Essay Presentation on Human Cloning

7/28/2019 Essay Presentation on Human Cloning

1/14


2/14

Although human cloning may be potentially usefulto society, this unethical practice certainly is not tobe tolerated.


3/14

I. The nature of human cloningA. Definition of cloningB. Its status as a bioscienceC. Process of cloning human cells

II. Grounds for unethicalityA. The dignity of a human personB. Intrapersonal conflicts and individual safety concernsC. Societal implications

III. Summing up of points and generalizationA. Reach of modern innovationB. Limits to human exploration


4/14


5/14

As defined by the American Medical Association, cloning is simplythe production of genetically identical organisms (as cited in Enescu etal., 2011). As a field of biomedical research, cloning technology has

received great attention in recent yearsespecially when scientists wereable to extend its practice to human beings, with the cloning of the firsthuman embryos in 2001 (Caplan and McGee, 2002). The process is doneby way of a technique referred to as somatic cell nuclear transfer(SCNT),

where the entire nucleus of the somatic (or body) cell is removed, andafterwards inserted into an oocyte that had its own nucleus removed. Tofurther depict the procedure, the donor cell nucleus is joined to theenucleated oocyte, giving rise to a single-celled entity equivalent to an eggfertilized by a sperm, which, once stimulated to divide spontaneously andto develop, usually by means of a mild electrical current, would result in acloned embryo: to be used for either reproductive, or therapeutic

(biomedical research) cloning purposes (Nationaler Ethikrat, 2004).Considered by some to be a huge medical breakthrough, this issue,nonetheless, has generated much controversy and is widely debatedamong the bioethics societies regarding its accept. Although humancloning may be potentially useful to society, this unethical practice

certainly is not to be tolerated.


6/14

To begin with, cloning, in truth, steps on the fundamental dignity of bothwoman, and childa reality very much evident in the process of cloning itself. Soas to expound further, human cloning is usually categorized into two sides,reproductive, and therapeutic. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that there is in factlittle substantive difference between the two. Both these intents make use of the

SCNT procedure, and the difference lies only in what is done with the resultingembryo after cloning: reproductivecloning involves implanting the embryo in awomb until a baby is born, while research, or therapeutic cloning, entails thedestruction of the embryo to be able to utilize his stem cells in scientificexperiments. Essentially, human cloning creates a new human being throughindustrial processes, treating him as a mere object of production and

manipulation (Chaverri, 2005, par. 10), with therapeutic cloning so much ashaving the new human being destroyed to perform scientific experiments, whichactually goes against its very objective of being able to save lives. Moreover, thecloning technique would require a hefty number of eggs, which necessarily equatesto the exploitation of women: In order to supply the need ofcloningscience, withall likelihood a market would open for poor women to sell their eggs, which alsoinvolves a painful and dangerous procedure requiring heavy dosages of hormones.As a result, conditions are then created for women to sell their bodies. Thus withregard to this issue, the United Nations in 2005 passed a nonbinding Declarationon Human Cloning that calls upon member states to adopt all measures necessaryto prohibit all forms of human cloning inasmuch as they are incompatible withhuman dignity and the protection of human life. It is made clear, then, that in itsvery essence human cloning gravely impinges on the dignity of the human person.


7/14

Furthermore, in the event that the cloned embryo is actually carried to term,thus bringing forth a new child, specific issues could be brought about concerningthe individual clone himself. Questions are raised about his safety, owing topotential dangers as manifested in earlier animal cloning experiments: At the veryleast, initial cloning attempts on human beings would result in multiple

demonstrations of abnormality and defect. In 2002 the United States NationalAcademy of Sciences released a report calling for a legal ban on human cloning;the report asserted that it would be very dangerous for the woman, the fetus, andthe newborn, and is likely to fail (The National Academies, 2002). Human cloningcannot become a reality without extensive human experimentation, and theinstances of failed or partially successful human experiments, which are very likely

to occur, are entirely unacceptable. (Kolehmainen, 2012). In addition would be thepsychological issues confronting the cloned child, among which may be includedidentity and individuality issues, as well as other aspects related to how a persondefines himself (Morales, 2009). Also, there is the occasion for discriminationagainst the child by people born naturally; and that of comparing him with hisgenetic donor, to whom he could never actually be identical because ofenvironmental differences affecting the clones own development. Professor IanWilmut, creator of theworlds first cloned mammal Dolly the Sheep, warns thathuman cloning, apart from being biologically dangerous, risks creating humanswho will suffer crippling psychological problems for the rest of their lives (McKie,2001, par. 6). These many issues centering on the person of the clone himself areanother reason why we must not allow human cloning to push through.


8/14

Notwithstanding such implications, there are yet further outcomes that the practice ofcloning humans is feared to effect upon society at large, for this human activity is not onlyaffecting those who are cloned or are clones, but also the entire society that allows orsupports it; insofar as the society accepts the prospect of human cloning, to that extent thesociety may be said to engage in it, and thus would share in its consequences as well. One ofthem is the great possibility that in order to account for the shortage of organ donors,individuals would merely be cloned so as to obtain compatible organs and spare parts whenneeded: In 1997 British scientists had announced the creation of a headless frog embryo,and the notion arose of its potential application to humans, creating headless human clonesfor the purpose of increasing the supply of organs and tissues available for transplantation.With the clone donor being brain-dead, organ donation consent problems are bypassed tothe great convenience of the recipient; however, without doubt already creation for thispurpose would be both psychologically and physically an abuse ofpower (Hilmert, 2000, p.368), an abhorrently grave act in the social order even. Moreover, it is also dangerously likely

that human cloning could distort the way children are viewed and raised, as the impulse tocreate designerchildren is ever present as an attractive option for parents today. As ThePresidents Council on Bioethics (2002) puts it, such practice advances the notion that thechild is but an object of our sovereign mastery (p. 112). Furthermore, financial status mayagain play a very influential role since it is presumed that these processes are quite costly;thus accordingly, wealthy parents have the ability to choose the exact traits they want theirchildren to have: geneticists could engineer such characteristics in the genome level, andthen clone the cells to produce a superior individual. As a result, if that capability was

only available to wealthy people, the divide between the wealthy and the poor could widenfarther than ever imagined (Wilmut, 2008). Subsequently also, this exercise may extendtowards the resurface of the once popular concept of eugenics, of improving the humanspecies through the selection of individuals possessing desired traits, since cloning can beused to breed better humans (Encyclopdia Britannica, 2012), which inevitably againprovides the occasion for genetic discrimination. A society that allows dehumanizing

practicesespecially when it could choose to prevent themin effect becomes anaccomplice in those very practices. Truly we cannot afford to let these things pass as

acceptable practice in society.


9/14

The science of human cloning demonstrates the outstandingscope of modern innovation; it is one of those at the frontier of thegreat scientific advancement of humankind. However, the same isalso at its borderline, putting humankind already on the thresholdof self-engineering. It is true that the welfare of man is the justconcern of medical science, but then sometimes overenthusiasm

over developments gives way to unethical practices, which could beconsidered as an attempt directed against man (Monge, 1994).Furthermore, as asserted by The Presidents Council on Bioethicsof the United States (2002), to pursue such endeavors withoutregard for the likelihood of serious unanticipated consequences

would be the height of all hubris. Thus in the end, it is of great

worth to know that science as well should work within certainlimits, as it is with every human endeavor. We must continuallytake care to know the bounds of human explorationbecause noteverything we can do, we ought to do.


10/14

Caplan, A. L., & McGee, G. (2002). Cloning human embryos. Western Journal of Medicine,176(2), 7879. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071666/

Chaverri, J. (2005, August 26). Why the UN banned human cloning. | Mercatornet | Promoting human dignity. Retrieved August15, 2012, from www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/why_the_un_banned_human_cloning/

Cloning. (2012). Encyclopdia Britannica. Encyclopdia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: EncyclopdiaBritannica.

Enescu, A., Mitru, P., Iovnescu, L., Ioana, M., Burada, F. L., & Enescu, A.-. (2011). Ethical considerations on humancloning. Current Health Sciences Journal,37(4). Retrieved from http://www.chsjournal.org/archive/vol37-no3-2011/for-practitioner/ethical-considerations-on-human-cloning

Hilmert, L. J. (2000). Cloning human organs: Potential sources and property implications. Indiana Law Journal,77(363), 367370.Retrieved from www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v77/no2/hilmert.pdf

Kass, L. R. (Ed.). (2002). The ethics of cloning-to-produce-children. Human cloning and human dignity: an ethical inquiry.Washington, D.C.: The Presidents Council on Bioethics. Retrieved frombioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/cloningreport/pcbe_cloning_report.pdf

Kolehmainen, S. M. (2012). Human cloning: Brave new mistake. Retrieved fromhttp://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/viewpage.aspx?pageid=106

McKie, R. (2001, December 8). Why cant you be more like them?The Observer. Retrieved fromhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2001/aug/12/genetics.medicalscience

Monge, M. A. (1994). Ethical practices in health and disease: A primer on health care ethics. (J. Eduarte, Trans.). Manila: Sinag-tala Publishers, Inc.

Morales, N. M. (2009). Psychological and ideological aspects of human cloning: A transition to a transhumanist psychology.Journal of Evolution and Technology, 20(2), 1942. Retrieved from jetpress.org/v20/morales.pdf

Simitis, S. (Ed.). (2004). Cloning for reproductive purposes and cloning for the purposes of biomedical research: Opinion. (P.Slotkin, Trans.). Berlin: German National Ethics Council. Retrieved from

www.ethikrat.org/_english/publications/Opinion_Cloning.pdf

Weismann, I. L. (Ed.). (2002, January 18). U.S. policy makers should ban human reproductive cloning. News from the NationalAcademies. Retrieved from http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=10285

Wilmut, I. (2008). Cloning. Microsoft Student 2009 [DVD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation.


11/14


12/14

In the past when I used to write our argumentative essays, I would usually employ ONLY

A MENTAL OUTLINE of my ideas, and, more often than not, due to my naturally poor

memory I forget some relevant details from which I would have greatly benefited. This

predicament I have carried with me for years, simply trying to manage and cope with the

occasional loss of information. Also, I would NOT be very particular with the 3-POINT

FORMAT for presenting an argument; I would simply write in MYOWN STYLE in order toconvince my readers, and this WITHOUT SOURCES CITED save the data I have acquired.

Of my THESIS STATEMENT I would NOT BE VERY AWARE as well, satisfied in taking pains

to see that my INTRODUCTION WOULD TURN OUT WELL and seem to drive a point. My

writing during high school may be considered quite PRIMITIVE, but although it has worked

for me, I am willing to adopt a better method of writing, which I am hopeful would be

consuming less time.


13/14

In Englcom I have learned to make use of a TOPIC OUTLINE, which greatly

facilitated the writing of my essay. Also, I have drawn particular attention towards

my THESIS STATEMENT, which I have had some difficulty determining whether

appropriate for the writing. In general, of all my writing assignments, the

argumentative essay so far has been the most METICULOUSLY done, owing to the

weight of the topic and the need to SEARCH FOR SOURCES. Also, I have learned

of the 3-POINT argumentative method, as well as the DIFFERENT TYPES OF

THESIS STATEMENTS that I can employ in my work. With all the critiquing

made on my work, I am being made to see, little by little, what the FEATURES OFACADEMIC WRITING ought to be.


14/14

I can truly make use of what I learn in Englcom to IMPROVE ON MY

WRITING STYLE. I can now see all the errors and faults I have beenmaking all these years, and how I should be CORRECTING them. This

class presented me with new methods of carrying out what I have been

doing for a while now in high school, and seem to be MUCH EFFECTIVE

than my crude ways. I value my notes on Englcom in that I can REFER TOTHEM in my future writing assignments. I am not to forget these things

that I learn of the THESIS STATEMENT, TOPIC OUTLINE, REFERENCE

CITATION, and ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY FORMAT very easily since I

would be applying them to all sorts of works, including those outside ofEnglcom and, possibly, La Salle even.

Documents

Essay Presentation on Human Cloning