Is Human Cloning Wrong

Human Cloning: It’s Possible, But Is It Ethical?

In 1997, Dolly the sheep was born by cloning an adult sheep, making her the first animal to be cloned from a somatic cell of an organism. This breakthrough brought the possibility of cloning a human closer to reality. However, as cloning a human becomes an increasingly imminent issue, the question of whether or not it should actually be done has arisen. While many people support cloning because of its benefits to society and the health, both mental and physical, of people, many others oppose it because of their misunderstanding of the process and its benefits. I believe that human cloning is an incredible asset to the world, because of its astounding applications and effectivity in solving

Humans would be cloned by one of two ways: cell mass division, in which an embryo is divided, and nuclear substitution, in which the nucleus of a cell is implanted into an egg cell. Human cloning has many benefits, including giving people who cannot have children one that is genetically related to them. If a woman is infertile, her only chance of having a child may be cloning. While there are other options for treatment, cloning can be used to easily create multiple embryos for implantation. But not just infertile people could benefit from reproductive cloning. According to “‘Goodbye Dolly?’ The ethics of human cloning”, many people that are carriers of genetic diseases, such as X-linked and autosomal recessive diseases, as well as mitochondrial disease, choose not to have children because of the risk of them having the disease that they carry. Cloning can be used to give these people children that are genetically related to themselves, without the risk of having the diseases, or can be used to provide a twin embryo for biopsy in order to see whether or not their child has the genetic disease. With mitochondrial disease, cloning by nuclear substitution removes the possibility of it being passed down, as the mitochondrial DNA is left in the cell that the nucleus is taken from. With the possibility of giving these people genetically related

First, one of the most common arguments against cloning is that people will lose their individuality if they are cloned. However, it is important to remember that cloning only creates a genetically identical copy of an organism, with a completely different personality. Quoted from “‘Goodbye Dolly?’: the ethics of human cloning”, to clone Bill Clinton would not produce more Presidents of the United States, just humans who looked like him but had a different individuality. Another argument is that it is a waste of human potential to create a spare embryo for preimplantation testing and then discard it. But, if no spare embryo is created and the original embryo is tested and not implanted because it is damaged by the procedure, it is also a waste of human potential. Even more people don’t support cloning because of the rights that all humans, both born and yet to be born, have. One of these is a right to have parents, or to have genes from two individuals. However, this argument is based off of the misconception that many people have, which is that a clone is the child of a nucleus donor. In fact, they are the donor’s twin sibling and have the same genetic parents as the donor. Some others interpret this right as a right to two social parents. But if this were true, it would constantly be broken by divorce, death, and other