• Category: American History
  • Words: 720
  • Grade: 100
How Might cloning be used to further expand the organ donation program?
Organ donation is not so efficient at this point in time. It does help, but more often than not, it doesn't. This is because there are a lot of factors that are taken into account when an organ is replaced with a donated one. If someone dies, and they have signed a paper allowing for their organs to be removed from their corpse and donated to needy people, and the needed organ proves to be healthy and working, and it matches the type of organ that is needed, and it is not rejected by the body of the receiver (which happens quite often), then things work out. If not, things just aren't so dandy. And the fact that every second more people are born than people that die continues to limit the usefulness of this program. Cloning would undoubtedly remove all these factors, allow corpses to rot away instead of being ripped open, and save thousands, maybe even millions, of lives.
However, people don't seem to agree.
Many ethicists (again!) and others worried about just how humane humans should be. Having so little reason they can use to prevent cloning, they resort to moaning and droning about organ harvesting.

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).
ad 4
Copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved