Ethical Issues on Ownership of Clones Essay Sample
Human cloning is another subject which pits moralss against scientific discipline. Cloning is associated with many benefits such as root cell engineering which is classified under curative cloning and may hold the capacity to bring forth variety meats for which can be used to handle many diseases. This sort of cloning is the chief ground why many scientists want to prosecute the survey of cloning. Generative cloning. on the other manus is done to bring forth a complete human being. However. despite of its possible to supply great benefit to mankind. cloning. whether curative or generative faces many ethical issues one of which is the ownership of the human ringer.
Harmonizing to Dr. Arthur Caplan. the manager of the Center for Bioethics and Trustee Professor of Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania and the current president of the Advisory Committee to the Department of Health and Human Services. Centers for Disease Control and Food and Drug Administration on Blood Safety and Availability. bring forthing human still has a low chance as animate being cloning has non been perfected yet and cloning worlds this early would necessitate immense sums of support because of the needful figure of egg cells. If scientists were so able to clone worlds. the ringer may hold malformations and other familial defects wherein lies another moral issue. He said that scientists who want to seek human cloning attempt non to look into this facet ( Cable News Network. 2001 ) .
Human ringers when conceived must hold all the basic rights that a normal human being has. Bing a ringer does non needfully intend that the ringer is a lesser being that is owned by person. The ringer must be treated every bit. Basic rights include the right to life. right to instruction. right to free address. etc. Although the ringer is a consequence of scientific experiments that may either be funded by authorities or private entities. the ringer is still a human being. therefore the ringer is besides protected by bing human rights Torahs. As a kid. the ringer must be brought up in a free environment and should non be locked up in a research lab someplace for the interest of farther surveies on human cloning. When the ringer reaches legal age. he must be allowed to do determinations for himself merely like any ordinary homo being conceived through the natural reproduction procedure. The thought of holding ownership of a ringer is the same of bondage. It is common cognition that bondage is an act that is purely prohibited by presently bing Torahs ( Cloning Misconceptions. 1998 ) .
Although curative cloning has many medical benefits. it has besides been argued that it is non pro-life fundamentally because an embryo may already be considered as “alive” and utilizing the embryo to turn root cells would intend the expiration of a life homo. It has been argued that killing one individual to salvage another is indefensible ( Robinson. 2005 ) . This statement may be true but root cell engineering could supply intervention to many potentially life endangering diseases and utilizing root cells as an recognized medical pattern may be a really important medical discovery.
Ringers are still human existences even if they have the same familial form of another individual. Bing a human being besides means that they are protected by any bing human jurisprudence and they must besides hold the same civil autonomies. When they reach legal age. the ringers may besides be capable to prosecution in instance of misbehaviors. Ringers should be treated as peers and non as lesser existences. Just like the fact that the parents do non have a kid that they conceived through the natural class of reproduction. ringers are non to be owned by a alternate female parent or any establishment that provided fiscal support to do the construct of the ringer possible.
Cable News Network. 7 August 2001.Dr. Arthur Caplan: Ethical motives of human cloning. Retrieved April 9. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //edition. cnn. com/2001/COMMUNITY/08/07/caplan. cnna/
misconceptionsnav. hypertext markup language
Robinson. B. A. 29 October 2005.Curative Cloning: How it is done ; possible benefits.Religious Tolerance. org. Retrieved April 9. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. religioustolerance. org/clo_ther. htm