'Reasons Why Cloning is Unethical Essay\r'

'From the day that ‘Dolly the sheep’ addle it to the headline intelligence agency, the controversy regarding her existence has never ceased. It is quite a amazing, how the issues surrounding a sheep could create such a great divide on public opinion, get up up much debate in scientific halls, and whose implications caused a dilemma that reached a magnitude which demand a presidential decision. Needless to say, the debate did non tutelage agriculture or animal rightlys, only when on how she came to be †by cloning.\r\nContrary to ordinary belief, these clinical ventures though, were non d whizz by cut sense of adventurism, or by simple acts of merciful arrogance of ‘playing God’. Instead, this break through in the field of bio applied science, along with other related cases, was carried come out of the closet with the legitimate purpose of propagating livestock that carry delectable traits. Breeders can easily then raise turn animals that get the preferred traits and thereof increase productiveness and yield. Also, lab research for the noble intention of growth drugs, require numerous testing on animals sooner it can in the long run be decl atomic number 18d impelling and safe for gentleman use.\r\n re-create would allow them to form test-animals that display similar or identical characteristics and gum olibanum help validate results. There argon several(prenominal) other formers why cloning is held by some(prenominal) scientists as an essential means for improving human condition. However, such so-called conditions had today been raised to the shew of fulf disastering conveys other than physical necessities. Man’s many woes and flaws in life such as the pain of losing a love one or s give wayrless couples having to bear the unfulfilled desire of benignant and rearing their give boorren, are just a few of the many disadvantages that confronts finite man.\r\nToday through science, man is long ing to challenge and ‘correct’ these unrealistic odds. Would cloning be the answer? II. Man’s Contemporary Alternative: Merits of Cloning-to Produce-Children Distinguished British philosopher bloody shame Warnock, expressed her support in favour of utilizing the technology of cloning to produce children. She relys that there is nothing abuse with this procedure and thereby there should be no question on the estimable soundness of such an endeavour (Connor, 2002). Together with the rest of those who agree with her, they believe that cloning offers an excellent root word for the following problems:\r\nA. To supporter Sterile Parent/s Obtain biologically Related Children Individuals or parents who long to have their induce offspring, but are hindered by sterility or some other reason †the only presented solution so far have been adoption. There are different reasons why some had found this unsatisfactory. With cloning, a sterile man can now have the oppo rtunity of producing a child that bears his own characteristics. The need to find a sperm bestower is eliminated, and then eliminates the porta of their child acquiring and issue on undesirable traits to future agentration outside the couple.\r\n much(prenominal) a method also opens for an attractive possibility not only for sterile couples but for man couples and unmarrieds who desire to raise a child of their own but do not want the entanglements of a marriage union. B. Pass-on a Genetic Disease Individuals or parents who carry defective genes such as a genetic disease can now trust to eliminate passing the disease to the following generations. Cloning would assure the parents of being able to raise children who allow foring not be troubled by the genetic disorder. C. Pain of Losing a Loved One\r\nThe affliction of losing a loved one can now be alleviated by cloning the demise or dead significant person. Since cloning involves the passing on of exact physical characte ristics, producing a cloned individual would invariably cause ‘replication’ of the deceased loved one or relative. Those who are left, will be comforted by ‘seeing’ their dead spouse, child or relative ‘live again’ on the cloned individual. Although, there would be major differences in experiences which would make it entirely impossible to make an exact likeness of an individual in all aspects, cloning would drive a connection of the lost loved one with the grieving members.\r\nD. Society’s Desire to incur Individuals with Superior Abilities or Qualities Cloning brings families and societies to have super-human individuals by cloning outstanding athletes, musicians, men and women renowned for their beauty, or geniuses. By replicating these individuals, it is presumed that these superior qualities are determined by certain genetic make-up and thus, will be passed on through cloning. III. Reasons for Argument Cloning violates the ethic s of human experimentation on the following understanding: A. Concern on Safety Of utmost attention when cloning humans is the high risk involved.\r\nAs of the moment, the cloning procedure being done in experimenting mammals has shown how unsafe it is to be even applied in humans. Many embryos got wasted as it took 277 attempts in advance finally producing Dolly the sheep (Gawler, 2000). Barely just being hexad years old later, Dolly became severely ill and had to be submitted for euthanasia. Careful examination revealed that her chromosomes had shown premature signs of ageing (â€Å"Cloning”). The possibility of creating inborn abnormalities or inbred defects caused by the procedure should even bring parents with a hereditary disease not to employ cloning.\r\n mend it could hold promise of not passing on genetic diseases to their child, the latter is also vulnerable for inborn malformation. Also, since several donor screwballs and substitute mothers are needed before achieving success, this places risks on several women. Experiments on animals had shown that there is high occurrence of premature stillbirth on cloned fetuses. If done on humans, continous abortion could overtake to greater possibility of maternal death. B. The Issue of concur Cloning also undermines the right of the cloned individual.\r\nIn demarcation to the risks that could bring to surrogate mother or the gene donor, the risks posed at the cloned individual do not have the individual’s consent. Most often, the right to exercise freedom is often called by those who abet it. This is often based on the ‘freedom to multiply’. This means that the constitution protects individuals or parents to freely use up whether they are to have children or not (Eisenstadt v. Baird, 1972). However, in exercising that right, it overrides the freedom of choice on the cloned individual.\r\nTrue, generative freedom permits anybody to decide whether to have a child or not w ithout hindrances by the government. It does not however, in any way, allow anyone to do it by any(prenominal) means and in complete disregard for the upbeat of others. C. Possible Exploitation of Women Since cloning requires numerous tests before any attempts could become fruitful, large quantity of donor eggs will be needed. Getting the egg would subject the woman donor of hormonal intervention that gives high health risks.\r\nFurthermore, what would most likely kick downstairs is that these women donors would be offered a substantial amount of money, and thus could lure poor women to compromise their health in exchange for financial gain (Council on Bioethics, 2002). IV. terminal More often, the concern for safety is limited on the aspect of limiting or perfecting the procedure. It does not cerebrate the possible undesirable effects it would have †afterwards it is accomplished. This perspective of safety does not take reflexion on the unexpected effects it would have on the individual, family involved and society in general.\r\nThe relationships between members of those with cloned children would greatly be altered compared to conventional family set-up. Would the cloned individual of a father be his child or replicate? Obviously, cloning will rearrange how family relations will be treated. Before any attempts to cloning-to-produce children be done, would be parent/s should give grave concern on the potential psychological effects this would have on the one being cloned. What also inescapably special consideration is it’s the social regard caused by confusion.\r\nCloning business leader open for spare expensive legal battles, over custody as to who really are the child’s parents. all(prenominal) individual who has a part of the cloned child might fight to claim for custody over the child. condition that such asexual means to produce children is not strange, faulty or imperfect, there is serious misunderstanding on the purpos e by which it longs for implementation. It places more consequence on the one which will be cloned by replicating the person, rather than the cloned child. Human experience has revealed that man has the inclining to abuse, and therefore such technology can be used for vain reasons.\r\nCloning somehow claims to endure solutions for man’s problems, the solution however, creates more problems. effrontery the demerits of the cause, it would far benefit society to keep from flirting with strange methods. Works Cited: 1. Connor, S. (2002). Warnock: ‘No estimable reason to ban cloning’. The Independent. Retrieved 20 Nov. 2008 <Accessed at http://www. independent. co. uk/news/uk/crime/warnock-no-ethical-reason-to-ban- cloning-649619. html> 2. Gawler, DM. Human cloning: Scientific, ethical and regulatory issues. [Electronic Version] Retrieved 20 Nov.\r\n2008 <Accessed at http://www. aph. gov. au/ suffer/committe/LACA/humancloning/sub234. pdf 3. â€Å"Cloni ng”. Ethical Issues in Biology. Retrieved 20 Nov. 2008 <Accessed at http://itech. pjc. edu/jwooters/eth_issue/ei_notes. htm> 4. Supreme Court of the United States (1972). , Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 US 438 5. Council on Bioethics. (2002). Human cloning and human dignity: An ethical inquiry. Retrieved 20 Nov. 2008. <Accessed at http://www. bioethics. gov/reports/cloningreport/children. htmlhttp://www. bioethics. gov/reports/cloningreport/children. html\r\n'