Should Human Cloning Be Permitted
Should Human Cloning Be Permitted?
By Patricia Baird
In her article “Should Human Cloning Be Permitted?,” Patricia Baird (2000) argues against human cloning. Human cloning is a new type of reproduction, specifically asexual reproduction. With this new technology, people have a choice instead of just a chance to have a biological child. Human cloning is rejected by the majority of people from different countries because most are not scientists and don’t have a deep understanding of it. People can however, make judgements about complex issues. There are advantages for those that agree with cloning humans because of personal reasons, such as an infertile couple wanting a child of their own, lesbian or gay couples that want to make a family, or a couple wanting to save a dying child. She states that “[in] these scenarios, there are other options available to form a family” (Paragraph 4). For the cloned humans, she emphasizes on the possible physical and psychological harm that can occur to them. Patricia Baird questions the risks and dangers of cloning humans in the future because it not only impacts people that choose to use it but also for society and future generations. She describes cloning as creating a product, not a human and says that it will change the way we think of children that have been cloned. Cloning could become marketable, change laws and most importantly, people may be able to control human evolution. In her conclusion, she accentuates the significance of it being a collective decision on whether or not human cloning should be permitted.
By Patricia Baird
In her article “Should Human Cloning Be Permitted?,” Patricia Baird (2000) argues against human cloning. Human cloning is a new type of reproduction, specifically asexual reproduction. With this new technology, people have a choice instead of just a chance to have a biological child. Human cloning is rejected by the majority of people from different countries because most are not scientists and don’t have a deep understanding of it. People can however, make judgements about complex issues. There are advantages for those that agree with cloning humans because of personal reasons, such as an infertile couple wanting a child of their own, lesbian or gay couples that want to make a family, or a couple wanting to save a dying child. She states that “[in] these scenarios, there are other options available to form a family” (Paragraph 4). For the cloned humans, she emphasizes on the possible physical and psychological harm that can occur to them. Patricia Baird questions the risks and dangers of cloning humans in the future because it not only impacts people that choose to use it but also for society and future generations. She describes cloning as creating a product, not a human and says that it will change the way we think of children that have been cloned. Cloning could become marketable, change laws and most importantly, people may be able to control human evolution. In her conclusion, she accentuates the significance of it being a collective decision on whether or not human cloning should be permitted.