Earlier this month the House passed a bill banning any form of human cloning in both the private and the public sector. In doing so the representatives took a position that is ethical, one that aims to prevent cloning used to create children or create new sources of embryonic stem cells.
Two key developments have renewed the initial public interest in cloning first generated after the creation of Dolly, a sheep produced in 1996 through the use of cloning techniques.
The first development has been the war over human embryonic stem cells, which have the potential to turn into any of the 220 cell types that make up the human body.
Many scientists believe that conducting research on these cells may yield cures for diseases including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. But right-to-life advocates contend such research is harmful to human embryos and is therefore unethical.
The second development was the recent announcement by several scientists that they have begun attempts to clone humans, using techniques similar to those used to create Dolly.
Many scientists and ethicists believe cloning should not be used as a reproductive technology.
The National Bioethics Advisory Commission's September 1997 executive summary concluded that it is "morally unacceptable" to attempt to create a child using cloning techniques.
Furthermore, many cloned mammals either die before they are born, or are born with developmental abnormalities.
Much scientific evidence shows cloned embryos do not develop into normal adult organisms. For example, Dolly is aging twice as fast a normal adult sheep. This occurred as a direct result of the particular method by which Dolly was created.
The Scottish scientists who cloned Dolly also made a tremendous amount of unsuccessful cloning attempts, requiring approximately 400 unfertilized eggs from donor sheep.
It is simply impractical to use this wasteful method to create a single human being.
A final argument against cloning for reproductive purposes addresses possible psychological harm to the cloned child.
The NBAC executive summary on cloning suggests that the child, being a clone of one of its parents, might be held to certain expectations. The cloned child might also be subject to a "diminished sense of individuality and personal autonomy."
Any attempt to create a child through cloning is ethically unacceptable. And though many scientists and ethicists find reproductive cloning repugnant, recent advances in stem cell research have suggested a new application for cloning, commonly referred to as therapeutic cloning.
Advocates of stem cell research believe tissues and organs derived from these special cells will help people with diseases that currently have no cure.
Some argue stem cells taken from cloned embryos will be necessary, because patients' bodies are less likely to reject transplanted tissues or organs if they are grown from the patients' own stem cells.
Any attempt at therapeutic cloning is as morally irresponsible as reproductive cloning. Creating embryonic clones only to harvest their stem cells reduces potential human life to an economic commodity, a situation that most would find abhorrent.
The potential benefits that may be gained from therapeutic cloning do not justify treating the embryos as merely a means to an end. Other alternatives that do not create new embryos should be used instead. One such alternative would be to harvest stem cells from leftover embryos taken from fertility clinics.
Although most other countries seem to be opposed to cloning, England has taken a more liberal viewpoint.
The British House of Lords passed a law in January permitting therapeutic cloning to harvest stem cells, and there is reason to believe that England eventually will allow reproductive cloning as well.
England traditionally has led the world in new reproductive technologies, producing the first baby through in vitro fertilization (the egg's fertilization outside the living body) in 1978.
The United States should not follow the example of Great Britain and allow human cloning attempts to proceed. To do so would represent a casual disregard for human life and an ignorance of the moral values held by many Americans.
Both the NBAC recommendation and the recent House ban on human cloning show respect for human life. The Senate has a strong moral obligation to support the House bill in its current form.
Read More
U.Va. Alumni Association submits plans for new Alumni Hall building
By Caroline Hagood | YesterdayWest said that despite the proposal moving through City Council’s review process, the project is still years away from becoming a reality.
Graduating student leaders reflect on how they impacted the University community
By Jackie Bond and Brandon Kile | 2 days agoAccording to Lilian Rojas, Board of Visitors student representative and fourth-year Batten student, the Class of 2024 is defined by its resilience.
D.C. baseball legend Ryan Zimmerman to deliver keynote Valedictory address
By Xander Tilock | 3 days agoFamously nicknamed “Mr. National” for his many contributions to the Washington, D.C. franchise, Zimmerman is considered one of the most successful alumni in Virginia baseball history.
