Skip to main content

Human cloning; the good, the bad and the ugly

The prediction that human cloning will be available in 50 years raises issues, good, bad and downright ugly. Whether it is ethical will depend on whether the 'good'  is sufficient to outweigh the potential 'bad' and 'ugly'. But good and evil in this context are not easy to define or measure. Even supposing there were good reasons for using human cloning, and that is a big if, it would need to be a pressing need to outweigh the potential for harm. Currently, the risk of abnormalities is high.

It has been suggested that cloning might be used to replace a lost child with a copy. And it is here a myth takes hold: the idea that cloning produces an identical human being. This is the stuff of science fiction, not of biology.  Cloning will not create identical, like-for-like people. A cloned human will not develop and become identical to the person from whom this being has been cloned. If we wanted to clone a person rather than an organism, it is highly unlikely we could succeed. A person has a unique history and an individual development; their hopes, fears, loves and hates are as likely to be as different as any other two people.

But even biologically they will be different.  They are likely, for example, to carry different risks of health and disease. Recent work on the developmental origins of health and disease indicate that much of the health risks we carry are environmentally determined during development in the womb and in early life. It is highly unlikely this could be replicated. A cloned human will be as unique as any other human. They are also likely to carry risks specific to being cloned.

But let us consider the idea of producing a replacement for a lost child. The psycho-social environment in which such a child develops would include the fulfilment or otherwise of the parents' needs. The burden of needing to be like the 'lost child' will make it less likely to be successful.  Better to be wanted as the person you are or will become than to always feel the need to be like someone else. The motives of such parents and their ability to adjust would be crucial. Perhaps they should not want to replace a 'lost child' but simply to have a child with his or her own personality. Psycho-social counselling would be better than a risky biological fix.

Postscript

Much of human development occurs after birth. This is particularly true of brain development and function, which are critically dependent on sensory input and social interaction.  Environmental influences are a significant feature in determining the capacity of our brains and our characteristics. In this sense alone, we will each have a different trajectory, and this is one of the reasons why 'identical' twins are not what their name suggests, identical.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

A time for every purpose

All life moves. Or, more precisely, all life moves purposefully.  This is true even for trees and plants.  Movement is essential for maintaining life.  Animals migrate; plants disperse.  Some form of migration is an ingredient of all life.  For many organisms, it is a key function of reproduction.  We don't reproduce merely to create a new organism, but also to disperse the population - finding new fertile ground, or resources. Reproduction is a form of migration. Reproduction isn't merely to replicate. Reproduction produces change and diversity.  While we may have strong resemblences in families, we also have differences.  Creating a difference is how evolution works.  In this sense, nature is a continuous exploratory process, finding what works best.  Nature senses change and responds.  Some of this is immediate and physiological or behavioural; some of it is over generations.  If we look at a forest over long periods of time, we would see that it shifts. There is a movement

A weaver's tail - the harvest mouse

Living in the grass is a tiny mouse: the tiny harvest mouse, with a wonderful scientific name that sounds like the title of a Charles Dickens Novel,  Micromys minutus.   It is the only British mammal with a prehensile tail. It uses its tail to hold on to the slender grass stems, at the tops of which it builds a nest. Photo: Nick Fewing These tiny mammals (just around 5 cm long) build a spherical nest of tightly woven grass at the top of tall grasses, in which the female will give birth to about six young.  In the fields, we see cows and horses brushing away flies with their tails; often they will stand side-by-side and end-to-end, and help each other.  Two tails are better than one!  In nature, tails are put to good use.  Just as a tight-rope walker uses his pole for balance, so for some species, a tail provides balance. When running, a squirrel uses its tail as a counterbalance to help the squirrel steer and turn quickly, and the tail is used aerodynamically in flight.  But many anima