Moral Controversy- Human Cloning

Moral Controversy- Human Cloning

Debates surrounding human cloning hinder the progression of a promising therapeutic procedure. Most of these debates are fueled by misunderstandings and misinterpretations of cloning procedures (Vajta, 2018). In most cases, media outlets promote these misunderstandings due to the spreading of information that people misunderstand; when people view media content, they let it influence their perception, hindering the acceptance of cloning (Jensen & Weasel, 2006). Subsequently, when people need and are required to undergo cloning procedures, they are put in dilemmas that hinder their implementation. Hire our assignment writing services in case your assignment is devastating you.

Mr. John Robinson, a 40-year-old man, was recently diagnosed with Congestive heart failure (CHF). This chronic heart failure was accompanied by pain in the chest area, out of breath, constant feeling of exhaustion, wheezing, and constant coughing accompanied by colored mucus. With all these symptoms affecting him, a heart transplant was the most probable treatment solution for him. However, with the high chance of organ transplant rejection, John is afraid of receiving a donor heart organ. Recently, he had heard of therapeutic cloning, which seemed like an acceptable treatment plan for him. However, as a religious man, cloning procedures were not easily accepted among his fellows. Further, without undergoing the procedure, there was a high chance of him passing away. This internal debate way heavily on his conscience and puts him in a dilemma revolving around his health.

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a chronic failure that develops when the heart doesn’t pump blood effectively due to various reasons, such as weak heart muscles. Accordingly, this misfunction limits blood supply all over the body, causing fluid build-up in various organs of the body, especially the lungs (Mayo Clinic, 2021). Accordingly, fluid build-up in the lungs contributes to most of the symptoms John has, including being out of breath and wheezing. Chronic heart failure results in heart transplant procedures. Heart transplant procedures involve the acquisition of a heart from a donor and transplant it to a patient. In certain instances, organ rejection occurs when the patient’s immune system mounts an immune reaction to an organ’s antigen, causing the rejection of the organ (Ludhwani, Abraham, and Kanmanthareddy, 2021). This rejection is accompanied by various symptoms similar to those of CHF. Accordingly, therapeutic cloning creates organs such as a heart from stem cells acquired from an embryo created through genetic engineering.

The internal conflict John is facing revolves around therapeutic cloning procedures. He requires the procedure to have a successful heart transplant without organ rejection, leading to his death. However, John is aware of the debates and ideas people have on cloning. Subsequently, he is uncertain whether undergoing a transplant from therapeutic cloning is the right thing to do. According to Hughes 2015, there are two points of concern regarding cloning, based on “The Recombinant University by Doogab Yi” and “A Biography of Paul Berg by Errol C. Friedberg,” the safety and application of cloning procedures. In John’s case, the cloning will occur in an embryo, and the retrieval of cells from the embryo will lead to the death of the embryo. On the other hand, the procedure will be safe for John, giving him a heart free of defects and with perfect functionality.

Additionally, John is uncertain about the procedure due to the debates he’s heard of between people. Consequently, some of the information he may have heard during the debates might be misconceptions such as “genetically modified plants are killers” (Nerlich et al., 2000). This statement represents some of the misinformation and misunderstandings that circulate in societies. However, providing evidence to support facts will help clear any doubts John might be having. In most cases, these debates on human cloning revolve around the misinterpretation of information passed using media platforms. In addition, “The press constitutes a primary forum for public discussions of scientific controversies such as human cloning” (Jensen & Weasel, 2006). Indicating that the media plays a part in the increase of misunderstandings of human cloning among people misunderstanding the information they produce. Also, “Misunderstandings and baseless accusations alongside with unsupported fears and administrative barriers hampered cloners to overcome the initial challenging period with obvious difficulties that are common features of a radically new approach” (Vajta, 2018), interfering with the creation of a clone of his heart. With the clearing of misunderstandings on cloning, John might agree to undergo the procedure, commencing the cloning procedure.

Furthermore, following the commencing of the procedure, John will obtain a clone of his heart, undergo a transplant, and obtain a healthy life. This progress indicates the efficiency of therapeutic human cloning. Consistently, more human cloning research will lead to the realization of more effective therapeutic approaches to ailments. Consequently, Häyry (2018) argues that “At some point, scientists in some laboratory will allow human clones to develop beyond the regulated 14 days, report it, and the news will stir a renewed confrontation.” Illustrating that the progression in human cloning research will lead to more debates on human cloning. Further implementation of cloning procedures requires the monitoring of ethics by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, which oversees ethics related to cloning and ethical behavior among professionals. The ethical standards set by NBAC result from contributions of other organizations such as (RAC), Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, which oversees genetic engineering, including plants, animals, and human cloning; and (AMA), American Medical Association, which oversees therapeutic procedures associated with human cloning (Eiseman, Ph.D., n.d.). in John’s case, therapeutic application stems from human cloning. The preservation of biodiversity would mostly apply to plants and animals.

Therefore, John’s dilemma results in the dispute arising from the conflict created between loyalty to self and society. Loyalty to self would save his life, while loyalty to the community would save his relationship with others but cost him his life. The moral thing to do would be to undergo the procedure because it would save his life. This action is ethical because it preserves his life and position in society.

Virtue ethics influence ethical behaviors based on just and appropriate and influence the moral worth of the action (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Aristotle’s Golden Mean is the balance between two extremes; in John’s case, on the one hand, not undergoing the procedure due to fear would be cowardice, while undergoing it would reflect recklessness. In his case, undergoing the procedure represents bravery. Utilitarianism focuses on the effect of the action based on its ability to cause happiness and the most appropriate action. In John’s case, saving his life would be the most appropriate action and would cause more happiness. Natural Law dictates the actions of people in a society. In John’s case, undergoing the cloning procedure goes against natural laws on cloning.

Ethically speaking, the most appropriate theory is utilitarianism because it considers the most appropriate action for all individuals involved. Other theories do not work as well because, for instance, natural laws might overlook human rights while the implementation of human rights surpass them. In contrast, Aristotle’s Golden Mean dictates people to live in a state of balance between two extremes, while that cannot always be the case. Therefore, the most appropriate action would be undergoing the procedure in John’s case.

In conclusion, ethics influence the making of ethical decisions. In all cases, the most appropriate action is the ethical and moral one. In John’s case, undergoing the procedure saves his life, promoting happiness and preserving his life.

References

Eiseman, Ph.D., E. Cloning Human Beings. Biotech.law.lsu.edu. Retrieved from https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/research/nbac/pubs/cloning2/cc3.pdf.

Häyry, M. (2018). Ethics and cloning. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy031.

Jensen, E., & Weasel, L. (2006). Abortion rhetoric in American news coverage of the human cloning debate. New Genetics And Society, 25(3), 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636770601032940

Ludhwani, D., Abraham, J. and Kanmanthareddy, A., 2021. Heart Transplantation Rejection. [online] Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Available at: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537057/>

Mayo Clinic, 2021. Heart failure – Symptoms and causes. [online] Mayo Clinic. Available at: <https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heart-failure/symptoms-causes/syc-20373142>

Nerlich, B., Clarke, D., & Dingwall, R. (2000). Clones and Crops: The Use of Stock Characters and Word Play in Two Debates About Bioengineering. Metaphor And Symbol, 15(4), 223-239. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1504_4

Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Vajta, G. (2018). Cloning: A Sleeping Beauty Awaiting the Kiss?. Cellular Reprogramming, 20(3), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1089/cell.2017.0058

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Return to the topic you chose in the week three assignment. Articulate a specific dilemma in a situation faced by a particular person based on that topic. The situation can be real or fictional.

Summarize the dilemma.

Define any key terms associated with the dilemma that are needed.

Analyze the conflicts or controversies involved in the dilemma.

Revise and rewrite based on any feedback you received in your previous draft (week three). Reference and discuss any professional code of ethics relevant to your topic, such as the AMA code for doctors, the ANA code for nurses, etc.  State whether and how your chosen topic involves any conflicts between professional and familial duties or conflicts between loyalty to self and loyalty to a community or nation.

What in your view is the most moral thing for that person to do in that dilemma? Why is that the most moral thing? Use moral values and logical reasoning to justify your answer

Next, apply the following:

Aristotle’s Golden Mean to the Dilemma

Utilitarianism to the dilemma

Natural Law ethics to the dilemma

Which of those three theories works best, ethically speaking? Why that one?

Why do the other two not work or not work as well?

Is it the same as what you said is the most moral thing earlier? Why or why not?

Use the 5 articles from your annotated bibliography to support your answers. (Additional academic scholarly research from the past 5 years can be included as well.)

Include a reference page in APA format at the end of your paper that includes your bibliography with the annotations removed and any other sources used in your final paper.