whose DNA had been removed ( 1 ). Their cloning experiments have led to widespread debate on the potential application of this remarkable technique to the cloning of humans. Following the Scottish researchers’ startling report, President Clinton declared his opposition to using this technique to clone humans. He moved swiftly to order that federal funds not be used for such an experiment and asked an independent panel of experts, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC), chaired by Princeton University President Harold Shapiro, to report to the White House with recommendations for a national policy on human cloning. According to recommendations by the NBAC, human cloning is likely to become a crime in the US in the near future. The Commission’s main recommendation is to enact federal legislation to prohibit any attempts, whether in a research or a clinical setting, to create a human through somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning.

The concept of genetic manipulation is not new and has been a general practice for more than a century, through practices ranging from selective cross-pollination in plants to artificial insemination in domestic farm animals.

Wilmut and his colleagues made 277 attempts before they succeeded with Dolly. Previously, investigators had reported successful cloning in frogs, mice, and cattle ( 2 )( 3 )( 4 )( 5 ), and 1 week after Wilmut’s report, Don Wolf and colleagues at the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center reported their cloning of two rhesus monkeys by utilizing embryonic cells. The achievement of Wilmut’s team shocked nucleic acid experts, who thought it would be an impossible feat. They believed that the DNA of adult cells could not perform similarly to the DNA formed when a spermatozoa’s genes mingle with those of an ovum.

On July 25, 1997, the Roslin team also reported the production of lambs that contained human genes ( 6 ). Utilizing techniques similar to those they had used in Dolly, they inserted a human gene into the nuclei of sheep cells. These cells were next inserted into the ova of sheep from which the DNA had been removed. The resulting lambs contained the human gene in every cell. In this new procedure the DNA had been inserted into skin fibroblast cells, which are specialized cells, unlike previous procedures in which DNA was introduced into a fertilized ovum. The new lamb has been named “Polly” because she is a Poll Dorset sheep. The goal of this new genetically engineered lamb is for these lambs to produce human proteins necessary for the treatment of human genetic diseases, such as factor VIII for hemophiliacs, cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) substance for patients with cystic fibrosis, tissue plasminogen activator to induce lysis of acute coronary and cerebral artery thrombi, and human growth factor.

Charles Darwin was frightened when he concluded that humans were not specifically separated from all other animals. Not until 20 years after his discovery did he have the courage to publish his findings, which changed the way humans view life on earth. Wilmut’s amazing investigations have also created worldwide fear, misunderstanding, and ethical shock waves. Politicians and a few scientists are proposing legislation to outlaw human cloning ( 7 ). Although the accomplishment of cloning clearly could provide many benefits to medicine and to conservation of endangered species of animals, politicians and a few scientists fear that the cloning procedure will be abused.

The advantages of cloning are numerous. The ability to clone dairy cattle may have a larger impact on the dairy industry than artificial insemination. Cloning might be utilized to produce multiple copies of animals that are especially good at producing meat, milk, or wool. The average cow makes 13 000 pounds (5800 kg) of milk a year. Cloning of cows that are superproducers of milk might result in cows producing 40 000 pounds (18 000 kg) of milk a year.

Wilmut’s recent success in cloning “Polly” represents his main interest in cloning ( 8 ). He believes in cloning animals able to produce proteins that are or may prove to be useful in medicine. Cloned female animals could produce large amounts of various important proteins in their milk, resulting in female animals that serve as living drug factories. Investigators might be able to clone animals affected with human diseases, e.g., cystic fibrosis, and investigate new therapies for the human diseases expressed by these animals.

Another possibility of cloning could be to change the proteins on the cell surface of heart, liver, kidney, or lung, i.e., to produce organs resembling human organs and enhancing the supply of organs for human transplantation. The altered donor organs, e.g., from pigs, would be less subject to rejection by the human recipient. The application of cloning in the propagation of endangered species and conservation of gene pools has been proposed as another important use of the cloning technique ( 9 )( 10 ).

The opponents of cloning have especially focused on banning the cloning of humans ( 11 ). The UK, Australia, Spain, Germany, and Denmark have implemented laws barring human cloning. Opponents of human cloning have cited potential ethical and legal implications. They emphasize that individuals are more than a sum of their genes. A clone of an individual might have a different environment and thus might be a different person psychologically and have a different “soul.” Cloning of a human is replication and not procreation.

Morally questionable uses of genetic material transfer and cloning obviously exist. For example, infertility experts might be especially interested in the cloning technique to produce identical twins, triplets, or quadruplets. Parents of a child who has a terminal illness might wish to have a clone of the child to replace the dying child. The old stigma, eugenics, also raises its ugly head if infertile couples wish to use the nuclear transfer techniques to ensure that their “hard-earned” offspring will possess excellent genes. Moral perspectives will differ tremendously in these cases. Judgments about the appropriateness of such uses are outside the realm of science.

Opponents of animal cloning are concerned that cloning will negate genetic diversity of livestock. This also applies to human cloning, which could negate genetic diversity of humans. Cloning creates, by definition, a second class of human, a human with a determined genotype called into existence, however benevolently, at the behest of another. The insulation of selection-of-mate is lost, and the second class is created. Few contrasts could be so clear. Selection-of-mate is so imprecise that, at present, would-be parents have to accept a complete new genome for the sake of including or excluding one or a few traits; cloning, in contrast, is the precise determination of all genes. If we acknowledge that the creation of a second class of humans is unethical, then we preempt any argument that some motivations for human cloning may be acceptable.

The opponents of cloning also fear that biotechnically cloned foods might increase the risk of humans acquiring some malignancies or infections such as “mad cow disease,” a prion spongiform dementia encephalopathy (human Jakob–Creutzfeldt disease).

The technological advances associated with manipulation of genetic materials now permit us to envision replacement of defective genes with “good” genes. Although current progress is not sufficient to make this practical today for human diseases, any efforts to stop such research as a result of cloning hysteria would preclude the development of true cures for many hereditary human diseases. Unreasonable restrictions on the use of human tissues in gene transfer research will have the inevitable consequences of delaying, if not preventing, the development of strategies to combat defective genes.

Wise legislation will enable humankind to realize the benefits of gene transfer technologies without risking the horrors that could arise from misuse of these technologies. Our hope is that such wise legislation is what will be enacted. In our view, the controversy surrounding human cloning must not lead to prohibitions that would prevent advances similar to those described here.

Wilmut I, Schnieke AE, McWhire J, Kind AJ, Campbell KHS. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 1997 ; 385 : 810 -813.

Pennisi E, Williams N. Will Dolly send in the clones?. Science 1997 ; 275 : 1415 -1416.

Gurdon JB, Laskey RA, Reeves OR. The developmental capacity of nuclei transplanted from keratinized skin cells of adult frogs. J Embryol Exp Morphol 1975 ; 34 : 93 -112.

Prather RS. Nuclei transplantation in the bovine embryo. Assessment of donor nuclei and recipient oocyte. Biol Reprod 1987 ; 37 : 859 -866.

Kwon OY, Kono T. Production of identical sextuplet mice by transferring metaphase nuclei from 4-cell embryos. J Reprod Fert Abst Ser 1996 ; 17 : 30 .

Kolata G. Lab yields lamb with human gene. NY Times 1997;166:July 25;A12..

Specter M, Kolta G. After decades of missteps, how cloning succeeded. NY Times 1997;166:March 3;B6–8..

Ibrahim YM. Ian Wilmut. NY Times 1997;166:February 24;B8..

Ryder OA, Benirschke K. The potential use of “cloning” in the conservation effort. Zoo Biol 1997 ; 16 : 295 -300.

Cohen J. Can cloning help save beleaguered species?. Science 1997 ; 276 : 1329 -1330.

Williams N. Cloning sparks calls for new laws. Science 1997;275:141-5..

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

  • Recommend to Your Librarian
  • Advertising and Corporate Services
  • Journals Career Network

Affiliations

  • Online ISSN 1530-8561
  • Print ISSN 0009-9147
  • Copyright © 2024 Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine
  • About Oxford Academic
  • Publish journals with us
  • University press partners
  • What we publish
  • New features  
  • Open access
  • Institutional account management
  • Rights and permissions
  • Get help with access
  • Accessibility
  • Advertising
  • Media enquiries
  • Oxford University Press
  • Oxford Languages
  • University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Vittana.org

11 Advantages and Disadvantages of Cloning

Cloning is a process that creates new life by copying the cell data of a living host. The cell data is gathered from the host and then implanted into an embryo, which undergoes a normal development cycle. Once born, the individual is a physical copy of the living host that had the cell data collected from it.

The first cloned animal from an adult somatic cell was Dolly the Sheep, a process which was successfully completed in the 1990s. The idea of cloning, however, dates to the 19th century. In 1885, Hans Dreisch became the first person to successfully perform a cloning experiment with a sea urchin.

There are certain advantages and disadvantages of cloning that must be fully evaluated to determine the value of this scientific process. Here are the key points to discuss.

What Are the Advantages of Cloning?

1. Cloning doesn’t need to involve making a whole new person. Imagine if a person has a failing liver. What if the cells of the liver could be cloned so that a new liver could be created and then transplanted? It would be an easy way to solve the organ scarcity issue that currently exists. The process of cloning could also be used to repair or grow new cells to replace damaged or missing ones, which could treat illnesses and genetic disorders.

2. It removes the barrier of infertility. Because cloning uses adult somatic cells, it is a process that allows anyone to have a child that is biologically their own. Even if that person has a reproductive system which does not support fertility, doctors could take the somatic cells and implant them into an embryo, creating new life. This technology would give everyone the chance to become a parent, even if they were not sexually active.

3. It could extend human life capabilities. In the developed world, the average lifespan is approaching 85 years for top nations. Even in the United States, the average lifespan is upward of 70 years for men and women. Not only could cloning help to extend life to even longer lengths, it could be a way to bring the rest of the world up to the current standards as well. In Sierra Leone, for example, the average lifespan for an adult male is just 49.3 years of age.

4. Biological children could be born to same-gender couples. Instead of using sperm or egg banks to create an embryo that could be brought to term, cloning would allow same-gender couples to have a child that was biologically their own. For women, a direct implantation of adult somatic cells wouldn’t even require a male donor at all except for the initial fertilization process to create the embryo. For men, the same would be true regarding the egg requiring fertilization.

5. It could restore balance to families. One of the greatest tragedies that occurs in life is the death of a child. In the United States, 7 out of every 1,000 children under the age of 5. According to information published by CNN, firearms kill nearly 1,300 children in the US every year. Sometimes this happens because of disease or illness. There are also accidents and unpredictable events that can take the life of a child. Cloning offers a process where parents could effectively balance their grief by creating another child. Although the new life would be different, it would also be similar, and that could temper some of the grief that is experienced.

What Are the Disadvantages of Cloning?

1. The results on society would be unpredictable. The most common argument against cloning involve the unknowns that would happen to society. If parents would be able to “manufacture” children to specific genetic profiles, then there is the possibility that genetic variation could decrease. This would result in humanity becoming more susceptible to disease and deformity, requiring more genetic selection, because we would eventually be inbreeding with ourselves.

2. The rich would get richer and the poor would disappear. A society where genetic selection is possible would place a higher emphasis on the socioeconomic means of each person or household. Those who could afford cloning would essentially create their own class, while those who could not afford the process would likely be shunned or disregarded by the rest of society.

3. It is an unpredictable and certain process. Cloning is far from a perfected science. Many of the disadvantages involve the “what ifs” of this science, but there are some facts to think about too. When Dolly was successfully cloned, only 9 eggs out of 300 were successfully implanted with adult somatic cells to create a pregnancy. Out of those 9 eggs, only one was successfully delivered to term. Although advances have been made since Dolly in the field of cloning, the science still has a long way to go.

4. There are unforeseen consequences that we cannot predict. Every advancement in science has some positives, but equal and opposite negatives. The bigger a success, then the bigger a problem there will be to manage. Manipulating human genes will have unpredictable and unforeseen consequences that could change how we live. It could endanger humanity as a species. At the very least, people who are cloned may find themselves dealing with severe health problems at some point in their life.

5. Cloned people could be treated like cattle. If a clone is an exact replica of the host, then embryos could be implanted with the sole purpose of helping with the health of the host instead of treating the clone with equal rights as a human being. Embryonic stem cells might be harvested from a clone. Clones might be used as automatic organ donors. They might be placed into forced labor. The levels of abuse that could occur with this type of technology are immense.

6. Children would still be in abusive situations. According to Michael Petit, President of the Every Child Matters Education Fund, more than 2,000 children, on average, are killed in their own homes by aa family member. Child abuse death rates in the US are 3 times higher than what they are in Canada and 11 times higher than what Italy experiences. The ability to have more children through cloning would only expand these rates unless core changes to family structures could be encouraged. The US already sees an average of 4 children die every day because of abuse and neglect.

The advantages and disadvantages of cloning show us that if this science can be managed ethically, there are still societal implications that must be taken into account. There are unknowns that we cannot plan for. There are potential health benefits, but there are also potential health risks.

How do you feel about the advantages and disadvantages of cloning?

  • Introduction to Genomics
  • Educational Resources
  • Policy Issues in Genomics
  • The Human Genome Project
  • Funding Opportunities
  • Funded Programs & Projects
  • Division and Program Directors
  • Scientific Program Analysts
  • Contact by Research Area
  • News & Events
  • Research Areas
  • Research investigators
  • Research Projects
  • Clinical Research
  • Data Tools & Resources
  • Genomics & Medicine
  • Family Health History
  • For Patients & Families
  • For Health Professionals
  • Jobs at NHGRI
  • Training at NHGRI
  • Funding for Research Training
  • Professional Development Programs
  • NHGRI Culture
  • Social Media
  • Broadcast Media
  • Image Gallery
  • Press Resources
  • Organization
  • NHGRI Director
  • Mission & Vision
  • Policies & Guidance
  • Institute Advisors
  • Strategic Vision
  • Leadership Initiatives
  • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
  • Partner with NHGRI
  • Staff Search

Cloning Fact Sheet

The term cloning describes a number of different processes that can be used to produce genetically identical copies of a biological entity. The copied material, which has the same genetic makeup as the original, is referred to as a clone. Researchers have cloned a wide range of biological materials, including genes, cells, tissues and even entire organisms, such as a sheep.

Do clones ever occur naturally?

Yes. In nature, some plants and single-celled organisms, such as bacteria , produce genetically identical offspring through a process called asexual reproduction. In asexual reproduction, a new individual is generated from a copy of a single cell from the parent organism.

Natural clones, also known as identical twins, occur in humans and other mammals. These twins are produced when a fertilized egg splits, creating two or more embryos that carry almost identical DNA . Identical twins have nearly the same genetic makeup as each other, but they are genetically different from either parent.

What are the types of artificial cloning?

There are three different types of artificial cloning: gene cloning, reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning.

Gene cloning produces copies of genes or segments of DNA. Reproductive cloning produces copies of whole animals. Therapeutic cloning produces embryonic stem cells for experiments aimed at creating tissues to replace injured or diseased tissues.

Gene cloning, also known as DNA cloning, is a very different process from reproductive and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive and therapeutic cloning share many of the same techniques, but are done for different purposes.

Cloning

What sort of cloning research is going on at NHGRI?

Gene cloning is the most common type of cloning done by researchers at NHGRI. NHGRI researchers have not cloned any mammals and NHGRI does not clone humans.

How are genes cloned?

Researchers routinely use cloning techniques to make copies of genes that they wish to study. The procedure consists of inserting a gene from one organism, often referred to as "foreign DNA," into the genetic material of a carrier called a vector. Examples of vectors include bacteria, yeast cells, viruses or plasmids, which are small DNA circles carried by bacteria. After the gene is inserted, the vector is placed in laboratory conditions that prompt it to multiply, resulting in the gene being copied many times over.

How are animals cloned?

In reproductive cloning, researchers remove a mature somatic cell , such as a skin cell, from an animal that they wish to copy. They then transfer the DNA of the donor animal's somatic cell into an egg cell, or oocyte, that has had its own DNA-containing nucleus removed.

Researchers can add the DNA from the somatic cell to the empty egg in two different ways. In the first method, they remove the DNA-containing nucleus of the somatic cell with a needle and inject it into the empty egg. In the second approach, they use an electrical current to fuse the entire somatic cell with the empty egg.

In both processes, the egg is allowed to develop into an early-stage embryo in the test-tube and then is implanted into the womb of an adult female animal.

Ultimately, the adult female gives birth to an animal that has the same genetic make up as the animal that donated the somatic cell. This young animal is referred to as a clone. Reproductive cloning may require the use of a surrogate mother to allow development of the cloned embryo, as was the case for the most famous cloned organism, Dolly the sheep.

What animals have been cloned?

Over the last 50 years, scientists have conducted cloning experiments in a wide range of animals using a variety of techniques. In 1979, researchers produced the first genetically identical mice by splitting mouse embryos in the test tube and then implanting the resulting embryos into the wombs of adult female mice. Shortly after that, researchers produced the first genetically identical cows, sheep and chickens by transferring the nucleus of a cell taken from an early embryo into an egg that had been emptied of its nucleus.

It was not until 1996, however, that researchers succeeded in cloning the first mammal from a mature (somatic) cell taken from an adult animal. After 276 attempts, Scottish researchers finally produced Dolly, the lamb from the udder cell of a 6-year-old sheep. Two years later, researchers in Japan cloned eight calves from a single cow, but only four survived.

Besides cattle and sheep, other mammals that have been cloned from somatic cells include: cat, deer, dog, horse, mule, ox, rabbit and rat. In addition, a rhesus monkey has been cloned by embryo splitting.

Have humans been cloned?

Despite several highly publicized claims, human cloning still appears to be fiction. There currently is no solid scientific evidence that anyone has cloned human embryos.

In 1998, scientists in South Korea claimed to have successfully cloned a human embryo, but said the experiment was interrupted very early when the clone was just a group of four cells. In 2002, Clonaid, part of a religious group that believes humans were created by extraterrestrials, held a news conference to announce the birth of what it claimed to be the first cloned human, a girl named Eve. However, despite repeated requests by the research community and the news media, Clonaid never provided any evidence to confirm the existence of this clone or the other 12 human clones it purportedly created.

In 2004, a group led by Woo-Suk Hwang of Seoul National University in South Korea published a paper in the journal Science in which it claimed to have created a cloned human embryo in a test tube. However, an independent scientific committee later found no proof to support the claim and, in January 2006, Science announced that Hwang's paper had been retracted.

From a technical perspective, cloning humans and other primates is more difficult than in other mammals. One reason is that two proteins essential to cell division, known as spindle proteins, are located very close to the chromosomes in primate eggs. Consequently, removal of the egg's nucleus to make room for the donor nucleus also removes the spindle proteins, interfering with cell division. In other mammals, such as cats, rabbits and mice, the two spindle proteins are spread throughout the egg. So, removal of the egg's nucleus does not result in loss of spindle proteins. In addition, some dyes and the ultraviolet light used to remove the egg's nucleus can damage the primate cell and prevent it from growing.

Do cloned animals always look identical?

No. Clones do not always look identical. Although clones share the same genetic material, the environment also plays a big role in how an organism turns out.

For example, the first cat to be cloned, named Cc, is a female calico cat that looks very different from her mother. The explanation for the difference is that the color and pattern of the coats of cats cannot be attributed exclusively to genes. A biological phenomenon involving inactivation of the X chromosome (See sex chromosome ) in every cell of the female cat (which has two X chromosomes) determines which coat color genes are switched off and which are switched on. The distribution of X inactivation, which seems to occur randomly, determines the appearance of the cat's coat.

What are the potential applications of cloned animals?

Reproductive cloning may enable researchers to make copies of animals with the potential benefits for the fields of medicine and agriculture.

For instance, the same Scottish researchers who cloned Dolly have cloned other sheep that have been genetically modified to produce milk that contains a human protein essential for blood clotting. The hope is that someday this protein can be purified from the milk and given to humans whose blood does not clot properly. Another possible use of cloned animals is for testing new drugs and treatment strategies. The great advantage of using cloned animals for drug testing is that they are all genetically identical, which means their responses to the drugs should be uniform rather than variable as seen in animals with different genetic make-ups.

After consulting with many independent scientists and experts in cloning, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided in January 2008 that meat and milk from cloned animals, such as cattle, pigs and goats, are as safe as those from non-cloned animals. The FDA action means that researchers are now free to using cloning methods to make copies of animals with desirable agricultural traits, such as high milk production or lean meat. However, because cloning is still very expensive, it will likely take many years until food products from cloned animals actually appear in supermarkets.

Another application is to create clones to build populations of endangered, or possibly even extinct, species of animals. In 2001, researchers produced the first clone of an endangered species: a type of Asian ox known as a guar. Sadly, the baby guar, which had developed inside a surrogate cow mother, died just a few days after its birth. In 2003, another endangered type of ox, called the Banteg, was successfully cloned. Soon after, three African wildcats were cloned using frozen embryos as a source of DNA. Although some experts think cloning can save many species that would otherwise disappear, others argue that cloning produces a population of genetically identical individuals that lack the genetic variability necessary for species survival.

Some people also have expressed interest in having their deceased pets cloned in the hope of getting a similar animal to replace the dead one. But as shown by Cc the cloned cat, a clone may not turn out exactly like the original pet whose DNA was used to make the clone.

What are the potential drawbacks of cloning animals?

Reproductive cloning is a very inefficient technique and most cloned animal embryos cannot develop into healthy individuals. For instance, Dolly was the only clone to be born live out of a total of 277 cloned embryos. This very low efficiency, combined with safety concerns, presents a serious obstacle to the application of reproductive cloning.

Researchers have observed some adverse health effects in sheep and other mammals that have been cloned. These include an increase in birth size and a variety of defects in vital organs, such as the liver, brain and heart. Other consequences include premature aging and problems with the immune system. Another potential problem centers on the relative age of the cloned cell's chromosomes. As cells go through their normal rounds of division, the tips of the chromosomes, called telomeres, shrink. Over time, the telomeres become so short that the cell can no longer divide and, consequently, the cell dies. This is part of the natural aging process that seems to happen in all cell types. As a consequence, clones created from a cell taken from an adult might have chromosomes that are already shorter than normal, which may condemn the clones' cells to a shorter life span. Indeed, Dolly, who was cloned from the cell of a 6-year-old sheep, had chromosomes that were shorter than those of other sheep her age. Dolly died when she was six years old, about half the average sheep's 12-year lifespan.

What is therapeutic cloning?

Therapeutic cloning involves creating a cloned embryo for the sole purpose of producing embryonic stem cells with the same DNA as the donor cell. These stem cells can be used in experiments aimed at understanding disease and developing new treatments for disease. To date, there is no evidence that human embryos have been produced for therapeutic cloning.

The richest source of embryonic stem cells is tissue formed during the first five days after the egg has started to divide. At this stage of development, called the blastocyst, the embryo consists of a cluster of about 100 cells that can become any cell type. Stem cells are harvested from cloned embryos at this stage of development, resulting in destruction of the embryo while it is still in the test tube.

What are the potential applications of therapeutic cloning?

Researchers hope to use embryonic stem cells, which have the unique ability to generate virtually all types of cells in an organism, to grow healthy tissues in the laboratory that can be used replace injured or diseased tissues. In addition, it may be possible to learn more about the molecular causes of disease by studying embryonic stem cell lines from cloned embryos derived from the cells of animals or humans with different diseases. Finally, differentiated tissues derived from ES cells are excellent tools to test new therapeutic drugs.

What are the potential drawbacks of therapeutic cloning?

Many researchers think it is worthwhile to explore the use of embryonic stem cells as a path for treating human diseases. However, some experts are concerned about the striking similarities between stem cells and cancer cells. Both cell types have the ability to proliferate indefinitely and some studies show that after 60 cycles of cell division, stem cells can accumulate mutations that could lead to cancer. Therefore, the relationship between stem cells and cancer cells needs to be more clearly understood if stem cells are to be used to treat human disease.

What are some of the ethical issues related to cloning?

Gene cloning is a carefully regulated technique that is largely accepted today and used routinely in many labs worldwide. However, both reproductive and therapeutic cloning raise important ethical issues, especially as related to the potential use of these techniques in humans.

Reproductive cloning would present the potential of creating a human that is genetically identical to another person who has previously existed or who still exists. This may conflict with long-standing religious and societal values about human dignity, possibly infringing upon principles of individual freedom, identity and autonomy. However, some argue that reproductive cloning could help sterile couples fulfill their dream of parenthood. Others see human cloning as a way to avoid passing on a deleterious gene that runs in the family without having to undergo embryo screening or embryo selection.

Therapeutic cloning, while offering the potential for treating humans suffering from disease or injury, would require the destruction of human embryos in the test tube. Consequently, opponents argue that using this technique to collect embryonic stem cells is wrong, regardless of whether such cells are used to benefit sick or injured people.

Last updated: August 15, 2020

  • Open access
  • Published: 29 July 2003

Human cloning laws, human dignity and the poverty of the policy making dialogue

  • Timothy Caulfield 1 , 2 , 3  

BMC Medical Ethics volume  4 , Article number:  3 ( 2003 ) Cite this article

104k Accesses

10 Citations

10 Altmetric

Metrics details

The regulation of human cloning continues to be a significant national and international policy issue. Despite years of intense academic and public debate, there is little clarity as to the philosophical foundations for many of the emerging policy choices. The notion of "human dignity" is commonly used to justify cloning laws. The basis for this justification is that reproductive human cloning necessarily infringes notions of human dignity.

The author critiques one of the most commonly used ethical justifications for cloning laws – the idea that reproductive cloning necessarily infringes notions of human dignity. He points out that there is, in fact, little consensus on point and that the counter arguments are rarely reflected in formal policy. Rarely do domestic or international instruments provide an operational definition of human dignity and there is rarely an explanation of how, exactly, dignity is infringed in the context reproductive cloning.

It is the author's position that the lack of thoughtful analysis of the role of human dignity hurts the broader public debate about reproductive cloning, trivializes the value of human dignity as a normative principle and makes it nearly impossible to critique the actual justifications behind many of the proposed policies.

Peer Review reports

Dolly, the most famous sheep in history, was euthanised on February 14 this year at the age of 6 after being diagnosed with an incurable lung disorder. [ 1 ] Dolly was a famous symbol of both the great possibilities of science and a focal point for public concerns about the social impact of biotechnology. Almost immediately after Dolly's birth, there were calls to introduce regulatory controls of the technology. Though most countries still do not have specific cloning laws [ 2 ], it continues to be a significant national and international policy issue. But despite years of intense academic and public debate, there remains little clarity as to the philosophical foundations for many of the emerging policy choices.

In this paper, I briefly explore one of the most commonly used ethical justifications for cloning laws, the idea that reproductive cloning necessarily infringes notions of human dignity. As we will see, there is, in fact, little consensus on point. Unfortunately, the counter arguments are rarely reflected in formal policy. Few, if any, domestic or international instruments provide an operational definition of human dignity [ 3 , 4 ]and there is rarely an explanation of how, exactly, dignity is infringed in the context reproductive cloning.

Admittedly, I do not provide my own definition of human dignity. I will, however, endeavor to divine the likely definition of human dignity at play in the context of a given social concern. We will see that regardless of the definition that seems to be implied within the social concerns outlined below, there are legitimate counter arguments that weaken the claim that human reproductive cloning necessarily infringes human dignity. Many thoughtful scholars have already done an admirable job attempting to define human dignity and it place in the policy making process. [ 5 – 8 ] The goal of this paper is not to provide a comprehensive review of these possible definitions, and there are many, or to definitively answer the question of whether human reproductive cloning infringes human dignity. Rather, in this paper I argue that the lack of thoughtful policy analysis of the role of human dignity hurts the broader public debate about reproductive cloning, trivializes the potential value of human dignity as a normative principle and makes it nearly impossible to critique the actual justifications behind many of the proposed policies.

Concerns About Human Dignity

Numerous arguments of varying persuasive force have been put forward as justifications for a ban on reproductive cloning. To cite just a few examples, some commentators have suggested that the visceral reaction that many in the public have had to the idea of human reproductive cloning is, from a policy perspective, significant enough to justify, on its own, a regulatory response. [ 9 ] Others have suggested reproductive cloning would have an adverse impact on the social definition of family: "Modernity's assault on the family would thus be complete with the development of cloning. Already stripped of its social function, the family would now be rendered biologically unnecessary, if not irrelevant".[ 10 ] And, of course, there are the clear health and safety issues that are far from being resolved.[ 11 ] Indeed, Dolly's death, while not definitively traceable to the cloning process, again highlighted the possible health risks associated with reproductive cloning. [ 12 ]

However, the broadest concern, and the concern that is often explicitly mentioned in relevant policy statements, is that human reproductive cloning, at some level, infringes notions of human dignity. One of the best known illustrations is UNESCO's Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights which recommends a ban on "practices which are contrary to human dignity, such as reproductive cloning". [ 13 ] Similarly, in 1998, the World Health Organization reaffirmed that "cloning for the replication of human individuals is ethically unacceptable and contrary to human dignity and integrity".[ 14 ] The Council of Europe's Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and its Additional Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings states that: "the instrumentalization of human beings through the deliberate creation of genetically identical human beings is contrary to human dignity and thus constitutes a misuse of biology and medicine".[ 15 ]

Despite the existence of such policy statements, and despite almost universal public objection to the idea of reproduction cloning [ 16 ] there is, at least in the academic community, little agreement about the role of human dignity in this context. Indeed, it has been suggested that "aside from the moral debate on whether the embryo is a human being arguments about human dignity do not hold up well under rational reflection".[ 17 ]

Below I briefly consider some of the reasons commentators remain skeptical of the claim that reproductive cloning infringes human dignity. The goal is not to provide a comprehensive analysis of all the relevant critiques, but to simply highlight a few of the counter arguments and substantive considerations that remain largely absent from a consideration of human dignity in the context of formal policy development.

Autonomy and Uniqueness

At the heart of many of the human dignity arguments, often implicitly, is the idea that copying someone's genome is a morally problematic action. From the perspective of human dignity, the concern is founded on the assumption that a clone's autonomy will be compromised and that a person's genome is singularly important to human uniqueness.[ 18 ] For those who espouse this view, dignity is obviously closely related to autonomy (likely to some version of the classic Kantian view of dignity) and the ability to make autonomous choices. Moreover, dignity is connected to human "uniqueness," though it is rarely explained why this is so. As Donald Bruce argues: "Willfully to copy the human genetic identity seems to go beyond something inherent in human dignity and individuality". [ 19 ] Many policy statements, such as the few noted above, seem to adopt this view and specifically link genetic identity with the concept of human dignity. Other statements simply assert that "the production of identical human individuals" [ 20 ] or the creation of a "genetic 'copy"' [ 21 ] should be banned.

The ethos that underlies these positions is, of course, both scientifically inaccurate and philosophically problematic. Without resolving the point, let us assume that, somehow, uniqueness is central to an individual's dignity. We must ask, then, what role our genome has in our uniqueness and, more to the point, why copying it infringes human dignity. Our genome plays a key role in how we develop, but it is hardly determinative of who we are as individuals. Is an identical twin's dignity compromised because of the mere existence of a sibling with an identical genome? More importantly, our genes do not, on their own, bind our future life to a particular course. Absent other external factors (such as social or parental expectations), an individual's autonomy is not compromised solely because he/she does not have a unique genome. To believe otherwise is to adopt a deterministic view of the role of genes that is simply wrong. [ 22 , 23 ] There are very few human traits that are controlled solely by genetic factors, and this is particularly true of the infinitely complex characteristics that make us who we are as individuals. [ 24 ] A human clone would be wholly unique and, as such, it is difficult to maintain that even a "uniqueness" view of human dignity is dependant on having a unique genome.

From a policy perspective, it is worth noting that a variety of commentators have long questioned the deterministic argument that underlies the autonomy/uniqueness concern about reproductive cloning. For example, shortly after the birth of Dolly Sir John Polkinghorne noted that " [o]ne of the by-products of the furor about Dolly has been to remind thoughtful people of the poverty and implausibility of a genetic reductionist account of human nature". [ 25 ] George Wright takes this idea to an extreme length by suggesting that reproductive cloning would actually promote human dignity by proving the inaccuracy of genetic determinism. "Human cloning may well serve to highlight, to emphasize, and to set off with greater clarity, quite apart from anyone's intentions, the mysterious capacities that comprise and express our human dignity".[ 26 ]

Instrumentalism

For some, it is not the technical copying of a genome that gives rise to concerns about reproductive cloning, but the possibility that cloning will be used in a way that instrumentalizes the clone. Again, this issue is likely tied to the concern that reproductive cloning would infringe the basic Kantian tenet to treat every human being as an end, not as a means. [ 27 ] It is certainly possible that the use of reproductive cloning for the purpose of creating an individual for a particular life role could infringe the resultant clone's dignity. However, it is the pressure or social expectations (expectations that are necessarily informed by an inaccurate view of the role of genes) placed on the individual clone that challenge the clone's human dignity, not the process of reproductive cloning. As noted by Pattinson, the act of cloning could be implicated in an intention to "violate the rights of the clone in the future." He goes on to note, however, that in such circumstances, "it is not the cloning as such that violates the clone's rights, but the intention to make the clone worse off (relative to its alternatives) in the future". [ 28 ]

That said, some argue that the mere act of cloning instrumentalizes the clone, "because the clone is created for the primary benefit not of the individual but of some third party as a means to an end". [ 29 ] This argument is problematic for a number of reasons. First, it raises the interesting question of whether an act done prior to the birth of an individual can infringe the dignity of that individual. Even if an individual is created with instrumental intentions, if, after the birth of the individual, he/she is treated as an equal member of the community, as an autonomous individual and with respect, is the individual's dignity still being infringed?

Second, if one accepts that our genes do not determine our life course or who we are as individuals, it is unclear how the technical act of cloning is more problematic, in relation to instrumentalism, than having children through IVF or, for that matter, making children the natural way for the sole purpose of producing an heir, labour or a means of old age support. Of course, one could argue that, for the sake of consistency, these latter activities should also be banned. However, monitoring and assessing the motives of perspective parents would not, quite obviously, be a practical or appropriate state policy.

Finally, these kind of instrumentalist concerns assume that cloning would always be done for instrumentalist purposes, which may not be the case (e.g., individuals may simply wish to use cloning for the same reason people use IVF, for the purpose of having biologically related offspring). As noted by Steven Malby: "From the point of view of dignity, the desire to treat infertility clearly does not violate any of the parameters associated with an objective perspective of dignity". [ 30 ] At a minimum, it is hard to support the argument that all forms of reproductive cloning will inevitably infringe human dignity. "We should distinguish among the different forms, uses, and contexts of human cloning in assessing the relationship between cloning and human dignity".[ 31 ]

Replication

Closely tied to the concerns regarding instrumentalism and the copying of an individual's genome, are the claims that the asexual nature of the process is "unnatural," that cloning is "replication" and not "reproduction" and that, therefore, by implication, cloning degrades human dignity. Gilbert Meilaender notes that we "find asexual reproduction only in the lowest forms of life. ... Children conceived sexually are 'begotten, not made.' When a man and a woman beget a child, that child is formed out of what they are. What we beget is like ourselves, equal to us in dignity and not at our disposal". [ 32 ]

Though individuals may not feel comfortable with the process (just as many did not feel comfortable with cadaveric research, in vitro fertilization and sperm donation), there must be something about the "replication" process that infringes human dignity. It is unclear how, exactly, the asexual nature of the process, on its own, is problematic from the perspective of human dignity. Again, people may have nefarious motivations for using cloning – just as they may have questionable reasons for using IVF or having children the natural way – but aside from religious arguments regarding the moral status of the embryo and the significance of sexual union, there seems to be little to support the notion that "replication" infringes human dignity.

Meilaender's claim that being created by a sexual union that is beyond "reason or will" is central to our dignity seems to suggest that the thousands of children born as a result of reproductive technologies are, somehow, less worthy of dignity. [ 33 ] Surely the process used to produce an individual is completely irrelevant to the respect and dignity the individual deserves once born. In fact, if we lived in a society that allowed individuals created by cloning, or any other process, to be treated as less than human, reproductive cloning would be far from our most pressing policy concern.

Community Dignity

It has also been suggested that reproductive cloning may adversely impact "communal dignity" or "the dignity of humankind". [ 34 ] While a detailed discussion of this issues is beyond the scope of this paper, it should be remembered that not all agree that "communities" have dignity in the same way that individuals have dignity. Indeed, most traditional legal applications of human dignity emphasize not the community but the protection of individual rights, often in an effort to guard against state imposed incursion upon individual autonomy. [ 35 , 36 ] As summarized by Deirk Ullrich in relation to law in Canada and Germany: "human dignity is an indispensable compass in our continuing journey to promote and protect the rights and freedoms of the individual". [ 37 ] That said, there are those who take a more expansive, less Western centric, view of dignity, suggesting, for instance, that dignity is also relevant to the way in "which groups visualize and constitute themselves." [ 38 ] This type of reference to "communal dignity" can be found in documents such as the UNESCO Declaration: "no research or its applications concerning the human genome, in particular in the fields of biology, genetics and medicine, should prevail over the respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity of individuals or, where applicable, of groups of people" [ 39 ]

However, even if one accepts a community view of human dignity, we see that in the context of reproductive cloning much of the concerns remain closely associated with individual autonomy. For example, Malby poses the question thus: "Does dignity impose a responsibility to protect a key feature of humanity (our 'genetic heritage'), from which (to an undetermined extent) we acquire key capacities such as autonomy and the capacity for moral thought?".[ 40 ] But if one's genetic make up is not a key feature to our autonomy and moral thought, and few could genuinely claim that it is, then a central plank of this concern is lost.

The Policy Response

Early in the cloning debate, many of the above points were noted by well-known scholars from a wide range of philosophical perspectives. [ 41 – 43 ] Nevertheless, there are few policy making entities that have, at least on the surface, engaged the human dignity debate in any meaningful manner. [ 44 ]

In Canada, for example, the government has recommended a ban on all forms of human cloning. The Health Canada information document that accompanied the publication of the proposed law simply claims, without any explanation of how or why, that human cloning "would be banned because it treats human beings as though they were objects and does not respect the individuality of human beings". [ 45 ] A later report by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health also recommends a ban on human cloning. The Committee noted that the recommendation is based on a number of core principles, including human dignity, but the Committee makes no attempt to relate the recommendation to the notion of human dignity. [ 46 ]

The two US reports, the 2002 US President's Council on Bioethics [ 47 ] and the 1997 Report of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission [ 48 ], do, at least, discuss the fallacy of genetic determinism. Nevertheless, they do not connect this analysis to the issue of human dignity and both conclude that reproductive cloning still creates problems in relation to individual autonomy. For example, the President's Council concludes that " [w]hat matters is the cloned individual's perception of the significance of the 'precedent life' and the way that perception cramps and limits a sense of self and independence". [ 49 ] Because this concern is based on the psychological harm associated with deterministic expectations, and not on the actual impact of cloning technology, they do little to support the argument that cloning, as a technology, infringes human dignity. In fact, as I have noted elsewhere, cloning laws that are not accompanied by thoughtful policy analysis may have the unintended effect of legitimizes perceptions of genetic determinism.[ 50 ]

Why Human Dignity?

If one were to take a skeptical view of the policy making process, it would not be hard to conclude that concern for human dignity is used as a justification for cloning laws precisely because the notion of human dignity is both so revered and so ill-defined. This fits well with the broad, generalized concerns that the public seems to have about reproductive cloning. As noted by Ronald Dworkin, the public isn't terribly worried about safety or research ethics, but have "some deeper, less articulate ground for that revulsion, even if they have not or perhaps cannot fully articulate that ground, but can express it only in heated and logically inappropriate language, like [a] bizarre reference to 'fundamental human rights..."' [ 51 ]

This view of public attitudes is supported by survey data. Risk and safety are not the issues driving public reaction. When asked, the public often lists morality and/or religion as the basis for their objection to human cloning. [ 52 ] As such, policy makers can safely use the concept of human dignity to reflect general unspecified condemnation. For a good percentage of the public, human reproductive cloning simply seems immoral and, for lack of a better philosophical argument, it is declared that it infringes human dignity. Dworkin puts it in less secular terms: "It is wrong, people say, particularly after more familiar objections have been found wanting, to play God". [ 53 ]

Another reason concerns for human dignity may be used so frequently as a justification for cloning bans is that they allow policy makers to avoid more socially controversial and politically charged rationales, such as those based on a particular religious perspective or abortion politics. It is far easier, at least politically, to say that a given law is based on concern for human dignity than on, for example, a Christian view of the moral status of the embryo – though there seems little doubt that religious perspectives have played an important role in the policy process. [ 54 ]

In addition, the use of human dignity allows policy makers to avoid the appearance that they are seeking to regulate morality. For many legal scholars, moral belief or repugnance "is not sufficient to outlaw conduct engaged in by consenting adults". [ 55 ]

Finally, I suspect that much of the debate remains scientifically ill-informed. Media images of reproductive cloning, which are everywhere, often portray clones as "carbon copies". [ 56 ] These representations undoubtedly impact the public's "intuitive" response to the technology and the public's desire to ban the technology.

In fact, I too have intuitive concerns regarding the appropriateness of human reproductive cloning. I believe that reproductive cloning will have little practical use, the health and safety concerns will likely endure for decades, and it may create some challenging genetic enhancement issues. There are, no doubt, sound reasons to consider the tight regulation of reproductive cloning.

Why, then, is the ad hoc use of the notion of human dignity in the context of reproductive cloning a problem? It hurts public debate. Though I am tremendously skeptical of the worth of intuitive reactions as a justification for a given law, particularly criminal prohibitions [ 57 ] if general cultural anxiety is one of the rationales for a proposed ban, then this should be explicitly stated. Policy makers should not dress up the argument as a concern for human dignity in order to create the perception of legitimacy. By doing so, transparency in policy making is obscured or even lost. As noted by Shaun Pattinson in his critique of the Canadian government's use of human dignity as a justification for a ban: "Once again we are left with the feeling that other arguments are in play but remain unsure as to what those arguments are". [ 58 ] But without knowing that these "other arguments" are, it is impossible to have an informed policy discussion.

If the concerns about cloning are based on the fear that we live in a world increasingly governed by inaccurate views of genetic determinism and, therefore, people may have inappropriate ideas of what cloning can do, [ 59 ] then this too should be stated. Indeed, it could be argued that we should be focussing our policy making energy not on the technology but on the possible causes of the deterministic sentiments that may motivate the desire to use reproductive cloning. Unfortunately, "genetic determinism" is a much more challenging and amorphous policy target as compared with human cloning technology.

In addition, using human dignity as a blanket argument against all forms of human cloning makes it much more difficult to reflect rationally on the true risks and benefits of the technology. Such claims can have powerful rhetorical force (no one is against the idea of human dignity!). [ 60 ] But, as noted by Beyleveld and Brownsword, "from any perspective that values rational debate about human genetics, it is an abuse of the concept of human dignity to operate it as a veto on any practice that is intuitively disliked".[ 61 ]

Finally, we are in danger of trivializing and degrading the potential normative value of human dignity. There seems little doubt that the rapid advances that are occurring in the field of science, and biotechnology in particular, will continue to create new social and regulatory challenges, many of which may also raise issues associated with notions of human dignity. The way we handle current science policy issues stands as a precedent for future analysis. The ad hoc application of human dignity in relation to human cloning will undoubtedly impact how it is applied to future technologies. We should strive to apply the principle in a logical and coherent fashion otherwise the notion of human dignity is in danger of being eroded to the point where it stands as nothing more than a symbol of amorphous cultural anxiety.

Author's Contributions

This paper is the original work of the author.

Vogel G: Dolly goes to greener pastures. Science. 2003, 299: 1163-

Google Scholar  

Bonnicksen A: Crafting a cloning policy: from Dolly to stem cells. Washington: Georgetown University Press. 2002

Schachter O: Human dignity as a normative concept. Am J Int Law. 1983, 77: 848-854.

Article   Google Scholar  

Malby S: Human dignity and human reproductive cloning. Heath and Human Rights. 2002, 6: 103-135.

Pullman D: Universalism, Particularism and the Ethics of Dignity. Christian Bioethics. 2001, 7: 333-358. 10.1076/chbi.7.3.333.6876.

Feldman D: Human Dignity as a Legal Value. Public Law. 1999, 682-702.

Gewirth A: Human Dignity as the Basis of Rights. In The Constitution of Rights: Human Dignity and American Values. Edited by: Meyer M, Parent W. 1992, London: Cornell University Press, 10-46.

Kass L: The wisdom of repugnance. The New Republic. June 2, 1997

Mohler RA: The brave new world of cloning: a Christian worldview perspective. In Human Cloning: Religious Responses. Edited by: Louisville: Westminster John Know Press. 1997, Cole-Turner R, 91-103.

Vogel G: Misguided chromosomes foil primate cloning. Science. 2003, 300: 225-10.1126/science.300.5617.225.

Giles G, Knight J: Dolly's death leaves researchers woolly on clone ageing issue. Nature. 2003, 421: 776-10.1038/421776a.

UNESCO: Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. Paris. 1997

World Health Organization: Ethical, Scientific and Social Implications of Cloning in Human Health. Geneva. 1998

Council of Europe: Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings. Paris. 1998

Saad L: Cloning of humans is a turn off to most Americans. Gallup News Service. May 16, 2002

Shalev C: Human Cloning and Human Rights: A Commentary. Health and Human Rights. 2002, 6: 137-151.

Williamson R: Human reproductive cloning is unethical because it undermines autonomy: commentary on Savulescu. J Med Ethics. 1999, 25: 96-97.

Bruce D: A View from Edinburgh. In Human Cloning: Religious Responses. Edited by: Cole-Turner R. 1997, Louisville: Westminster John Know Press, X-Y.

Scientific Committee of the International Society of Bioethics (SIBI): Bioethics Declaration of Gijon. Gijon. 2000

HUGO Ethics Committee: Statement on Cloning. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics (EJAIB). 1999, 9: 70-

Rovane C: Genetics and personal identity. In A Companion to Genethics. Edited by: Burley J, Harris J. 2002, Maiden, Mass: Blackwell Publisher, 245-252.

Caulfield T: Cloning and Genetic Determinism: A Call for Consistency. Nat Biotech. 2001, 19: 403-10.1038/88047.

Nuffield Council on Bioethics: Genetics and Human Behavior: The Ethical Context. London. 2002

Polkinghorne J: Cloning and the Moral Imperative. In Human Cloning: Religious Responses. Edited by: Cole-Turner R. 1997, Louisville: Westminster John Know Press, 35-41.

Wright TG: Second Thoughts: How Human Cloning Can Promote Human Dignity. Valparaiso University Law Review. 2000, 35: 1-35.

Beyleveld D, Brownsword R: Human Dignity, Human Rights, and Human Genetics. The Modern Law Review. 1998, 61: 661-681. 10.1111/1468-2230.00172.

Pattinson S: Reproductive Cloning: Can Cloning Harm the Clone?. Med L Rev. 2002, 10: 295-307.

Meilaender G: A Case Against Cloning. In Beyond Cloning: Religion and the Remaking of Humanity. Edited by: Cole-Turner R. 2001, Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 77-83.

Meilaender G: A Case Against Cloning. In Beyond Cloning: Religion and the Remaking of Humanity. Edited by: Harrisburg: Trinity Press International. 2001, Cole-Turner R, 77-83.

Kolnai A: Dignity. In Dignity, Character and Self-Respect. Edited by: Dillon RS. 1995, New York: Routledge, 53-75.

Ullrich D: Concurring Visions: Human Dignity in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Basic law of the Federal Republic of Germany. Global Jurist Frontiers. 2003, 3: [ http://www.bepress.com/gj/frontiers/vol3/iss1/art1/ ]

Lewontin RC: The Confusion over Cloning. The New York Review of Books. 23 October 1997, [ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=1046 ]

Harris J: Cloning and Human Dignity. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 1998, 7: 163-167. 10.1017/S0963180198702087.

Steinbock B: Cloning Human Beings: Sorting Through the Ethical Issues. In Human Cloning: Science, Ethics and Public Policy. Edited by: MacKinnon B. 2000, Chicago: University of Illinois Press, X-Y.

Health Canada: Proposal for Legislation Governing Assisted Human Reproduction: An Overview. Ottawa. 2001

House of Commons Standing Committee on Health: Assisted Human Reproduction: Building Families. Ottawa. 2001

President's Council on Bioethics: Human Cloning and Human Dignity. Washington. 2002

National Bioethics Advisory Commission: Cloning Human Beings. Rockville. 1997

Dworkin R: Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 2000

Pew Research Center: Public Makes Distinctions on Genetic Research. April 9, 2002, [ http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=152 ]

Donley Young C: A Comparative Look at the US and British Approaches to Stem Cell Research. Albany Law Review. 2002, 65: 831-855.

Cowan J: Fear Factor: Is Jurassic Park Dictating Canada's Policy Towards Cloning?. Saturday Night. 16-17. 14 July 2001

Caulfield T, Knowles L, Meslin E: Law and Policy in the Era of Reproductive Genetics. J Med Ethics.

AFP: Clonaid Chief Offers to Clone Israeli, Palestinian Victims. 18 March 2003, [ http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/18/1047749730611.html ]

Gibbins R: How in the World Can You Contest Equal Human Dignity?. National Journal of Constitutional Law. 2000, 12: 25-30.

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6939/4/3/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Lori Sheremeta, Nola Ries, Angela Long, Jai Shah, Jason Robert, the peer reviewers and to Genome Prairie, the Stem Cell Network and the AHFMR for their funding support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Law, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Canada

Timothy Caulfield

Health Law Institute, Faculty of Law, University of Alberta, Canada

Health Law Institute 4th Floor, Law Centre University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2H5, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy Caulfield .

Additional information

Competing interests.

None declared.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Caulfield, T. Human cloning laws, human dignity and the poverty of the policy making dialogue. BMC Med Ethics 4 , 3 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-4-3

Download citation

Received : 24 April 2003

Accepted : 29 July 2003

Published : 29 July 2003

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-4-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Human Dignity
  • Counter Argument
  • Policy Making Process
  • Genetic Determinism
  • Human Cloning

BMC Medical Ethics

ISSN: 1472-6939

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

  • IELTS Scores
  • Life Skills Test
  • Find a Test Centre
  • Find Student Housing
  • General Training
  • Academic Word List
  • Topic Vocabulary
  • Collocation
  • Phrasal Verbs
  • Writing eBooks
  • Reading eBook
  • All eBooks & Courses
  • Sample Essays
  • Human Cloning Essay

IELTS Human Cloning Essay

This is a model answer for a  human cloning  essay.

If you look at the task, the wording is slightly different from the common  'do you agree or disagree'  essay.

However, it is essentially asking the same thing.

As people live longer and longer, the idea of cloning human beings in order to provide spare parts is becoming a reality. The idea horrifies most people, yet it is no longer mere science fiction.

To what extent do you agree with such a procedure?

Have you any reservations?

Understanding the Question and Task

Human Cloning Essay IELTS

You are asked if you agree with human cloning to use their body parts (in other words, what are the benefits), and what reservations (concerns) you have (in other words, what are the disadvantages).

So the best way to answer this human cloning essay is probably to look at both sides of the issue as has been done in the model answer.

As always, you must read the question carefully to make sure you answer it fully and do not go off topic.

You are specifically being asked to discuss the issue of creating human clones to then use their body parts. If you write about other issues to do with human cloning, you may go off topic.

Model Human Cloning Essay

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.

Write at least 250 words.

Model Answer for Human Cloning Essay

The cloning of animals has been occurring for a number of years now, and this has now opened up the possibility of cloning humans too. Although there are clear benefits to humankind of cloning to provide spare body parts, I believe it raises a number of worrying ethical issues.

Due to breakthroughs in medical science and improved diets, people are living much longer than in the past. This, though, has brought with it problems. As people age, their organs can fail so they need replacing. If humans were cloned, their organs could then be used to replace those of sick people. It is currently the case that there are often not enough organ donors around to fulfil this need, so cloning humans would overcome the issue as there would then be a ready supply.

However, for good reasons, many people view this as a worrying development. Firstly, there are religious arguments against it. It would involve creating other human beings and then eventually killing them in order to use their organs, which it could be argued is murder. This is obviously a sin according to religious texts. Also, dilemmas would arise over what rights these people have, as surely they would be humans just like the rest of us. Furthermore, if we have the ability to clone humans, it has to be questioned where this cloning will end. Is it then acceptable for people to start cloning relatives or family members who have died?

To conclude, I do not agree with this procedure due to the ethical issues and dilemmas it would create. Cloning animals has been a positive development, but this is where it should end.

(276 words)

The essay is well-organized, with a clear introducion which introduces the topic:

  • The cloning of animals has been occurring for a number of years now, and this has now opened up the possibility of cloning humans too.

And it has a thesis statement that makes it clear exactly how the human cloning essay will be structured and what the candidate's opinion is:

  • Although there are clear benefits to humankind of cloning to provide spare body parts, I believe it raises a number of worrying ethical issues.

The first body paragraph discusses the advantages of cloning humans, and then the second body paragraph looks at the problems associated with this. The change of direction to look at the other side is clearly marked with a transition word ("however") and a topic sentence:

  • However, for good reasons, many people view this as a worrying development.

Other transition words are used effectively to guide the reader through the ideas in the human cloning essay: Firstly,.. Also,... Furthermore,...

The candidate demonstrates that they can use a mix of complex structures. For example:

  • Due to breakthroughs in medical science and improved diets, people are living much longer than in the past.
  • It would involve creating another human and then eventually killing it in order to use its organs, which it could be argued is murder.
  • ...if we have the ability to clone humans, it has to be questioned where this cloning will end.

<<< Back

Next >>>

More Agree / Disagree Essays:

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Free University Education Essay: Should it be paid for or free?

Free university education Model IELTS essay. Learn how to write high-scoring IELTS essays. The issue of free university education is an essay topic that comes up in the IELTS test. This essay therefore provides you with some of the key arguments about this topic.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Technology Development Essay: Are earlier developments the best?

This technology development essay shows you a complex IELTS essay question that is easily misunderstood. There are tips on how to approach IELTS essay questions

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

IELTS Vegetarianism Essay: Should we all be vegetarian to be healthy?

Vegetarianism Essay for IELTS: In this vegetarianism essay, the candidate disagrees with the statement, and is thus arguing that everyone does not need to be a vegetarian.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Sample IELTS Writing: Is spending on the Arts a waste of money?

Sample IELTS Writing: A common topic in IELTS is whether you think it is a good idea for government money to be spent on the arts. i.e. the visual arts, literary and the performing arts, or whether it should be spent elsewhere, usually on other public services.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

IELTS Sample Essay: Is alternative medicine ineffective & dangerous?

IELTS sample essay about alternative and conventional medicine - this shows you how to present a well-balanced argument. When you are asked whether you agree (or disagree), you can look at both sides of the argument if you want.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Airline Tax Essay: Would taxing air travel reduce pollution?

Airline Tax Essay for IELTS. Practice an agree and disagree essay on the topic of taxing airlines to reduce low-cost air traffic. You are asked to decide if you agree or disagree with taxing airlines in order to reduce the problems caused.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Ban Smoking in Public Places Essay: Should the government ban it?

Ban smoking in public places essay: The sample answer shows you how you can present the opposing argument first, that is not your opinion, and then present your opinion in the following paragraph.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Dying Languages Essay: Is a world with fewer languages a good thing?

Dying languages essays have appeared in IELTS on several occasions, an issue related to the spread of globalisation. Check out a sample question and model answer.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Essay for IELTS: Are some advertising methods unethical?

This is an agree / disagree type question. Your options are: 1. Agree 100% 2. Disagree 100% 3. Partly agree. In the answer below, the writer agrees 100% with the opinion. There is an analysis of the answer.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Employing Older People Essay: Is the modern workplace suitable?

Employing Older People Essay. Examine model essays for IELTS Task 2 to improve your score. This essay tackles the issue of whether it it better for employers to hire younger staff rather than those who are older.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Truthfulness in Relationships Essay: How important is it?

This truthfulness in relationships essay for IELTS is an agree / disagree type essay. You need to decide if it's the most important factor.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Extinction of Animals Essay: Should we prevent this from happening?

In this extinction of animals essay for IELTS you have to decide whether you think humans should do what they can to prevent the extinction of animal species.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Return of Historical Objects and Artefacts Essay

This essay discusses the topic of returning historical objects and artefacts to their country of origin. It's an agree/disagree type IELTS question.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Paying Taxes Essay: Should people keep all the money they earn?

Paying Taxes Essay: Read model essays to help you improve your IELTS Writing Score for Task 2. In this essay you have to decide whether you agree or disagree with the opinion that everyone should be able to keep their money rather than paying money to the government.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Internet vs Newspaper Essay: Which will be the best source of news?

A recent topic to write about in the IELTS exam was an Internet vs Newspaper Essay. The question was: Although more and more people read news on the internet, newspapers will remain the most important source of news. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Role of Schools Essay: How should schools help children develop?

This role of schools essay for IELTS is an agree disagree type essay where you have to discuss how schools should help children to develop.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Scientific Research Essay: Who should be responsible for its funding?

Scientific research essay model answer for Task 2 of the test. For this essay, you need to discuss whether the funding and controlling of scientific research should be the responsibility of the government or private organizations.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Multinational Organisations and Culture Essay

Multinational Organisations and Culture Essay: Improve you score for IELTS Essay writing by studying model essays. This Essay is about the extent to which working for a multinational organisation help you to understand other cultures.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Examinations Essay: Formal Examinations or Continual Assessment?

Examinations Essay: This IELTS model essay deals with the issue of whether it is better to have formal examinations to assess student’s performance or continual assessment during term time such as course work and projects.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

IELTS Internet Essay: Is the internet damaging social interaction?

Internet Essay for IELTS on the topic of the Internet and social interaction. Included is a model answer. The IELTS test usually focuses on topical issues. You have to discuss if you think that the Internet is damaging social interaction.

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Before you go...

Check out the ielts buddy band 7+ ebooks & courses.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

  • Click on the HTML link code below.
  • Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

ielts buddy ebooks

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

  • All Lessons
  • Band Score Calculator
  • Writing Feedback
  • Speaking Feedback
  • Teacher Resources
  • Free Downloads
  • Recent Essay Exam Questions
  • Books for IELTS Prep
  • Student Housing
  • Useful Links

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Recent Articles

RSS

IELTS Computer Delivered Practice Tests Plus Band Score

Mar 01, 24 02:38 AM

IELTS Listening Section 4 Practice

History and Heritage Vocabulary for IELTS

Feb 29, 24 10:00 AM

Historical Place Essay

Travel and Tourism Vocabulary for IELTS

Feb 25, 24 11:55 AM

International-travel-essay

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

GRIN

The advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans as well as the ethical and social problems involved in it!

Pre-university paper, 2002, 14 pages, grade: 2+(b), sabine reinhold (author).

Free online reading

1. Introduction

I think nobody can afford to ignore the progress that is made in science today. Scientific research gives us knowledge about things that nobody ever thought about just a few years ago, for example the cloning of humans.

In this essay I want to focus on this topic with special regard to the advantages and disadvantages and the social and ethical problems. I will start with a definition of cloning. The next part of the essay will be about the beginning of life followed by a listing of arguments about advantages and disadvantages of human cloning. Furthermore my essay will involve a look on cloning and sciene fiction and finish with the economic reasons for cloning humans. My motivation to do the essay about this topic is not only that it is crucial for everybody to think about cloning but in my mind it is also very interesting and exciting to learn more about it. It is a scientific possibility that has become reality. Maybe cloning and genetic engineering will someday even affect my life or that of my children. I hope that I will be able to learn enough about cloning by writing this essay so that I can make up my mind on how I feel about this topic.

1 The word cloning originated from the greek and means sprout or branch.

Cloning is an asexual kind of reproduction. In order to understand the technique we first have to know how sexual reproduction basically works.Every human body cell has a set of 46 chromosomes 2 and every gamete, which is the man’s sperm cell and the woman’s egg cell, has 23 chromosomes. The gametes have only half of the chromosomes a body cell has because during sexual reproduction the egg cell and the sperm cell come together and create a new life which then has a complete set of chromosomes (46) in every body cell again, 23 from the mother and 23 from the father. If gametes would have complete chromosome sets, too, the number of chromosomes in the body cells of the following generations would continue to grow.

Cloning works kind of similar but since the goal is to create something which is genetically identical to one model the fertilization process has to take place with the chromosomes ( the hereditary material) of only one person or thing. This can only be done by scientists in the laboratory (asexual). It works like this: One body cell from the model is taken and the core of the cell is removed (the core contains the whole hereditary material which is on 46 chromosomes). The core of this body cell is then implanted into an “empty” egg cell (empty because the core from the egg cell with the hereditary material on 23 chromosomes has to be removed as well). The fertilized egg cell then contains 46 chromosomes like it contains after sexual fertilization but with the difference that these 46 chromosomes are from one person and not from two, the man and the woman. What happens with this fertilized egg cell next depends on what kind of cloning is to be practised, either therapeutic cloning or reproductive cloning.

2.1 Therapeutic cloning

If therapeutic cloning is practised, the fertilized egg cell is harvested. When the cell has itself a few times divided, the valueable embryonic stem cells can be taken from the developing embryo, hereby the embryo is killed. These embryonic stem cells are so valueable because they can only be won from umbilical cord or from embryos and they are crucial for scientific research. The purpose of therapeutic cloning is to clone things such as organs and tissue for patients in need (see advantages and disadvantages of human cloning).

2.2 Reproductive cloning

If reproductive cloning is practised the fertilized egg cell is implanted into the womans womb where it is able to develop to full maturity like a “normal” sexually fertilized egg cell. Therefore reproductive cloning has the purpose of actually producing a human that is genetically identical to somebody else.

3. When does life begin?

3 There are several opinions regarding this question but the only one that is biologically demonstrable is that life begins with the fertilization of the egg cell. The reason to support this argument is that with fertilization the genetic identity of the new life is already determined completely since the mother’s and the father’s genes 4 are fused together. From this point on the embryo steadily develops and during this process the genetic identity doesn’t change any more. You could say that the genetic identity is like an instruction for the creation of the embryo, it just takes nine months till this instruction is realized. From fertilization on the embryo develops as a human and not to a human.

Some other opinions to the question where life begins are the following:

1) Life begins with birth because before birth the embryo isn’t able to stay alive on it’s own. It needs the mothers body to survive and to develop to full maturity. 2) Life begins when a human has the consciousness to live. Supporting this argument one has to believe that some mentally sick people and coma patients are not living either since they probably don’t have the consciousness to live. 3) Life begins after the first fourteen days,the first three months, etc. It is easily explainable why people favor this argument. Many have problems to define a bunch of cells ( that’s all a human is in the very beginning) as living. After some time ( for example three months) has passed one can at least recognize the shape of an embryo. Argument one has at least a reasoning but the others a hardly acceptable from the biological point of view as there is no proof for them.

The reason why it is important to define the beginning of life is that with its beginning every human has basic human rights that are unimpeachable.These rights are granted to every human without regard of attributes like age, race, sex, state of health or anything else and involve the right of human dignity and the right to live. With cloning we would hurt these human rights, if one believes that life begins with fertilization. When a scientist takes stem cells from an embryo for therapeutic cloning and kills the embryo afterwards it is a violation of the right to live. Furthermore the scientist didn’t respect the human dignity of the embryo because he uses it like a rat for his experiments and then “throws it away”. Some people still defend therapeutic cloning by saying that this kind of cloning is a very valuable technique for scientists in order to learn more about certain diseases but that doesn’t change the crucial point that human dignity is hurt and that’s a violation against the law, at least in industrialized countries where these human rights belong to the law.

Before we can make up our mind on how we feel about cloning we defenetly have to ask us where we see the beginnig of life and we have to know the different advantages and disadvantages of cloning that I will discuss on the following pages.

4. Advantages and disadvantages of human cloning

Although this part of my essay has the title “advantages and disadvantages of human cloning” you will see that I didn’t clearly define every single fact as an advantage or disadvantage. Instead of doing this I wrote down all my knowledge about this fact and left it up to the reader to decide whether he sees it as an advantage or disadvantage. I think this is something that everyone has a different opinion about. I can hardly give one definition and claim this to be right.

4.1 The reversion of the aging process

5 We can reverse our own aging process by using cloning. It works like this: Each cloned body cell is a brand new cell. It is the exact copy from an existing cell but is has the advantage that it is not as old as the model 6 . If a person would copy/ clone his 7 body cells and have these cells inplanted into the body when he is older, this person could renew his body. Someday this technique could allow humans to live to any age they want.

On one hand “this would eleminate fear of old age an death” 8 but on the other hand realising the dream to live forever brings a lot of new problems. We already have the problem that there are too many old people and not enough young people to pay for their pension. This problem would get even bigger. Also old people may be physical healthy but we have no medicine or technique to renew their mind. For some people with mental illness this artificially prolonged life might not be worth living.

4.2 The production of organs

Many people need organ donors but there are often not enough available and the risk that the body rejects the new organ is high. Many patients with an implanted organ need to take a lot of medicine with side effects each day for the rest of their lives to make sure that their body accepts the organ. These side effects lower their life quality.

It is possible to harvest embryonic stem cells and therefore it would be possible to grow organs or tissues, too. Everybody could clone his own organs. The clone shares identical genes to the model and hereby “the chances of rejection are nullified” 9 . It is even possible to grow skin for burn victims by using the victims own skin cells and cloning them. Up to today it is a big problem to help a burn victim. At present the only solution is to take skin from a “less important“ part of the body and put it where it is needed ( e.g. when a persons face is all burned he could use skin from the leg to cover the burned parts ).

4.3 The chance to have children for infertile couples

Cloning could help infertile couples if they want to have children. At the moment those couples have a harsh time. They have to “go through physically and emotionally painful procedures” 10 which are not only expensive and take a lot of time but which are also “estimated to be less than 10 % succsessful” 11 . Current infertility treatments don’t seem to improve soon because “being infertile is not considered a ‘real medical problem’ “ 12 in people’s attitudes.

The solution is called “in vitro fertilization”: One single egg cell has to be taken from the woman’s ovary and put into a dish where it is fertilized with a sperm cell of the man. The fertilized egg cell is than placed into the woman’s womb. It’s guaranteed that this technique is successful.

Seen from the couples point of view using cloning in order to have children is a brilliant idea but what about the ethical views? Cloning children will probably lead to the designer baby since the fertilized egg cell ( which is to be an embryo soon ) could also be enhanced with extra genes for special traits such as musical or athletic talent.

Furthermore the egg cell could be tested for special heriditary diseases. If they don’t excist, the egg cell can be implanted into the woman’s womb, otherwise it will be annihilated. This technique is called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (pgd).

Maybe the parents want only a boy or a girl. Then, using a procedure called sexing, scientists separate the sperm cells and choose the sex of the planned child.

There are several critical points that have to be considered when talking about those embryo selecting techniques 13 :

1) Choosing one child over another is immoral. By doing this industrialized countries are no better than Third World countries who favor boy babies and often kill girl babies soon after birth. The only difference would be that we “kill“ the egg and not the born baby. At this point we have to get back to the question “where does life begin?“ If it begins, in your opinion, with fertilization, it would make no difference. 2) It is wrong to mess with the natural order. Some people believe that there is a “predetermined goal for the evolution of humankind” 14 . 3) The medicine is misused. Its purpose in the general sense is to heal. 4)Embryo selection will put a lot of pressure on couples who want to have children. First of all if they don’t test their embryo for certain heriditary diseases for example and their child gets sick later, people may reproach them that they could have prevented this. As a consequence every couple is forced to test their baby, even if they don’t want to. Furthermore insurance companies or state regulations could make the condition to only provide health coverage to children who were embryonically screened for the absence of certain diseases.

4.4 The improvement of reconstructive and cosmetic surgery

15 Reconstructive and cosmetic surgery could be improved with the help of cloning. Up to today cosmetic surgery can be risky because the used materials are foreign to the body. Silicone breast implants may cause immune disease, for example. Doctors would have the ability to manufacture bone, fat and connective tissue that matches the patient’s tissues exactly. Every person could change his appearance riskless.

4.5 The curing of diseases that are still uncurable

Cloning can be used to cure currently uncurable diseases. Diseases such as cancer are a “major killer throughout the world” 16 .We may be able to cure cancer if we learn how “cells differentiate into specific kind of tissue and how cancerous cells loose their differentiation” 17 . We could learn about this and then we may be able to develop an effective gene therapy to help sick people. Another example of a currently uncurable disease is Tay-Sachs disease. We could manufacture the enzyme hexoseaminidase A which is calling for the disease when it is absent. Tay-Sachs disease causes an unpreventable death by the age of five 18 .

Using cloning to inquire after such diseases can save many lives.

On the other side we would destroy the natural evolution process (see “The threat to genetic diversity and evolution”).

4.6 The replacement of dead people

Before discussing this topic a big misunderstanding has to be pointed out. Cloning can only produce genetically identical humans but it can’t ensure that the personal beliefs or goals will be similar to the model, too. This means for example that even if somebody would have a baby whose embryo was enhanced with genes for musical talent it isn’t guaranteed that this baby will someday become a famous pianist. The child may have musical talent but what he makes out of these talents, if he uses them or not, is up to the child. If it is not interested in taking piano lessons for example the talent will stay undiscovered. The problem is the same when somebody would try to replace a loved one. Unrealistic expectations on how the character will be might lead to frustration. Of course the outward appearance of the clone will be exactly the same but the personality will be probably different and that’s the critical point here. The clone can never really be a substitute for another person.

Also we have to ask us if it is justifiable from the ethical side. Cloning people to replace others is somewhat similar to have another baby just to create a perfect donor for the already existing sibling that is sick. How would you feel if your parents someday tell you that you were only born for your brother or sister and that you wouldn’t be here now if your sibling wouldn’t have needed your help or wouldn’t have died?

4.7 The threat to genetic diversity and evolution

Clones are genetically like brothers and sisters. Therefore genetic diversity is more and more destroyed by cloning and diseases can easier be spread under equal people. That’s the reason why nobody is allowed to have a sexual relationship with a family member. Humans already destroyed the natural evolution process by inventing all kinds of medecine. In consequence, even if that sounds cruel, people who were chosen to die by nature are still living because we can heal them or at least enable them to live with their illness by using unnatural chemicals (what most of the medecine is). With cloning we would also create people that wouldn’t have been created by nature. That is something revolutional but the question is if humans are allowed to play god and control the evolution process.

4.8 The chance for lesbians to have children

Like all ethical questions the question if being homosexual is considered “normal” or not is one that everybody has own answers and opinions to. It wouldn’t bring us any further to argue about it here. If you accept it or not, technically it is possible to create a baby with the hereditary material from two mothers. They would both have to donate an egg cell. The hereditary material in both egg cells is then separated from the egg cells.Now the egg cell from one mother is fertilized with the hereditary material from the other mother. The fertilized egg cell could then be implanted into either one of the mothers. Of course their baby will later look exactly like the mother who donated the hereditary material.

By the way: that’s how Dolly the sheep was cloned, too, only that the sheep had three mothers. One donated the egg cell, the other donated the hereditary material. The fertilized egg cell was then implanted into the third mother who carried the sheep out. By using cloning for this purpose, Lesbian couples have the possibility to create a family like all other couples, too, but this will probably evoque a lot of protest in society among those who don’t feel that they should have these rights because they don’t accept homosexuality.

4.9 A society that is broken into two classes

If someday many people have been cloned there will consequently envolve two classes of humans: the gene-enhanced and those who were “created” naturally. Of course the gene- enhanced will have a lot of advantages in life since they were given special talents. It is logical that those gene-enhanced people will be the rich ones because only rich parents have the possibility to afford the techniques to enhance their baby with special genes. These rich gene-enhanced people can probably get better jobs than the others because of their special talents so they will get even richer. Rich people often have a lot of authority. If one continues to think this through the rich gene-enhanced people could someday be the most powerful ones and rule over the others.

Also people with hereditary diseases are likely to be excluded from society and to become outsiders because their parents could not afford to test their baby for those diseases before it was born.

5. Cloning and science fiction

19 Now, after you are informed about the cloning of humans in general and it’s advantages and disadvantages (the realistic possibilities that human cloning brings with it), I want to show the unrealistic expectations of cloned humans as well.

We often find these unrealistic expectations in books from science fiction authors and in science fiction movies.These fantasy products tell us horror stories about armies of clones that want to kill humans or the creation of a second Hitler. I want tu use these two examples to demonstrate how unrealistic such horror stories are.

First of all these armies of clones are often described as armies of robots without feelings that are programmed to kill others by their creator and this is not possible. As I already wrote earlier in this essay clones are not much different from other humans except thet they were created by asexual reproduction thus having feelings like “normal” humans, too. The second question is: why would a person create such an army of clones if he would at least have to wait fifteen to twenty years till he could use this army for his interests? Clones can’t grow and develop faster than other humans.

A third problem is that this person would need several women that carrie each clone out and women that are willing to do that may be hard to find.

The idea that a second Hitler could be created is another unrealistic science fiction phantasy. I already mentioned earlier in this essay that one could enhance a person with extra genes for special traits but the clones own will and his surroundings contribute to his character and beliefs as well. Hitler could get so powerful because of the german history. He used the bad situation of Germany and convinced people that he would improve it. A clone of Hitler probably wouldn’t have the possibility to do the same thing at present, the circumstances are not given.

The most important aspect one has to keep in mind when he isn’t sure if something he heard is really possible or just a fictional story is that clones are normal people of flesh and blood, no robots or machines that have no feelings and can be programmed to do certain things. Even if it would be possible to create clones for a certain purpose it probably wouldn’t be allowed since all humans, which involves clones as well of course, have basic human rights and cannot be anyones property.

6. Economic reasons for cloning

20 As you can imagine there probably will be people who try to profit from cloning. I found out some possibilities that people could use. I want to point out that the first two of those are rather unrealistic as they are a violation against human rights and they are hard to realize.

6.1 Information retention

A cloning firm could buy DNA from a top ability worker and produce the clone of this person in another part of the world.When the clone has grown up the cloning firm tells him that he is the clone of a top ability worker but not who is his model. Of course the clone is eager to know who the model is and is probably willing to pay a lot of money to get this information.

6.2 Extract rents from clones via education

Top ability people have greater returns to higher education and top schools get high rents from the top ability people who visit their school. If some top schools would get together and invest in the cloning of top individuals they would make their own future students and get a lot of rent from them later.

6.3 Patents for certain techniques

If a big firm would develop a technique to produce organs for transplantation, for example, and then have this patented it could make a lot of money because all the people who want to use this technique, in this example this would be people who are in need of an organ, would charge this firm.

7. Conclusion

I want to start by pointing out that the thing I learnt best while writing this essay is that this topic is very extensive. You can’t really discuss every detail in a little essay like this one. I hope I managed to give an objective overall view. In my opinion you can’t think either just negative or just positive about cloning. Many things that cloning makes possible have their advantages as well as disadvantages to them. Lets take for example the reversion of the aging process: Many people would like to “live forever”. On the other hand, this will evoque the pension problem (see “advantages and disadvantages of human cloning”).

To my mind the scientific progress today goes really fast and that’s a big problem. We have the possibility to do these big things that nobody has ever done before like cloning but we also have the responsibility for what we do. The question humankind asks today is not “Do we have the possibilty to do it?” but “Do we have the right to do it? Are we ready to stand up for the consequences of our deeds?” Technically it is already possible for a long time to clone humans. Many scientists are eager to try all of the techniques out that they know about but the problem is that the government doesn’t allow them to do it yet. Especially the german government is very strict.

I think that we should allow only therapeutic cloning since this could really help people. But we should have strict regulations. The production of organs and tissue by using therapeutic cloning, for example, should, in my opinion, only be practised when there is absolutely no donor organ for the patient who needs it and he would have to die without the organ. To my mind it would be murder if we know how to manufacture an organ but the patient still has to die because we didn’t use our knowledge. I think it is also justifiable to help infertile couples with cloning but without using embryo selecting techniques.

I reject reproductive cloning though. In my judgement it has no sense to create an identical twin of somebody, especially because the character of the clone is probably different than the character of the model anyways. The special thing about humankind is that everybody is different, why should we want to destroy this multiplicity?

Last but not least I want to say that those parts of my essay which are titled “Advantages and disadvantages of human cloning” and “Economic reasons for cloning” are just speculations. They are not unrealistic but it is important to realize that it hasn’t happened yet. Who knows what the future brings.…

1) Mc Kinnell, Robert Gilmore, Cloning - Leben aus der Retorte, Karlsruhe 1981

2) Silver, Lee M., Remaking Eden, New York 1997

3) Saint - Paul, Gilles, The Economics of Human Cloning, in: IZA Discussion Paper No. 231, pages 3 and 4

4) http://www.humancloning.org/benefits.htm

5) http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

6) http://www.solidaritaet.com/neuesol/2000/35/col1.htm

7) http://cloning.ch/cloning/doku/doku_ewig.html

Hiermit erkläre ich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbstständig und ohne fremde Hilfe verfasst und keine anderen als die im Literaturverzeichnis angegebenen Hilfsmittel verwendet habe.

Insbesondere versichere ich, dass ich alle wörtlichen und sinngemäßen Übernahmen aus anderen Werken als solche kenntlich gemacht habe.

1 I got this knowledge from my biology class.

2 Chromosomes carry the hereditary material.

3 Compare http://www.solidaritaet.com/neuesol/2000/35/col1.htm and http://cloning.ch/cloning/doku/doku_ewig.html

4 Genes are little units on the chromosomes that carry the hereditary information.

5 Compare http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

6 The model is the person or thing that donates the hereditary material in order to clone it.

7 I decided to use only the male grammatical forms like “he”, “his”, because the essay is easier to read this way, of course the women are meant as well when I talk about “persons”.

8 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

9 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

10 http://www.humancloning.org/bebefits.htm

11 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

12 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

13 compare point 1), 2) and 3) to “Remaking Eden”, pages 255-257

14 ”Remaking Eden”, page 256

15 compare http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

16 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

17 http://www.humancloning.org/publish/posts/142.html

18 compare “Remaking Eden“, page 251

19 compare “Cloning-Leben aus der Retorte“, pages 94-98

20 compare “Extract rents from clones via education” and “Information retention” to “The Economics of Human Cloning“, pages 3 and 4.

Ms. Awesome work :)

jbj. xcellent

Thanks Alot :D. Hi Thankyou For Your Advice On Cloning Up There, It Has Really Helped Me On My Coursework At School I Was Stuck Then I Found Your Website To Help Me And I Got A B+ For It Thanks Again X

Facharbeit. Verdammt gute Facharbeit- Respekt

Title: The advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans as well as the ethical and social problems involved in it!

Similar texts

Title: Advantages & Disadvantages of activity based costing with reference to economic value addition

Advantages & Disadvantages of activity based costing with reference to ec...

Title: Technology Delivery Robot. Potential Benefits, Security Concern, Social Problem, Legal and Ethical Issues

Technology Delivery Robot. Potential Benefits, Security Concern, Social Probl...

Title: Ethical, Social and Environmental Standards and Practices of Microsoft

Ethical, Social and Environmental Standards and Practices of Microsoft

Title: Eliminating Drug Addiction: The Ways of Solving the Social Problem in Early Soviet Medical Texts

Eliminating Drug Addiction: The Ways of Solving the Social Problem in Early S...

Title: Constructing the Social Problem: Causes of Drug Addiction in Early Soviet Medical Texts

Constructing the Social Problem: Causes of Drug Addiction in Early Soviet Med...

Title: Income Inequality in the European Union and its relation to health and social problems

Income Inequality in the European Union and its relation to health and social...

Title: Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Social Networks in Business

Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Social Networks in Business

Title: Group Decision Making in Schools: Advantages and Disadvantages

Group Decision Making in Schools: Advantages and Disadvantages

Title: Informal Second Language Acquisition Through Entertainment Mediums. Advantages and Disadvantages

Informal Second Language Acquisition Through Entertainment Mediums. Advantage...

Title: Gausemeier’s Scenario Management Process. Reflection on the Advantages and Disadvantages

Gausemeier’s Scenario Management Process. Reflection on the Advantages and Di...

Title: The Advantages and Disadvantages of the British Monarchy in 21st Century Great Britain

The Advantages and Disadvantages of the British Monarchy in 21st Century Grea...

Title: Advantages and Disadvantages of Arbitration

Advantages and Disadvantages of Arbitration

Title: The Future of Education. Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Education

The Future of Education. Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Education

Title: The Advantages and Disadvantages of E-Recruitment

The Advantages and Disadvantages of E-Recruitment

Title: Advantages and Disadvantages of the Lean Production Process

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Lean Production Process

Title: E-learning as a Tool of Contemporary Learning. A Brief Overview of Advantages and Disadvantages

E-learning as a Tool of Contemporary Learning. A Brief Overview of Advantages...

Title: Assessment Centre for Recruiting. Its Advantages and Disadvantages

Assessment Centre for Recruiting. Its Advantages and Disadvantages

Title: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Constructing Free-Trade Zones as an Industrialisation Strategy

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Constructing Free-Trade Zones as an Indus...

Title: Workplace Spirituality. The Ethical and Social Responsibility Implications

Workplace Spirituality. The Ethical and Social Responsibility Implications

Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book - High royalties for the sales - Completely free - with ISBN - It only takes five minutes - Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free

Title: The advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans as well as the ethical and social problems involved in it!

Opinion Thank the Alabama Supreme Court for its IVF decision. I’m serious.

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

Maybe we should thank the Alabama Supreme Court for its bizarre ruling that frozen embryos are children protected by state law. The decision, which seemed absurd to many people on its face, shone a needed spotlight on the concept of “fetal personhood.” It highlighted the danger that view poses not just to what remains of abortion rights in the United States but also to the modern technology that helps people build families. And — fingers crossed — the appalled reaction to the ruling might help thwart efforts to go even further than the Supreme Court already has in limiting reproductive freedom.

The campaign for fetal personhood began more than a half-century ago. In Roe v. Wade , the state of Texas, whose abortion ban was being challenged, argued that the fetus is entitled to protection under the 14th Amendment, which prohibits denying any “person” due process or equal protection of the law. The Supreme Court rejected that argument, but securing constitutional protection for “fetal personhood” became the preferred mechanism among abortion foes for undoing the newly declared right to abortion. Just eight days after Roe was decided in 1973, the first Human Life Amendment to the Constitution was introduced in Congress; it became a standard plank in the Republican Party platform.

Now, Roe is gone, but the campaign for fetal personhood has taken on a new role : to extend abortion prohibitions far beyond where they were left with the court’s 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. While some political factions that sought to roll back Roe seem content with the law reverting to a patchwork of state-granted rights, committed antiabortion advocates are seeking a nationwide ban, and they see claims of fetal personhood as one of the most straightforward and effective paths toward achieving that goal.

Notably, the Dobbs majority ignored a plea from the leading academic advocates of fetal personhood to go beyond overruling Roe and declare that the 14th Amendment protects fetal life. In a friend-of-the-court brief , professors John M. Finnis and Robert P. George argued that “unborn children are persons within the original public meaning” of the 14th Amendment, meaning that “state homicide laws would need to forbid elective abortion.” (Another amicus brief, filed on behalf of a former frozen embryo implanted in adoptive parents, went even further, arguing that abortion had to be banned because, with the advent of IVF, “viability outside the womb actually occurs at fertilization.”)

The five-justice majority opinion, by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., disclaimed “any view about if and when prenatal life is entitled to any of the rights enjoyed after birth.” Still, it repeatedly referred to situations involving an “unborn child.” Some abortion rights advocates have read this language as an invitation to develop fetal personhood arguments. “Now that the Pandora’s box of fetal personhood has been opened, and the Supreme Court has sown the seeds for a constitutional right to life for fetuses, it is time to reckon with the full ramifications of fetal legal personhood,” the group Pregnancy Justice warned .

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

But this overstates the risk from the Supreme Court, in my assessment. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, in a concurring opinion, took pains to make clear that the court was not adopting a theory of fetal personhood. “No Justice of this Court has ever advanced that position,” Kavanaugh observed. “The Constitution neither outlaws abortion nor legalizes abortion.” As a practical matter, this court seems unlikely to endorse the notion that embryos are people.

That doesn’t counsel complacency. Even without the court declaring fetal personhood, its advocates argue, Congress has independent power under the 14th Amendment to enforce its provisions by “appropriate legislation.” In the House, the Life at Conception Act — endorsed by 124 co-sponsors, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — would establish “equal protection for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.” It defines “human person” to cover “all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.”

George, the fetal personhood advocate, made the case for such legislation in a January speech at the Capitol Visitor Center in D.C. “The national government constitutionally may, and is in truth constitutionally obligated to, in the face of the failure of states to do their constitutional duty, protect unborn babies against elective abortions,” he argued. That’s right, constitutionally obligated . Forget all that nonsense from the Dobbs majority about leaving things up to the states.

Let’s pause for a moment to ponder the question of personhood. Although the fetal personhood movement arose mostly out of Christian theology and beliefs about ensoulment, today George and others who contend for fetal personhood make an argument they present as grounded in irrefutable science: that from the moment of fertilization, when sperm meets egg, the resulting organism is a genetically distinct entity entitled to legal and moral respect.

“A human embryo is not something different in kind from a human being, like a rock, or a potato, or a rhinoceros,” George has written. “A human embryo is a human individual in the earliest stage of his or her natural development. Unless severely damaged or deprived of a suitable environment, an embryonic human being will, by directing his or her own integral organic functioning, develop himself or herself to each new stage of developmental maturity along the gapless continuum of a human life.”

This has a certain intellectually consistent clarity compared with the unscientific and arbitrary line-drawing by abortion rights opponents who point to stages such as the detection of a fetal heartbeat or, later in pregnancy, the asserted capacity to feel pain. You can criticize it for being too black-and-white, but it is at least a comprehensible distinction — in a sense, the antiabortion equivalent of the Roe court’s (to me) sensible determination that fetal viability marks the point at which the state is permitted to protect the fetus.

Where the personhood argument falls short is that it declares the genetic moment to be dispositive on the question of when life begins, ignoring the gradual process that unfolds from that union to a point where humanity cannot be denied. Among women who know they are pregnant, up to 25 percent of those pregnancies end in miscarriages, according to the National Library of Medicine . Are those events, however tragic, akin to the stillbirth of a viable fetus or the death of a baby or child? We may regret, even grieve, that an in vitro embryo fails to develop, but most of us do not experience it as a death.

And however much antiabortion advocates insist that their view is rooted in science, they also tend to be guided by a religious philosophy with which other Americans simply disagree. Outside of Christianity, many religions (such as Judaism , for instance) recognize the gradual conferral of personhood on a fetus. At bottom, the personhood debate is a matter of contested moral and theological convictions, which is why these intimate decisions, about abortion and fertility, should be left to individuals, not the state.

As Harvard University philosopher Michael Sandel argued during the early-2000s debate over funding embryonic stem cell research, “The fact that every person began life as an embryo does not prove that embryos are persons. Consider an analogy: although every oak tree was once an acorn, it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that I should treat the loss of an acorn eaten by a squirrel in my front yard as the same kind of loss as the death of an oak tree felled by a storm. Despite their developmental continuity, acorns and oak trees are different kinds of things. So are human embryos and human beings. Sentient creatures make claims on us that nonsentient ones do not; beings capable of experience and consciousness make higher claims still. Human life develops by degrees.”

People can, and do, differ on this. And that’s the point. Scientific certainty is a false refuge in this instance. On the other side of the equation is the fact of an undeniable human being — the woman — whose participation is required, at least until science produces an artificial womb, to bring the embryo to life.

To say that the woman in whom the embryo resides — or, in the case of IVF, the woman whose egg was used to create the embryo — has rights only equal to the embryo itself raises thorny legal and moral questions. Recall George’s words: “Unless … deprived of a suitable environment, an embryonic human being will … develop himself or herself.” Deprived of a suitable environment? Under this view, could fetal personhood mean women’s bodies would be commandeered to provide the “suitable environment” to grow these embryos? (George disclaims that view, but it’s not hard to imagine an argument that if you are responsible for creating a person, you have a duty to host it.)

Short of that extreme, if an artificial womb were invented, would the embryos’ parents be responsible for raising them? Would fertility specialists be barred from creating more embryos than they are able to implant, prohibited from discarding embryos with genetic anomalies or required to keep excess embryos in perpetuity? There are an estimated 1.5 million frozen embryos in the United States. What happens to them in a regime that recognizes fetal personhood, broadly defined? Could “abandoned embryos” be taken for incubation and adoption by other families, a possibility that is already generating discussion among Christians concerned about the “new orphan crisis”?

And what happens with contraceptive methods, such as intrauterine devices and the morning-after pill, that some abortion opponents believe operate as abortifacients, preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus? Will fetal personhood prevent women from using those technologies?

If the Life at Conception Act were to become law, it wouldn’t just ban abortion nationwide — it would prohibit IVF (which is overwhelmingly popular , even among Republicans) as currently practiced. That’s a big “if,” though; the chances of this measure passing getting through both houses of Congress were slim even before the furor over the Alabama ruling.

So the greatest real-world risk, as the Alabama case has demonstrated, might be what happens in the states, through both state legislatures and state courts. According to Pregnancy Justice , at least 10 states define “personhood” as applying to every stage of development, including embryos; more say personhood applies to the fetus in the womb. The Guttmacher Institute identifies 25 states, overlapping the first group, in which “personhood” measures that would ban abortion have been introduced this legislative session.

Here is where, no kidding, we should be thankful for the Alabama Supreme Court. Its overreading of the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act exposed the risks inherent in the push for fetal personhood — and might have put the brakes on this development. In Florida , for example, in the aftermath of the Alabama ruling, legislators paused work on a measure that would have extended wrongful-death protections to fetuses.

Alabama itself scrambled to do legislative damage control that would allow IVF procedures to resume in the state — but dropped language contained in a draft bill that would have explicitly excluded frozen embryos from the definition of unborn life. Still, that wasn’t enough for the antiabortion Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and the Alabama Policy Institute, which denounced the measure for failing “to respect the dignity of human life.” They want Alabama to model its statute on a 1986 Louisiana law that prohibits viable embryos from being discarded. (The embryos are transferred for storage outside the state, raising the cost of the procedure in Louisiana.)

The political lesson of Alabama echoes the fallout from Dobbs. Strong majorities reject extremist positions. They don’t want women who are undergoing miscarriages to be forced to suffer sepsis before they can get medical help. They don’t want lawmakers or courts to interfere with a procedure that has helped millions of couples conceive. They believe that an abortion at six weeks is different from one at 20 weeks; they understand the moral and physiological difference between a microscopic clump of cells and a fetus kicking its mother in the womb. The more rigidly personhood advocates hew to their stance, and the more the public understands about the consequences of this position, the better for those who take a more nuanced view.

  • Opinion | Donald Trump, the luckiest politician who ever lived March 5, 2024 Opinion | Donald Trump, the luckiest politician who ever lived March 5, 2024
  • Opinion | What’s behind the Supreme Court’s furious agreement on Trump in Colorado March 4, 2024 Opinion | What’s behind the Supreme Court’s furious agreement on Trump in Colorado March 4, 2024
  • Opinion | How Oct. 7 is forcing Jews to reckon with Israel March 5, 2024 Opinion | How Oct. 7 is forcing Jews to reckon with Israel March 5, 2024

essay on disadvantages of human cloning

COMMENTS

  1. Cloning humans? Biological, ethical, and social considerations

    Human cloning more typically refers to "reproductive cloning," the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) to obtain eggs that could develop into adult individuals. Human cloning has occasionally been suggested as a way to improve the genetic endowment of mankind, by cloning individuals of great achievement, for example, in sports ...

  2. 20 Advantages and Disadvantages of Cloning Humans

    7. Cloning humans would help us to eliminate defective chromosomes and genetic profiles. If a person has an extra chromosome or one is missing, then that condition is called "aneuploidy." There is an increased risk of a genetic disorder when women have children later in life.

  3. PDF The Ethical Implications of Human Cloning

    The Ethical Implications of Human Cloning. and on embryos created for research (whether natural or cloned) are morally on a par.This conclusion can be accepted by people who hold very different views about the moral status of the embryo. If cloning for stem cell research violates the respect the embryo is due,then so does stem cell research on ...

  4. The Pros & Cons of Cloning

    The cons or disadvantages of human cloning raise moral, ethical and safety issues: Reproductive cloning: The negatives of human cloning including the making of designer babies. Human cloning: Could be a violation of the clone's individual human rights. Embryonic cloning: Cellular degradation occurs when too many clones are made from embryos.

  5. PDF CLONING HUMAN BEINGS

    Human cloning would enable the duplication of individuals of great talent, genius, character, or other exemplary qualities. The first four reasons for human cloning considered above looked to benefits to specific individuals, usually parents, from being able to reproduce by means of human cloning.

  6. Op-ed: The dangers of cloning

    This op-ed is part of a series from E295: Communications for Engineering Leaders. In this course, Master of Engineering students were challenged to communicate a topic they found interesting to a broad audience of technical and non-technical readers. Dolly the sheep's taxidermied remains. Dolly was the first mammal cloned from an adult ...

  7. Cloning: A Review on Bioethics, Legal, Jurisprudence and Regenerative

    Cloning is the outcome of the hard works on use of genetic engineering in animal breeding, treatment of hereditary diseases in human and replicating organisms. 16 In 1901, transfer of nucleus of a salamander embryonic cell to a enucleated cell was successfully undertaken. During 1940-1950, scientists could clone embryos in mammals.

  8. The Cloning Debates and Progress in Biotechnology

    Opponents of animal cloning are concerned that cloning will negate genetic diversity of livestock. This also applies to human cloning, which could negate genetic diversity of humans. Cloning creates, by definition, a second class of human, a human with a determined genotype called into existence, however benevolently, at the behest of another.

  9. (PDF) A Review on Advantages and Disadvantages of Human Cloning

    Results: The advantages and drawbacks of cloning was defined according to scientific and legal perspectives. None of the different views investigated in this study accept human cloning, because of ...

  10. (PDF) Human Cloning: Arguments for

    Key Concepts Cloning is a process that creates a genetic replica of an organism. Cloning is ubiquitous in nature. The most straightforward reason why someone may want to reproduce through cloning ...

  11. 11 Advantages and Disadvantages of Cloning

    3. It could extend human life capabilities. In the developed world, the average lifespan is approaching 85 years for top nations. Even in the United States, the average lifespan is upward of 70 years for men and women. Not only could cloning help to extend life to even longer lengths, it could be a way to bring the rest of the world up to the ...

  12. Disadvantages of Human Cloning Free Essay Example

    Disadvantages of Human Cloning. Nowadays, Clone is a word that is heard throughout the world, especially the United States. Scientists have discovered a way to bring back extinct animals. Many people dream to extend a life time for their loves one and to be able to express their hidden feelings in their mind after their loved one has ...

  13. Cloning Fact Sheet

    Cloning Fact Sheet. The term cloning describes a number of different processes that can be used to produce genetically identical copies of a biological entity. The copied material, which has the same genetic makeup as the original, is referred to as a clone. Researchers have cloned a wide range of biological materials, including genes, cells ...

  14. Human cloning

    Human cloning is the creation of a genetically identical copy of a human. ... Another Nobel Laureate, James D. Watson, publicized the potential and the perils of cloning in his Atlantic Monthly essay, "Moving Toward the Clonal Man", in 1971. With the cloning of a sheep known as Dolly in 1996 by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), ...

  15. Disadvantages Of Human Cloning

    There is plainly a huge measure of moral and good stresses as for human cloning. Human life is acknowledged to be important and blessed. Cloning certainly is now and again successful the principal gone through, which infers that human creating leaves will fail miserably. Most would concur that cloning is like murder or manslaughter in any occasion.

  16. Disadvantages Of Human Cloning

    Human cloning can lead to the curing of many diseases and helping people via the use of stem cells. Human cloning can also help stop illegal activity and benefit many people along the way. Some people believe it is unethical but the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Read More.

  17. Human cloning laws, human dignity and the poverty of the policy making

    The regulation of human cloning continues to be a significant national and international policy issue. Despite years of intense academic and public debate, there is little clarity as to the philosophical foundations for many of the emerging policy choices. The notion of "human dignity" is commonly used to justify cloning laws. The basis for this justification is that reproductive human cloning ...

  18. Disadvantages Of Human Cloning

    Disadvantages Of Human Cloning. 1674 Words 7 Pages. The term Human cloning refers to artificial human reproduction, which Is the reproduction of human cells and tissue, or replication of a human thus making a copy of that human. Two commonly discussed types of theoretical human cloning are therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning.

  19. The Disadvantages of Human Cloning Essay

    The Dark Side of Cloning Essay. Taylor Gordon Ms. Windsor HHS4M May 1, 2013 "The Dark side of Cloning" Cloning has been one of the most controversial and debatable topics for some time now, regarding its legality. Genetic engineering is very advanced technology but, ask yourself this question, is it really ethical and worth it?

  20. Human Cloning Essay: Should we be scared of cloning humans?

    IELTS Human Cloning Essay. This is a model answer for a human cloning essay. If you look at the task, the wording is slightly different from the common 'do you agree or disagree' essay. However, it is essentially asking the same thing. As people live longer and longer, the idea of cloning human beings in order to provide spare parts is becoming ...

  21. The advantages and disadvantages of cloning humans as well as the

    The next part of the essay will be about the beginning of life followed by a listing of arguments about advantages and disadvantages of human cloning. Furthermore my essay will involve a look on cloning and sciene fiction and finish with the economic reasons for cloning humans. My motivation to do the essay about this topic is not only that it ...

  22. Essay on the Advantages & Disadvantages of "Cloning"

    Cloning has a number of disadvantages too: I. Cloning can result in creating DNA diversity between human beings. The DNA of the clone and the child may fail to match. II. A number of undesirable traits can occur in human beings who are produced as a result of cloning. Cloning is economically, socially and politically unacceptable.

  23. Opinion

    It defines "human person" to cover "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being

  24. Disadvantages of Human Cloning Essay Example

    Disadvantages of Human Cloning Essay Example. 1. Health risks from mutation of genes - an abnormal baby would be a nightmare come true. The technique is extremely risky right now. A particular worry is the possibility that the genetic material used from the adult will continue to age so that the genes in a newborn baby clone could be - say - 30 ...