The Bioethic Concerns Surrounding Human Cloning

In 2002, the first human clone was made. Although the insignificant company was second guessed, their product, baby Eve, was a genuine human clone as proved by the DNA test conducted by Michael Guillen, science editor at ABC News and a former Harvard University mathematician. The common understanding of cloning and what it entails projects a very positive view upon cloning. The common understanding of cloning is that one makes a genetically identical copy of oneself by replicating their DNA. However, what is really going on behind the closed doors of those white, sterile labs? How does one actually go about producing and obtaining a clone? At what cost can one have a clone? What are the characteristics of a clone? Why are clones coming up in conversations about bioethics? Are clones something that should be allowed, or should it be prohibited?

Bioethics are the moral principles of medicinal and biological research. Bioethics concerns cloning because cloning is done so with stem cells. For cloning to be successful, stem cells are obtained from donor embryos, or unborn babies. The genetic material of these unborn infants is replaced with that of the clonee. The embryo is then placed back in the womb for further development. The rest of the birthing process is natural. The infant will be born with the same genetic material as that of the clonee, as opposed to who would have been its natural parents (the egg donors). According to the National Center for Biotechnology Information, the bioethical issue that is prevalent with cloning is that to obtain the stem cell from the embryo, one has to “erase” the embryos genetic material, virtually killing a human. Although the embryo is not destroyed but merely “reset”, many believe that this “erasing” is cruel. It can be considered an abortion by some and a killing of a person who never even got the chance to live by others. The child will be born with the same hair color, complexion, and characteristics as that of its genetic material donor. The only difference is that the “clone” will not share the memories of the clonee.

People are interested in cloning because they hope to use the technology to bring back a love ones such as a miscarried child or pet. According to a New Scientist article, one family paid a company, Clonaid, a front for the Raelian cult, to make a clone of the wife because her partner is infertile. On the twenty-sixth of December in 2002, Eve, the first human clone was born healthy. Eve, now nearly fifteen, had become an advocate for cloning. However, Eve goes through genetic testing regularly. This is because the few animals that have been cloned have all developed genetic issues. These issues end up typically causing premature death. Although Eve's DNA matches that of her mother's and no genetic defects have occurred, does not mean that a “medicinal” company funded by a cult that is founded on the principle that the earth's population are clones of aliens and that the cult had possessed the secret of cloning since the beginning, and is the first to successfully make a clone, a human clone. With a business as fraudulent and invalid as Clonaid, one can only wonder about their released statement of ”Then we started to do some basic science involving cow eggs we got from slaughterhouses.” Although many consider the topic of slaughterhouses a cruel and gruesome topic, primarily due to the book The Jungle, one can only wonder why they would use cow embryos instead of something that is genetically similar to humans, such as a primate. This creates more questions as to how Clonaid has been able to clone humans. With Clonaid having produced an additional five clones in 2002, the Food and Drug Administration tried closing in on the Bahamian based organization, but to no prevail. Although Clonaid released a statement staying that all of its clone birthing mother's are willing adherents to the cult, it is still unclear as to through what means Clonaid is able to successfully produce clones. With Clonaid standing steadfast in its stubbornness to provide it's technique, one can only assume the worst about Clonaid and it's morals relating to bioethics.

As stated previously, one reason why one might desire a clone is to replace a lost love one. However, what is the desire of a clone if it will not have the same memories as your beloved one. Imagine bringing up what had been an inside joke between you and a former friend when you remember that the person you are talking to is actually Barbie or Ken 2.0. Clones have the potential to ruin our social lives. This could be done by acting as a “fill in” for friends. They could potentially isolate each and every one of us. In the case of the Hunt family, another family that confided in Clonaid, wanted their 11-month year old boy, Andrew, back. According to the New York Times, the Hunt’s were so willing “to transcend the great gulf of death and create an identical twin of Andrew.” In the United States, therapeutic cloning (one of the three types of cloning: therapeutic, genetic, and reproductive cloning) is legal. When the Food & Drug Administration, FDA, heard that the Hunt’s were trying to conduct reproductive cloning in America to gain their son back, the FDA shut them down. At this, the Hunt’s nearly one million dollar investment, as well as their hopes dreams, became just that, dreams, as they got shut down. The Hunt family has been trying to recreate their son for the past decade. This dream of having their son back, having a clone, has consumed their life.

Considering the fact that nearly fifty countries worldwide have banned reproductive cloning due to its declaration of being unethical, one might wonder what cloning really entails. In consideration to the “erasing” of embryos, these countries have chosen a more ethical route. Many other countries have chosen the “in the name of science” route. These countries are similar to the Raelian cult because they have been trying to figure out cloning for years, ruining countless embryos; all for what, the name of science? In what way can cloning actually help society to progress other than to console sobbing fools to get over the past? Some say that clones can be used for dangerous jobs, but why not use a robot or machine for those jobs? In the end, a clone is still a human being. A robot is something man made. A human is conceived by man. Clones fall under the latter of those. When all things are considered, clones provide nothing except to heal broken hearts and to make people question their morals in relation to bioethics.