"Cloning Human Beings: An Assessment of the Ethical Issues Pro and Con"- Dan. W Brock

what does Brock argue in this essay?

there is probably a right to reproductive freedom that covers human cloning, but there could be other rights in conflict with this right, or serious enough harms involved to override it

what are the possible benefits of human cloning according to Brock?

the ability to relieve infertility, to avoid transmitting serious genetic disease to offspring, and to clone someone (such as a child who died) who had special meaning to individuals.

what are the possible cons of human cloning according to Brock?

it violates a right to unique identity or to an open future, that it would cause psychological harm to the later twin, that it would carry unacceptable risks for the clone, and that it would lessen the worth of individuals and diminish respect for human life

what does Brock say about human cloning and the right to reproductive freedom?

he concludes that reproductive freedom includes both a right to select the means of reproduction, as well as a right to determine what kind of children to have, by use of human cloning

Even if a moral right to reproductive freedom protects the use of human cloning, that does not settle the moral issue about human cloning, since there may be other moral rights in conflict with this right, or serious enough harms from human cloning to override the right to use it

what individual benefits might human cloning produce?

1. human cloning would be a new means to relieve the infertility some persons now experience

2. human cloning would enable couples in which one party risks transmitting a serious hereditary disease to an offspring to reproduce without doing do

3. Human cloning to make a later twin would enable a person to obtain needed organs or tissues for transplantation

4. human cloning would enable individuals to clone someone who had special meaning to them, such as a child who had died

what social benefits might human cloning produce?

1. human cloning would enable the duplication of individuals of great talent, genius, character, or other exemplary qualities

2. human cloning and research on human cloning might make possible important advances in scientific knowledge, for example about human development

what does Brock say about human cloning being a new means to relieve the infertility some persons now experience?

The large number of children throughout the world possibly available for adoption represents an alternative solution to infertility only if we are prepared to discount as illegitimate the strong desire of many persons, fertile and infertile, for the experience of pregnancy and for having and raising a child biologically related to them.

what does Brock say about human cloning being used to make a later twin that would enable a person to obtain needed organs or tissues for transplantation?

Such a practice can be criticized on the ground that it treats the later twin not as a person valued and loved for his or her own sake, as an end in itself in Kantian terms, but simply as a means for benefiting another. This criticism assumes, however, that only this one motive defines the reproduction and the relation of the person to his or her later twin

What does Brock say about human cloning enabling individuals to clone someone who had a special meaning to them, such as a child who had died?

Cloning such a child would not replace the child the parents had loved and lost, but would only create a different child with the same genes. The child they loved and lost was a unique individual who had been shaped by his or her environment and choices, not just his or her genes, and more importantly who had experienced a particular relationship with them. Even if the later cloned child could not only have the same genes but also be subjected to the same environment, which of course is impossible, it would remain a different child than the one they had loved and lost because it would share a different history with them

What does Brock say about human cloning enabling the duplication of individuals of great talent, genius, character, or other exemplary qualities?

Cloning them would produce individuals with the same genetic inheritances (nuclear transfer does not even produce 100 percent genetic identity, although for the sake of exploring the moral issues I have followed the common assumption that it does), but it is not possible to replicate their environments or the historical contexts in which they lived and their greatness flourished.

What does Brock say about human cloning and research on human cloning might make possible important advances in scientific knowledge, for example, about human development?

Creating human clones solely for the purpose of research would be to use them solely for the benefit of others without their consent, and so unethical. But if and when human cloning was established to be safe and effective, then new scientific knowledge might be obtained from its use for legitimate, nonresearch reasons.

what two rights does Brock consider in this argument as candidates for what human cloning could violate?

a right to have a unique identity and a right to ignorance about one’s future or to an open future

what does Brock say about human cloning violating the right to a unique identity?

For human cloning to violate a right to a unique identity, the relevant sense of identity would have to be genetic identity, that is, a right to a unique unrepeated genome. This would be violated by human cloning, but is there any such right? It might be thought that cases of identical twins show there is no such right because no one claims that the moral or human rights of the twins have been violated.

what does Brock say about human cloning violating the right to an open future?

Neither a moral or human right to a unique identity, nor one to ignorance and an open future, would be violated by human cloning

what individual harms might human cloning produce?

1. Human cloning would produce psychological distress and harm in the later twin

2. Human cloning procedures would carry unacceptable risks to the clone

what social harms might human cloning produce?

1. Human cloning would lessen the worth of individuals and diminish respect for human life.

2. Human cloning might be used by commercial interests for financial gain.

3. Human cloning might be used by governments or other groups for immoral and exploitative purposes.

What does Brock say about human cloning producing physiological distress and harm in the later twin?

While psychological harms of these kinds from human cloning are certainly possible, and perhaps even likely in some cases, they remain at this point only speculative since we have no experience with human cloning and the creation of earlier and later twins. Nevertheless, if experience with human cloning confirmed that serious and unavoidable psychological harms typically occurred to the later twin, that would be a serious moral reason to avoid the practice

What doe Brock say about human cloning procedures carrying unacceptable risks to the clone?

I believe it is too soon to say whether unavoidable risks to the clone would make human cloning forever unethical. At a minimum, further research is needed to better define the potential risks to humans. But we should not insist on a standard that requires risks to be lower than those we accept in sexual reproduction, or in other forms of ART.

What does Brock say about human cloning lessening the worth of individuals and diminish respect for human life?

Such a change in the equal moral value and worth accorded to persons should be avoided at all costs, but it is far from clear that such a change would result from permitting human cloning

what does Brock say about human cloning being used by commercial interests for financial gain?

This would be a fundamental violation of the equal moral respect and dignity owed to all persons, treating them instead as objects to be differentially valued, bought, and sold in the marketplace. Even if embryos are not yet persons at the time they would be purchased or sold, they would be being valued, bought, and sold for the persons they will become. The moral consensus against any commercial market in embryos, cloned or otherwise, should be enforced by law whatever the public policy ultimately is on human cloning

What does Brock say about human cloning being used by governments or other groups for immoral and exploitative purposes?

Any use of human cloning for such purposes would exploit the clones solely as means for the benefit of others, and would violate the equal moral respect and dignity they are owed as full moral persons. If human cloning is permitted to go forward, it should be with regulations that would clearly prohibit such immoral exploitation.

What is Brocks conclusion?

Legitimate moral concerns about the use and effects of human cloning, however, underline the need for careful public oversight of research on its development, together with a wider public and professional debate and review before cloning is used on human beings.