This probably one of the most difficult topics everyone has to face in the realm of science i.e., cloning. Whether scientists clone embryonic stem-cells or someone’s pet, one should take these issues to heart whenever the discussion pops up. However, not so many people are willing to understand the processes and reasons behind the form of cloning.
One of the most difficult topics that tend to run along the threshold of bioethics is human and embryonic stem-cell cloning. Prior to discussing these topics altogether, let me explain what these two scientific processes are, first, with human cloning. While we all have seen the process of cloning in Hollywood movies e.g., Star Wars & Brave New World, but understand very little about the genetic process. Although science literacy remains stagnant to the public, I will give some basic explanation here. According to this site, the way which human reproductive cloning would have to work through the means of reproducing deceased pets: through taking an egg cell, sterilizing, and implanting the egg with donor DNA. In a sense the egg, which was fertilized neither by the surrogate nor partner’s DNA, has a very chance at life once again and placed inside the mother for development.
Personally, I would have no troubles with the generic idea; however, there are some issues I do take with how the process goes. Although using the egg to carry the DNA from a deceased individual is a terrific process, using someone else’s nucleus and using the mother as surrogate one is not so cool. The reason for this dislike is mostly because scientists rob mother of their rights to raise their own natural offspring. Simply by taking someone else’s eggs and exterminate the nucleus is not so entirely helpful, especially if these are taken from individuals (or animals) in this case that may not want to be mothers.
There can be of course and exception to the rule i.e., if the human mother donates her eggs voluntarily for this cause and decides to give birth to this child. In that case, I would have a bigger problem because this may interfere with future offspring development and this interferes with the will of the mother. If the technology would get better, I would highly recommend developing genetically modified eggs designed to carry no nucleus whatsoever. In those circumstances, neither scientists nor mothers would need to worry about their consciences being violated with experimentation and risk taking when it comes to creating a human being on their own.
Speaking of experimentation, there the next topic comes in mind: embryonic stem cell research. My biggest problem in this area comes when people ‘abort/murder/kill’ children in order to advance science. I would definitely not support any of this ideology, especially when the alternatives are much greater to this false dilemma. In the field of science, humans should know better when it is and when it is not OK to engage in the field of studying embryonic stem cells without the interference of destroying other lives in order to ‘preserve’ others. This research would be entirely useless if scientists still pursue the case.
In short this is where my view on human cloning stands:
- Yes, it is perfectly fine to clone other humans; only be aware that the ‘exact duplicate’ is not the same as the original.
- There needs to be artificial egg cell development that does not contain the nucleus.
- The chances of success for the cloning process needs to decrease so that the process is ethically safe.
- Producing embryonic stem cells from cloning and killing unborn children is wrong and downright ridiculous. Whenever someone decides to engage in this practice, he or she only does so for the monetary, not medical benefits.