Q: What is cloning?
A: Cloning means making a genetic copy or duplicate of a DNA sequence, a cell, or an entire organism.
Q: What is human cloning?
A: Human cloning means making a genetic copy or duplicate of an existing person. It would be done by taking the nucleus from a cell in an existing person, putting it into an egg whose nucleus has been removed, and implanting that clonal embryo into a woman's womb to be brought to term. The baby, and later the child and adult, would be the genetic duplicate of the person from whom the original cell nucleus was taken. A person created in this way would not have a genetic mother or father, as we understand those words, but instead a "nuclear donor."
Q: What's the difference between "reproductive" cloning and "research" cloning, and why is this significant?
A: Some medical researchers want permission to create clonal embryos for research. They would be produced using the same techniques described above. But instead of being implanted in a woman's womb to become a child ("reproductive" cloning), they would be used at the earliest stages to generate tissues that could be used for research toward medical therapies. People who support reproductive cloning by definition support research cloning (also called "embryo cloning" or "therapeutic cloning"). Many who support research cloning oppose reproductive cloning.
Q: Isn't human reproductive cloning an acceptable option for people who are otherwise unable to have biologically related children?
A: No. Human cloning is risky human experimentation. The vast majority of cloning attempts in mammals fail. Of the clones born alive, as many as 30% are affected by "large offspring syndrome" or other seriously debilitating—sometimes lethal—conditions. Further, the number of people for whom cloning is the only way they'd be able to have biologically related children is very small. Most couples or individuals with fertility problems have other viable options for having children, including in vitro fertilization, use of donor sperm or eggs, or adoption. Even if cloning were safe, the social risks it entails would make it an unjustifiable option.
Q: What about gay and lesbian couples who want to have a child that is genetically related to them?
A: Cloning would result in a child that is genetically "related" to one individual in the couple, but in a way unprecedented in history. In the case of male couples, a donor egg and "surrogate" mother would be needed to carry the fetus to term. It would be impossible to develop and allow cloning for gays and lesbians without making it available to all.
Q: Shouldn't parents of a child who has died be able to clone that child as a way to redress their loss?
A: No. Throughout history parents who have lost children have grieved and sought consolation from family and community, and in the process resolved their sense of loss. The notion that a child who has died can be "replaced" with its clone is an insult to the lost child, to children in general, and to human dignity.
Q: Doesn't access to reproductive cloning constitute a "reproductive right"?
A: No. The right to decide whether and when to have a child is far different than a right to determine the genetic makeup of a child or to obtain a child by any means possible. A "right to clone" would be a dangerous distortion of reproductive choice. Many groups and individuals concerned with reproductive rights see this distinction clearly and support bans on human cloning.
Q: Why should we care about human reproductive cloning if it is not expected to be used widely?
A: Human cloning represents a degree of control over the genotype of a person that is unacceptable. If human cloning becomes accepted, it is difficult to see how any other pernicious application of genetic engineering technology could be proscribed.
Q: Hasn't a human clone already been born?
No. Although the Clonaid company, and the affiliated Raelian religion, claim to have created several human clone babies, they have offered no evidence. Nearly all observers conclude that this was an elaborate publicity hoax.
Q: Doesn't the development of embryonic stem cell therapies require the use of cloning techniques?
A: At the present time, research cloning is not needed as a source of embryonic stem cells for medical research. Basic research questions about the therapeutic use of embryonic stem cells remain to be investigated. These studies do not require the use of cloning techniques, since they can use embryonic stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization procedures.
However, if researchers learn to produce therapeutic tissues or organs from embryonic stem cells, then the issue of immune compatibility would have to be resolved. Therapeutic tissues grown from stem cells derived from clonal embryos created using cells from your own body would probably not be rejected. However, alternatives to using clonal embryos to prevent immune system rejection are under investigation. These alternatives would make it unnecessary to obtain the millions of human eggs that routine medical use of research cloning would require, and would avoid other profound social consequences of cloning.
Q: Isn't human reproductive cloning inevitable?
A: Not at all. In a democratic society, people have the power to agree on the rules under which they wish to live. Many nations have already banned human germline engineering and reproductive cloning. There is no reason that the United States and the rest of the world cannot do the same.
Q: Isn't cloning banned?
A: Reproductive cloning is banned in dozens of countries, but not, for example, in the United States. That is why it must be proscibed at the international level, as well as by all individual countries.
More Information
Analysis:
Examine the social, cultural, and economic landscape
Perspectives:
Explore various communities' concerns regarding human genetic
technologies
Policies:
Read about existing and potential regulations
Date modified: