Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The disadvantages of human cloning
Human cloning immorality
Health issues with human cloning
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The disadvantages of human cloning
While the ethics and legality of human cloning are blurry, I think human cloning would be detrimental to the human race. First of all, a lot of unwanted clones can end up happening because the process of cloning seems to be very limited success from what we know now. Screwing up from trying to obtain the nearest perfect clone should not be an option. It would be unfortunate for the women to go through the whole process and have to get rid of it, just because it did not turn out correct. Where will all the mess ups or unsuccessful clones remain at? All of this will cause the world to be overly populated, just in case they do not discard a human clone afterwards. It does not make any sense to me to clone a human if they exist or existed already. Many mistakes need to happen in order to get cloned the right way like: malformation, stillborn, or dying immediately after birth. The thought of performing the procedure over and over multiple times does not help the human mind and the society we are in. Just imagine if you get cloned and on your mind and thoughts you have high expectations of your clone, but do not receive what you hoped. This will create a lot of injustice than what we already have going on now. Cloning will just mean to add more misunderstanding of the real purpose. Like everything else in this world we will use the cloning method to commit copious misconduct, for example, creating an attack army, increased malpractice, or insufficient research, along with additional disadvantages. A clone may do things in your name and nobody would ever suspect it. This means that the identity of the human race is threatened. An unfavorable reason will be the developmental of new diseases. By bringing in an entirely new group of...
... middle of paper ...
...he cause, there may be parents who wished they can bring that child back to have a second chance. It shows the eagerness of the parents to try and have the same kid even though it will only be physically identical. This being the matter, couples will have that option and perhaps fill in the void.
In conclusion, it is clear that human cloning has enormous potential benefits or negative consequences to the human race. It also demands funding for further development and error methods. Cloning humans not only threatens society, but also the value and uniqueness of every individual. Maybe they will have a check box where it asks if you are a clone or an original. We do not need any more discrimination than what we have going on now. How I mentioned in the beginning, human cloning will be detrimental to the human race. This is clearly going against the course of nature.
The author’s purpose for writing the book was to help families who are struggling with infertility, miscarriage, and adoption. The author was able to fulfill her purpose throughout the book with stories and personal experiences. For example, when she gave a history of her grief with three miscarriages and five to seven adoption lost. She was able to relate to families dealing with each situation because she had experienced all three herself.
Additionally, people are sometimes already given custody. Zits’ aunt was his one surviving family member, so she was already assigned custody: “She was the only living family I had.” (160) She wanted to let Zits’ mom leave this world trusting that her little boy would be in good hands and that he would not be in foster care. Unfortunately, this was not how it ended up, some people are not capable of raising a child especially while grieving the loss of someone close to them. Some people also do not know what actually comes with the upbringing of a child.
If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.
Parents have the tendency to overlook how lucky they are to have had the ability to create their own children. Many do not recognize what a true blessing it is to have kids, and that others are not fortunate enough to experience that miracle. Ten percent of couples endure infertility (Advantages) so they must consider other options. A very popular choice is adoption. It is not only a good alternative for the couple, but also for the child who needs a loving home.
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
A compelling issue that has come into focus in the past several years is the idea of human cloning. Many scientists believe that it is inevitable because the technology is there, and anything that can be done eventually will be done. They preach the value of human clones, dropping phrases like 'cure for disease' and 'prolonged life' to entice the public into supporting their cause. Though these concepts seem beguiling, the notion of human cloning, when looked at as a whole, has serious repercussions and should not be entertained lightly. From a strictly scientific point of view, we are just not ready to attempt the cloning of a human being.
Automatically when people talk about human cloning that tend to be negative. Most reaction is people shouldn't play god or interfere with nature. Of course there are negative consequences that could come from cloning. On the other hand there is so many positive things that could save more lives than it would cost. Yes Cloning involves risky techniques that could result in premature babies and some deaths. That is why public policy needs to be changed on cloning. The medical possibilities are endless if federal money is given to research and develop cloning techniques.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
... the clone lives and if clones got to be very widespread they could potentially impact the gene pool. Needless to say, the cons definitely outweigh the pros and the impact clones would have on the everyday life of society would not be our greatest worry.
Human cloning destroys individuality and uniqueness. “What makes people unique is the fact that we have different genes and cloning would lose these important parts of our bodies makeup.” There would be less of a variety of people and everyone would be the same. This would not only be the good qualities, but also the bad that would pass on. Since clones and the original donor will look alike and have the same DNA, it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference. Overtime, they would lose their individuality and uniqueness. For example, say a crime was committed.
is born and as well as the father having a new son it also shows how
Last of all, Cloning is not ethical, many religious groups look down upon cloning and think it’s not proper because they think it’s like playing God. Many scientists were mainly thinking about cloning animals and, most likely, humans in the future to harvest their organs and then kill them. “Who would actually like to be harvested and killed for their organs?” “Human cloning exploits human beings for our own self-gratification (Dodson, 2003).” A person paying enough money could get a corrupt scientist to clone anybody they wanted, like movie stars, music stars, athletes, etc (Andrea Castro 2005),” whether it be our desire for new medical treatments or our desire to have children on our own genetic terms (Dodson, 2003).
John A. Robertson’s article “Human Cloning and the Challenge of Regulation” raises three important reasons on why there shouldn’t be a ban on Human Cloning but that it should be regulated. Couples who are infertile might choose to clone one of the partners instead of using sperm, eggs, or embryo’s from anonymous donors. In conventional in vitro fertilization, doctors attempt to start with many ova, fertilize each with sperm and implant all of them in the woman's womb in the hope that one will result in pregnancy. (Robertson) But some women can only supply a single egg. Through the use of embryo cloning, that egg might be divisible into, say 8 zygotes for implanting. The chance of those women becoming pregnant would be much greater. (Kassirer) Secondly, it would benefit a couple at high risk of having offspring with a genetic disease choose weather to risk the birth of an affected child. (Robertson) Parents who are known to be at risk of passing a genetic defect to a child could make use of cloning. A fertilized ovum could be cloned, and the duplicate tested for the disease or disorder. If the clone were free of genetic defects, then the other clone would be as well. Then this could be implanted in the woman and allowed to mature to term. (Heyd) Thirdly, it would be used to obtain tissue or organs...
In recent years our world has undergone many changes and advancements, cloning is a primary example of this new modernism. On July 5th, 1995, Dolly, the first cloned animal, was created. She was cloned from a six-year-old sheep, making her cells genetically six years old at her creation. However, scientists were amazed to see Dolly live for another six years, until she died early 2005 from a common lung disease found in sheep. This discovery sparked a curiosity for cloning all over the world, however, mankind must answer a question, should cloning be allowed? To answer this question some issues need to be explored. Is cloning morally correct, is it a reliable way to produce life, and should human experimentation be allowed?
Human cloning is dangerous. It is estimated that between 95 and 98 percent of cloning experiments have failed (Genetics and Society). These downfalls to cloning are in the form of miscarriages and stillbirths (Genetics and Society). Cloned human beings also run the risk of having severe genetic abnormalities. Children cloned from adult DNA would, in a sense, already have “old” genes. These children’s main problem would be developing and growing old too quickly. This includes arthritis, appearance, and organ function. Since the chance of having a child with mental and physical problems is so much higher than that of a normally conceived child, cloning should be illegal.