Ok
posted by jess on March 23rd, 2004 at 11:21AM
posted by jess on March 23rd, 2004 at 11:21AM
Yay! My paper's done and now I have ethical theories stuck in my head so I might as well put them to good use while I still remember them. :P
In reponse to three arguements, this is my opinion on the matter.
#1 - Two views can be taken on stem cell research. Depending on the reasons for doing it, it can be regarded as either ethical or non-ethical. Yes, I would agree that stem cell research is a wonderful field to learn because it can help fix the problem of organ donations or limb replacements/functionality. However, this category strongly falls upon the slippery slope arguement. If stem cell research is deemed ethical and accepted by society for the use of creating organs, what's to stop society from saying they could create humans as well?
Scientists are well aware that cloning a human may be difficult but they are constantly in a race to be the "first" to do the cloning and thus make a name in history for them. Although their colleagues would not agree with them and would rather have extensive research done before testing, the few would ignore them and continue with experimenting with cloning. I watched a video in my ethics class a few weeks ago regarding cloning and introduced some scientists who were in a mad rush to be the first to clone a human being. Presently, there's a cloning lab in Korea that has successfully cloned the world's first embryo.
#2 - Even though this point is ideal for some people, it's simply not possible. Gattaca was also brought up in my class but I haven't seen the movie. The biggest concern with this point is the divide among social classes. There is a divide amongst classes now but once you introduce designer babies, the social divide will be even more prominent. However, designer babies may be something that the parents want but what of the child's perspective.
Let's take a scenario where the parents decide that they want their child to be good looking, smart, and have the physical attributes of a basketball star in hopes that the child will grow into one. What of the child's feeling when they find out that everything about the child was pre-determined? What if the child doesn't even want to be a basketball player but rather a chef instead (or any other profession)? The child would face extreme guilt for their parents since so much time and money was put into such an expensive process. Amongst children, there will be more distinct groups or cliques between the rich kids and the poor kids. This type of environment frightens me considering how much of a divide there presently is among schools today.
#3 - For me personally, I am against the idea of cloning humans. With the example of Dolly the sheep, sure she was an icon in the cloning world that brought much attention to the cloning area of science. However, the fact that Dolly survived is a fluke. She was the 276th (I can't remember the actual number) attempt at cloning a sheep and she was the one that actually worked. What of the other 200-odd something sheep that didn't make it through?
Some people may argue that a clone can be used as personalized spare parts for the original person should an organ fail or a limb be lost. However, if a clone were actually to exist, they have the same rights as any other person on the face of this planet. Using them just for spare parts is the most inhumane thing I've ever heard of. If you think it's ethical, you might as well take a brain-dead patient and use their parts and deem that ethical as well.
Although cloning may have good intentions, I would not agree to it. Even if it was strictly used for stem cell research to generate organs and limbs, it is far too risky because cloning humans would not be far away.
