People are well acquainted with the notion of assessing costs and benefits, and it is common to hear the argument that something will produce so much benefit that efforts to block it must surely be misguided.
While the concern for freedom and responsibility for one's own life in this way of thinking is admirable, autonomy justifications are as deeply flawed as utility justifications. The personal and social destructiveness of large-scale eugenic efforts including but by no means limited to Nazi Germany's has been substantial, but at least it has been restricted to date by our limited genetic understanding and technology.
What is the difference?
Procreation and Child-Rearing Were it to take place, cloning-to-produce-children would represent a challenge to the nature of human procreation and child-rearing. If so, there will be abiding ethical difficulties even with efforts aimed at making human cloning safe.
One possible result would be the industrialization and commercialization of human reproduction. Toward these ends, they promoted the benefits of cloning: Will humans actually be cloned in the laboratory? In natural procreation, two individuals give life to a new human being whose endowments are not shaped deliberately by human will, whose being remains mysterious, and the open-endedness of whose future is ratified and embraced.
In Chapter One we outlined some morally significant features of human procreation and raised questions about how these would be altered by human cloning. So we more commonly talk in terms of re"production" rather than pro"creation. Similar arguments, it is worth noting, were made before the first attempts at human in vitro fertilization.
Personal identity is, we would emphasize, a complex and subtle psychological phenomenon, shaped ultimately by the interaction of many diverse factors. Although in theory I should respect the autonomy of others as I live out my own autonomy, in practice an autonomous mindset predisposes me to be unconcerned about how my actions will affect others.
The Destiny Justification As noted near the outset of the chapter, there is a third type of proposed justification for human cloning which moves us more explicitly into the realm of theological reflection: They make great efforts to locate their "biological parents," even where paternity consists in nothing more than the donation of sperm.
When autonomy rules, then, scientists, family members, and others are predisposed to act on the basis of their own autonomous perspectives, and the risk to others is real.
Such confusion will impair their psychological and social well being--in fact, their very sense of identity. In other words, those operating out of the human cloning mindset see themselves as Creator rather than procreator. If we allow cloning, we legitimize in principle the entire enterprise of designing children to suit parental or social purposes.
They affect human life in endless subtle ways, and they shape families and communities. There is only space here to note two of the many that weigh heavily against human cloning. To proceed with human cloning at this time, then, would involve a massive assault on the autonomy of all clones produced, whether they lived or died.
There is no plausible way to undertake human cloning at this point without a major loss of human life. He argued his position on the ground that the embryonic cells have not begun to differentiate, the nervous system is not developed enough to feel pain, or sense its environment, etc.
We are already liable to regard children largely as vehicles for our own fulfillment and ambitions. In fact, a careful look at any of these types of justification shows that they provide compelling reasons instead to reject human cloning.
Since the nucleus of each cell red blood cells excepted contains all of the genetic information the DNA for a complete human being, a nucleus extracted from a donor would be transplanted into an unfertilized host egg cell the nucleus of which had been removed.
To arbitrarily destroy a human being, i. Scientists may be able to manipulate certain biological laws to evil ends. If the two individuals turned out to lead similar lives, the cloned person's achievements may be seen as derivative.
Knowing that people are created in the image of God Gen. Thus, anticipating the possibility of a perfected and usable technology, it is important to delineate the case against the practice itself.
The technique is called nuclear transfer or nuclear transplantation because it involves transferring the nucleus and thus most of the genetic material from a cell of an existing being to an egg cell in order to replace the egg cell's nucleus.
By considering these other ways in which cloning would constitute an experiment, we could enlarge our analysis of the ethics of research with human subjects to assess possible nonbodily harms of cloning-to-produce-children. As Christian influences in public life, from public policy to public education, continue to be eradicated in the name of separation of church and state, the self-centeredness of an autonomy outlook will become increasingly evident.
Most significantly, it is "unworkable" and it is "dangerous. But the human person is different. The cell nucleus of an adult person would be removed from an ordinary body cell e.Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry Table of Contents The President's Council on Bioethics Washington, D.C.
as a clone to no existence at all. There is also a serious corollary about how, in the absence of a principle that values existence as such, the cloning family differs from the "natural family" or the "adoptive.
Human cloning (HC) will most definitely overturn the cart of traditional family values. We need to be much more concerned with how HC will impact our understanding of the family itself.
David Lemberg, M.S. in Bioethics, Albany Medical College, May 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. The human person has a higher dignity, which we ignore at our own peril.
The Priests for Life website is carrying a section with a reflection on cloning from the Pontifical Academy for Life, as well as pastoral tools for clergy to use in. Human beings were designed to be a part of a family relationship – involving a loving father and mother.
The “family” unit existed from the first day of man’s existence upon the earth (Gen. ff; ). 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.Download