ETHICS OF CLONING
Cloning, the extraordinary process of producing similar populations of genetically identical individuals. Even the notion of being able to produce such creations is mindboggling. Perhaps another Michael Jackson, Mozart or even Einstein himself. It may sound like fantasies, but oh they are very much real and the possibility and probability of the procedure’s success is higher than ever. However there are mixed views and opinions on the ethics of the matter. The idea that humans might someday be cloned from a single adult somatic cell without sexual reproduction moved further away from science fiction and closer to a genuine possibility when scientists at the Roslin Institute in Scotland announced the successful cloning of a sheep named “DOLLY” +by a new technique that had never before been fully successful in mammals. But however amusing it may sound there are possible complications. Several serious scientific uncertainties remain that could have a significant impact on the potential ability of this new technique to create human beings. Examples of such uncertainties include the impact of genetic imprinting, the nature of currently unknown species differences, and the effects of cellular aging and mutations. The initial public response around the world to this news was primarily one of concern; how would this new technology dramatically reshape the future of our society. The sources of these feelings was centered around the basic fact that this technique would allow for an unlimited number of genetically identical offspring, and would give us the capacity for complete control over the genetic profile of our children. Within days of the published report, President Clinton instituted a ban on federal funding related to attempts to clone human beings in this manner. In addition, the president asked the recently appointed National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) to report within 90 days on the ethical and legal issues that surround the potential cloning of human beings. NBAC made every effort to consult widely with ethicists, theologians, scientists, scientific societies, physicians, and others in initiating an analysis of the many scientific, legal, religious, ethical, and moral dimensions of the issue. This included a careful consideration of the potential risks and benefits of using this technique to create children and a review of the potential constitutional challenges that might be raised if new legislation were to restrict the creation of a child through somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning.
Another concern about the ethics of this technology is the possible risk of abuse of the technology in the future, risk of mutation of genes and emotional risks. A good example of this is the possibility of the tragedy of an abnormal baby being created. The technique is very risky right now as there lies many uncertainties. 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 - 25 years old or more on the day of birth. Many previous attempts at animal cloning have resulted in disfigured monsters with severe abnormalities. So that would it mean to create cloned embryos, implanting them and destroying (presumably) them if the turn out to be imperfect as they grow in the womb. However, some abnormalities may not appear till after birth. A cloned cow recently died several weeks after birth with a huge abnormality of blood cell production. What will happen if a child grows up knowing her mother is her sister, her grandmother is her mother or that Her father is her brother-in-law ? Every time a mother looks at her child she is seeing herself growing up. What happens to a marriage when the "father" sees his wife's clone grow up into the exact replica (by appearance) of the beautiful 18 year old he fell in love with 35 years ago? A sexual relationship would of course be with his wife's twin, no incest involved technically. You could not find one person in this world who could prove that these problems wouldn’t arise. Another risk to consider is the risk of abuse of such powerful technology in the wrong hands. What would dictators like Hitler have done if such cloning technology were available in the 1940s ? There always will be powerful leaders in every generation who will seek to abuse this technology for their own purposes. Going ahead with cloning technology makes this far more likely. Also you cannot have therapeutic cloning without reproductive cloning because the technique to make cloned babies is the same as to make a cloned embryo to try to make replacement tissues. It is rather crude to create a complete embryonic identical twin embryo just to get hold of stem cells to make - say - nervous tissue.
However, therapeutic and reproductive cloning on their own have vast number of advantages and potentials.
In reproductive cloning use of the technical method of somatic nuclear cell transfer to produce embryos, a woman or a surrogate could provide the nurturing womb for such embryos until the period of birth. So reproductive cloning involves the generation of embryos with the intent of bringing them to birth. With the technique now available, the debate as to whether it is technically possible to bring forth babies by such a means has moved from ‘how’ to ‘when’. This has led to the debate as to the morality and/or immorality of the use of such a technique. Some arguments in favor of reproductive cloning are as follows
• Replacement of a dead/dying loved one or someone of importance.
• To meet the reproductive needs of gay and lesbian couples.
• Treatment of infertility for heterosexual couples when all other options are exhausted.
• Cloning to prevent genetic diseases
Replacement of a Dead/ Dying Loved One or Someone Important One argument that has been offered in favor of human cloning is that the method could be used to replace a dead or dying loved one (a spouse or child) or someone that has special meaning or importance to mankind, like Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Gandhi or Mozart to name but three. Example in the case of a family (husband, wife and son) involved in an accident in which two (the husband and son) lose their lives is often given as a morally defensible example in which the woman, as both mother and spouse, can clone her son using the DNA of her dead husband and in this way, preserve a relationship with the deceased. Cloning can be used to help meet the reproductive needs of gay and lesbian couples who may want to have children that are genetically related to either or even both of them and thus meet their family formation goals.
Also cloning to prevent and/or cure of inheritable genetic diseases and cloning children with a battery of positive genetic endowments as well. This second bit, though highly controversial, will be raised and discussed as it is being asked as to whether we are, in our use of biotechnology, to limit its application just to the prevention and/or cure of diseases or should it also encompass augmenting our share of positive natural endowments like memory, intelligence, longevity and the like. This concern also centers on therapy/enhancement distinction. i.e.; The use of biotechnological power to treat individuals with known ailments, disabilities or impairment, in an attempt at restoring them to normal and acceptable state of health and fitness. Enhancement (somatic or germline), on the contrary, is the use of similar means to alter by direct intervention not disease processes but the normal workings of the human body or psyche with the intent of augmenting their innate capacities and functions.
The as the opinion on the use of the technology is a dilemma, cloning has a brilliant and uncertain future
No comments:
Post a Comment