First and Last Name/s of Presenters

Ashley Marx, Sacred Heart UniversityFollow

Participation Type

Poster

Mentor/s

Professor Thomas Terleph

Location

University Commons

Start Day/Time

4-20-2018 1:00 PM

End Day/Time

4-20-2018 3:00 PM

Abstract

All humans have an innate need to reproduce, and therefore an innate need to engage in sexual activity (Benagiano, Carrara and Filippi 2010). However, reproduction today can and is frequently achieved without sexual intercourse (Benagiano, Carrara and Filippi 2010). Human reproductive cloning provides an alternate route for those who have tried assisted reproductive techniques, like in-vitro fertilization or oocyte donation, with no success. Somatic cell nuclear transfer and embryo splitting have both been explored as a means to accomplish reproductive cloning in animals, yet, the health risks associated with using these modern technological techniques remains virtually unknown (Montazer-Torbati et al 2016; Nie et al 2017; Oh et al 2015; Secher et al 2017). In addition, the potential ethical effects that human reproductive cloning can have upon the resulting clones is also in question (Mameli 2007; Shapshay 2012). Human reproductive cloning can lead down a dangerous path of reducing humans to an object to be used for the sole purpose of benefitting their parent (Shapshay 2012). Additionally, human reproductive cloning can cause the resulting clones to feel as if their individuality is in question due to the fact that they will share their DNA with another already existing individual (Mameli 2007). Nevertheless, proponents of human reproductive cloning have argued that the right to self-determination will prevent the clones produced using this method from feeling that their autonomy has been undermined using research investigating the opinions of monozygotic twins on this topic (Havastad 2010; Prainsack, Cherkas, and Spector 2007). Evidentially, human reproductive cloning has been highly debated in today’s society due to the scientific and ethical aspects that could occur as a result. Considering the potential risks that human reproductive cloning can have upon not only the resulting individual but also society as a whole, human reproductive cloning should be prohibited. Future research should be conducted investigating possible alternate assisted reproductive techniques with higher success rates, views of monozygotic twins on human reproductive cloning, and health risks on animals cloned using somatic cell nuclear transfer.

College

College of Arts and Sciences

College and Major available

Biology

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 20th, 1:00 PM Apr 20th, 3:00 PM

The Ethical and Scientific Debate Behind Human Reproductive Cloning by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer

University Commons

All humans have an innate need to reproduce, and therefore an innate need to engage in sexual activity (Benagiano, Carrara and Filippi 2010). However, reproduction today can and is frequently achieved without sexual intercourse (Benagiano, Carrara and Filippi 2010). Human reproductive cloning provides an alternate route for those who have tried assisted reproductive techniques, like in-vitro fertilization or oocyte donation, with no success. Somatic cell nuclear transfer and embryo splitting have both been explored as a means to accomplish reproductive cloning in animals, yet, the health risks associated with using these modern technological techniques remains virtually unknown (Montazer-Torbati et al 2016; Nie et al 2017; Oh et al 2015; Secher et al 2017). In addition, the potential ethical effects that human reproductive cloning can have upon the resulting clones is also in question (Mameli 2007; Shapshay 2012). Human reproductive cloning can lead down a dangerous path of reducing humans to an object to be used for the sole purpose of benefitting their parent (Shapshay 2012). Additionally, human reproductive cloning can cause the resulting clones to feel as if their individuality is in question due to the fact that they will share their DNA with another already existing individual (Mameli 2007). Nevertheless, proponents of human reproductive cloning have argued that the right to self-determination will prevent the clones produced using this method from feeling that their autonomy has been undermined using research investigating the opinions of monozygotic twins on this topic (Havastad 2010; Prainsack, Cherkas, and Spector 2007). Evidentially, human reproductive cloning has been highly debated in today’s society due to the scientific and ethical aspects that could occur as a result. Considering the potential risks that human reproductive cloning can have upon not only the resulting individual but also society as a whole, human reproductive cloning should be prohibited. Future research should be conducted investigating possible alternate assisted reproductive techniques with higher success rates, views of monozygotic twins on human reproductive cloning, and health risks on animals cloned using somatic cell nuclear transfer.

 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.