Preserving Human Dignity: Human Reproductive Cloning

Modern technology has brought significant changes in the field of medicine. Reproductive cloning refers to a situation where a cloned embryo is implanted into the uterus, which can either be real or artificial. However, there have been concerns regarding the adoption of biotechnology, especially on human cloning, and many people have initiated efforts aimed at ensuring that the biomedical projects that contravene the societal values and standards are subjected to tight human control (Kass, 2001: 2). Understandably, human reproductive cloning has been premised on commercial interests even though it has the potential of leading to dehumanization. Also, cloning often results in adverse effects on human identity and individuality, which makes it unethical practice. Notably, human reproductive cloning has extensively destroyed the natural parent-child relations, which ultimately violate the ethical norms observed by the human community.

Despite the significance of innovation and genetic progress, human cloning is expected to result in negative consequences in the future. It is worth noting that there has been negligible demand for human cloning, and this lends credence to the fact that the practice is unethical and non-beneficial to the public. Furthermore, Kass has been championing the ban of human cloning argue that that the practice's commercial interests are reducing, and many countries have adopted different measures aimed at preventing cloning (Kass, 2001: 4). Additionally, undertaking the cloning process does not require the consent of the people whose genetic substance is used, and this often affects reproductive freedom. Understandably, most Americans have shown opposition to the practice of human cloning, as re-designing of humanity has been viewed as anti-religious practice. Moreover, nature dictates that parents should be hopeful about their children's progress going forward, but parents who have children resulting from cloning always have high expectations, which can destroy their relationships.

It is worth noting that banning reproductive cloning should be encouraged, notably because the practice has serious ethical ramifications. Children are always considered to be gifts and not possessions, and therefore, cloning breeds moral problems (Kass, 2001: 7). Furthermore, the process of reproductive cloning has displayed disrespect for human life. Also, biotechnological progress that has given rise to reproductive cloning has increasingly taken the commercial trajectory, which breaks the moral standards about the nature of life. I strongly agree with Kass' position about the need to enforce the banning of reproductive cloning because of the practice's potential to bring moral ruin to the human race. Understandably, human freedom and dignity are adversely affected by reproductive cloning because it creates a departure to the natural, ethical process of getting children (Kass, 2001: 13). In light of this, most countries should enact laws that will help in stopping reproductive cloning. Additionally, reproductive cloning has been faced with criticism on moral grounds because parents often dictate the traits they want in their cloned children. The idea of seeking to influence the generic characteristics of a child is highly unethical in the human community.

According to Kass, banning human cloning will not necessarily disrupt the genetic science progress, but the genetic scientists will show the public that their technological innovation is not aimed at violating the vital ethical norms that are maintained by the human community (Kass, 2001: 9). Notably, many people are grown increasingly fearful about technological advancement, especially on genetic science, and many scientists have been subjected to extreme public criticism. Many scientists have taken advantage of their possession of knowledge on genetic science have shown gross misconduct in their experiments (Kass, 2001: 8). In light of this, therefore, banning human reproductive cloning will be instrumental in addressing the emerging ethical concerns on the practice and restoring the natural value of life. However, the government should ensure that the cloning ban is initiated without creating a hostile environment for biotechnological progress, which has proved to be beneficial to modern life. Most American states have made significant progress in enacting a ban on human reproductive cloning, and Michigan specifically has enforced tough punitive measures such as 10 years imprisonment and a fine of at most $10 million (Kass, 2001: 11).

Furthermore, it has been argued that there should be a collective ban on human cloning right from embryonic clones. Discouraging human cloning from the starting point will be a key step towards banning the human reproductive cloning (Bostrom & Roache, 2008:120). Understandably, some proponents of cloning have argued that the practice should be allowed, but this is usually shortsighted as a society that has allowed reproductive cloning to continue will depart from the natural settings. However, it should be noted that reproductive cloning has been supported by some scientists who argue that human enhancement is instrumental in making certain treatments. According to Nick Bostrom and Rebecca Roache, human enhancement helps in raising the human capacity that helps in achieving certain desirable results (Bostrom & Roache, 2008:129). Moreover, the proponents have maintained that cloning is vital in creating a life extension by reversing human aging, which ultimately helps in addressing social problems associated with aging in society. According to the proponents of reproductive cloning, the practice will inevitably bring improvement in the health status of the people, which will thus result in an increased standard of living (Bostrom & Roache, 2008:138).

It is instructive to note that control of biology will help address the difficulties that often characterize human cloning. Notably, cloning has not been successful in all the attempts that have been made. For instance, despite implanting around 29 clonal embryos of sheep eggs, only a single lamb clone was attained. In some instances, there have been reported incidences, where the cloned animals have displayed horrific deformities and disabilities (Kass, 2001: 13). Some animals, like cloned cows, have been characterized by heart problems. Also, human cloning will create a possibility of mass reproduction of human beings who have the same gene, and this will adversely affect their individuality. Moreover, scientists and bio-entrepreneurs have been making efforts to gain access to embryos and, more especially, the stem cells that can be used during transplantations to restore somatic damage (Kass, 2001: 14). Contemporary studies have indicated that potent stem cells from adults and children can be obtained from bone marrow, pancreas, and blood, among others. Understandably, cells derived from the bodies of natural beings have proved to be readily and inexpensively available compared to cells derived from reproduced clones.

Conclusion

In conclusion, human reproductive cloning has always been discouraged on moral grounds. Despite the general benefits that genetic science has contributed to the lives of human beings, reproductive cloning has always been viewed as an unattractive and unethical practice that negatively affects human dignity. The efforts to ban the practice of human reproductive cloning have faced many challenges as most Americans often view every innovation as progress without considering the ultimate consequences that can result from biotechnological advancement. Notably, considering the unethical nature of reproductive cloning, there has been an argument that the efforts to ensure a ban on the practice should commence from the point where embryonic clones are made. It should be noted that societies that have given room for human cloning have departed from the natural course of life where the bearing of children should be through natural procreation and not manufacturing. Notably, uncontrolled innovations have the potential of destroying humanity, and the efforts should be made to ensure that genetic science is geared towards providing human enhancement and not affecting human dignity and individuality.