William Morrow and Company,pp.
The Need for a Comprehensive Ban Issues: Cloning Human cloning is the creation of a human being whose genetic make-up is nearly identical 1 to that of a currently or previously existing individual. Recent developments in animal cloning coupled with advances in human embryonic stem cell research have heightened the need for legislation on this issue.
Despite their nearly identical titles, the two bills currently being considered by Congress call for markedly different policies on this critical issue. Though both seek a ban on what is being called "reproductive" cloning--in which a clonal human embryo is implanted in a woman with the intent that a cloned human being will be born--they differ dramatically with respect to what is being termed "therapeutic" cloning.
This latter type of cloning involves the creation and subsequent destruction of a clonal human embryo for the purposes of scientific or medical An analysis of the issues of cloning. To achieve this end, we believe that a comprehensive ban prohibiting both "reproductive" and "therapeutic" cloning is needed.
In support of this assertion, we offer the following: The overwhelming consensus in this country that human reproductive cloning should not be permitted necessitates a ban on both reproductive and "therapeutic" cloning.
An overwhelming majority of scientists, lawyers, health care professionals, ethicists and the general public has spoken out strongly against creating a human baby via what is being termed "reproductive cloning. Yet, to enact a ban on the former while simultaneously permitting the latter would almost certainly result in instances of both reproductive and "therapeutic" cloning.
Support for this premise is as follows: First, if a ban only on reproductive cloning were adopted, enforcement would require the legally mandated destruction of human embryos created via cloning.
That is, if it were legal to create clonal embryos for "therapeutic"--but not for reproductive--purposes, the demise of these embryos would be required in order to prevent the illegal practice of reproductive cloning from occurring.
A non-comprehensive ban would thereby establish "for the first time in American history a class of embryos that it is a crime not to destroy, a felony not to treat as anything except disposable tissue. Therefore, the birth of clonal human beings--the very thing such a ban would intend to prohibit--would likely result.
A clonal embryo is produced with the "therapeutic" intent of producing tissue needed to save the life of a seriously ill child.
Before the tissue can be obtained, the child dies. Her grieving parents, distraught over their tragic loss, request that the embryo be implanted so that they may have another child.
A man agrees to be cloned with the intent of donating the resultant embryo to research. Subsequent to creation of the clonal embryo, he learns that both he and his wife are infertile.
Realizing that their prospect for having a genetically related child suddenly appears to be compromised, the man changes his mind and requests that his clone be implanted in his wife instead. In cases like these, authorities would be hard pressed to deny the wishes of those desiring to implant a clonal embryo.
Fertility clinics often go to great lengths to determine parents' wishes regarding embryos who have been stored for a long period of time and honor decisions both for and against implantation.
The implantation of human life--regardless of how that life originated--should not be regarded as a prohibitable act.
Second, if the laboratory creation of clonal embryos was permitted but the implantation of such embryos was banned, logistical problems regarding enforcement of such a system would undoubtedly arise.
Policies that would require genetic testing of every baby upon birth to ensure that he or she is not a clone would likely be regarded as a violation of privacy. Furthermore, such testing would itself fail to ensure that human cloning had not occurred, as the baby could be a clone of an unknown or unrevealed person, rather than being a near genetic duplicate of one of the parents.
As a result, the threat to levy fines on or otherwise punish those who clone often would not serve as a deterrent. Also, those who could be proven to have cloned e. Therefore, policies that would prohibit the implantation of clonal human embryos would often be unenforceable and would fail to deter human reproductive cloning.
To mandate the destruction of clonal human embryos created for research purposes would constitute a break with our nation's longstanding legal tradition and the majority of public sentiment. While some proponents of "therapeutic" cloning have characterized the cloning controversy as primarily a dispute between those who are "pro-life" and those who are "pro-choice," extracorporeal human embryos historically have been accorded the right to certain protections by those on both sides of the abortion debate.
The following excerpt from Richard Doerflinger's June 20, testimony before the U. House Subcommittee on Health illustrates this point in convincing fashion: In the National Institutes of Health did propose funding such [a practice], as part of a larger proposal for funding human embryo research generally.
The moral outcry against this aspect of the proposal, however, was almost universal. Opinion polls showed massive opposition and the NIH panel making the recommendation was inundated with over 50, letters of protest.
The Washington Post, while reaffirming its support for legalized abortion, attacked the Panel's recommendation as follows: The creation of human embryos specifically for research that will destroy them is unconscionable We can debate all day whether an embryo is or isn't a person.All three panelists commended the decision of the state advisory committee to deal separately with the issues of human cloning and stem cell research.
Religious Perspectives Two religion panelists, Suzanne Holland and Laurie Zoloth, are co editors of The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics and Public Policy (MIT . The ethical issues with reproductive cloning include genetic damage to the clone, health risks to the mother, very low success rate meaning loss of large numbers of embryos and fetuses, psychological harm to the clone, complex altered familial relationships, and commodification of human life.
Jan 01, · Cloning and analysis of the promoter region of the erythromycin-resistance gene (ermE) Next article in issue; Keywords. Recombinant DNA. S1 mapping. exonuclease VII. in vitro transcription.
Streptomyces lividans. promoter-probe plasmids. MLS. RNA polymerase. Abbreviations.
A. . Human Cloning Essay Examples. An Analysis of the Major Concerns Regarding the Controversial Issue of Human Cloning. 1, words. 3 pages. A Study of Cloning. words. 1 page. Potential Risks and Benefits of Human Cloning.
1, words. 3 pages. The Many Benefits of Human Cloning. The NBAC heard testimony and read opinions on the multitude of complex issues surrounding human cloning, but in the end, the NBAC based its recommendation for a three to five year moratorium on human cloning in the United States on safety concerns.
Cloning Human Beings: An Assessment of the Ethical Issues Pro and Con In Dan W. Brock's essay, Cloning human beings: an assessment of the ethical issues pro and con, Brock tries to take a neutral stance on the subject and give both the positives and negatives of cloning human beings.