The Ethics of Cloning of Humans from Somatic Cells

Note: This page always under development


Suggested Resource(s)...

"Ethical Issues in Human Cloning - Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives" by M. C. Brannigan (Seven Bridges Press, 2001)

Related news...

South African Doctor Ready To Clone Humans
Lighter Side of Cloning


I took a medical ethics based approach to this panel. One of my follow panalists, Lisa Silverthorne Pruvis, took a practical, legal based approach (how would you deal with property rights and inheritance with clones). Larry Niven brought up a very good point regarding the production of brainless clones as a source of transplant organs. His question was, would the creation of brainless clone (say though pharmaceutical or genetic intervention) result in a non-human or a seriously mistreated human. I do not have an answer to this question.

In my opinion, the real question here is weather we should be ruled by hope or fear. Nearly every technology can be applied for good or evil. Reproductive technologies in general and cloning from somatic cells in particular is no different. We can write policies and laws to encourage "good" uses and discourage "bad" ones, but ultimately there can not be progress without some risk.

Interestingly, some of the arguments against cloning are based on science fiction literature. Particularly, David Rorvik's In His Image: The Cloning of a Man, C. S. Lewis' The Abolition of Man: Or Reflections on Education with Special Reference to the Teaching of English in the Upper Forms of Schools, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World: A Novel and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. As much as I like science fiction, it's a little scary seeing it used as a basis of public policy and law.

I suggest we use current reproductive technologies in the U.S. as a model of public policy related to human cloning. Currently, most private health insurance plans and government assistance programs do not cover the cost of fertility treatment. However, if you want it you pay for it yourself, its not illegal and its practice is controlled by ethical standards imposed by the fertility industry itself. I oppose any attempt by the U.S. Federal Government to make human cloning research illegal.

Arguments For Cloning and Cloning Research

It can increase the number of embryos transferred and avoid subsequent egg retrieval during in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures.

It may provide a way for completely sterile individuals (those not capable of producing gametes) to reproduce.

It may provide a way for homosexual couples to reproduce themselves.

It probably will provide valuable basic research and possible spin off technologies related to reproduction and development.

Our society has generally respected individual privacy and the general right to control ones body in regard to reproduction.

No one is clearly harmed by it.

Prohibiting it would violate the fundamental freedom of scientific inquiring.

Arguments Against Cloning and Cloning Research

Safety Concerns - This is the same as any new medical technology. Research is needed to quantify and reduce any risk. Current human subject norms (informed consent) should apply and be sufficient.

Individuality and Uniqueness - This ignores the normality of naturally born identical twins. Nurture is probably more important than nature in the development of human personality. Except in cases in witch an individual women provided both the somatic cell and the egg, mitochondrial DNA will differ between the progenitor and the clone. Even in these cases, X chromosome deactivation would differ.

Family Integrity - This is a ridiculous argument. Our society freely allows single people to reproduce sexually.

Destruction of Embryos - We do not now consider embryos or fetuses to have the status of full humans and therefore to be protected by a full compliment of human rights.

Treating children as Objects - In this regard, cloning does not differ from other reproductive technologies (such as artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization,).

Psychological harm to child due to diminished sense of individuality and personal autonomy - this is very hypothetical and ignores the normalcy of naturally born identical twins.

It is impossible to obtain informed consent from the embryo/fetus - Cloning is not different that any other type of reproductive research or technology in this regard.

Slippery Slope to Eugenics - Cloning probably produces less concern in this regard than does genetic testing and screening. There are certain genetic traits that are harmful to individuals with them and removing them from the human gene pool is no different that eradication of a infectious disease (such as small pox).

Cloning (and abortion and reproductive technologies in general) Cheapens Life - Product liability litigation and work place heath and safety laws seem to indicate that we currently place a higher value on individual life and health than we did 50 years ago. This is the same time period over which many of the opponents of reproductive technologies have repeatedly voiced this concern.

Cloning is Playing God - This argument assumes that someone knows God's intentions. Even among Christians there is substantial disagreement as to what is God's will. Who is to say that it is not God's intention that we clone ourselves? At least one writer indicates that Hindu thought embraces IVF and other technologies (Prakash N. Desai, Health and Medicine in the Hindu Tradition: Continuity and Cohesion).

Medical Ethics, Cloning and Molecular Biology Web Sites

* University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics (Very Good)
* Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW) linked Bioethics Web Sites
* Boston University Health Law Department
* DOE's Protecting Human Subjects Site
* Your Genes, Your Choices a book describing the Human Genome Project
* The Task Force on Genetic Testing
* The Human Genome Organization (HUGO)
* DOE Human Genome Project Information (Very Good)
* NIH Human Genome Project site
* National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC)
* Gene Map of the Human Genome

Cloning and Reproductive Technology Literature

The Hasting Center (John A. Robertson, "The Question of Human Cloning," Hastings Center Report, 24(2):6-14 1994 and Richard A. McCormick, S.J., "Blastomere Separation; Some Concerns," Hastings Center Report, 24(2):14-6 1994) published a two well considered essays on the ethics of cloning. These essays were written before the cloning of Dolly and hence do not address somatic cell cloning directly. However, most or the arguments are equally valid or can be extended from the bastomere separation to somatic cell cloning approaches. George J. Annas, J.D., M.P.H. testified before the U.S. Senates's Public Health and Safety subcommittee on March 12, 1997. A transcript of this testimony is available on line at http://www-busph.bu.edu/Depts/LW/Clonetest.htm. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) prepared a report on cloning human beings for the U.S. president. This report was issued in June, 1997 and is available on line at http://www.georgetown.edu/research/nrcbl/nbac/pubs/cloning1/cloning.pdf. Any modern medical ethics book should have a section on cloning (although these sections tend to get dated very quickly these days).


Back to my Home Page
Send comments and suggestions about this page to: Charles S. Tritt, Ph.D.
This page last updated 3/13/98 (link fixed 3/21/03)