On what ethical basis might cloning a human be justified? Cloning is a modern and controversial issue, one that has come hand in hand with exponential growth in scientific research. Because of this relatively no ethicists have specifically commented on the issue. Human cloning is a particularly troubling issue, because not only does it involve bringing life unnaturally, but it also potentially interferes with the sanctity of life, something which many people hold dear. Following Kantian ethics it may be possible to justify cloning a human being, if somebody were to feel it was their duty to clone a human, and if they did it through good will, then all they would need to do to justify it would make their action work as a universal law.
Q) “Fertility Treatment is never justified.” Discuss (10 Marks) Fertility Treatment is the use of medicine and medical procedures to help infertile couples who want children, have children. Fertility Treatment is allowed in the UK as it is viewed as a fundamental desire to want to have children and thus we should help couples who are having trouble conceiving to conceive. However some thinkers would argue that this is wrong and should not be allowed. Natural Law thinkers are set well against Fertility Treatment. They have many issues with processes such as IVF as masturbation to gain the sperm used in IVF is viewed as a misuse of the genitals.
Anthropology Essay The creation of a perfect human should not be the goal of humanity. There are many reasons that prove that this statement is correct. The main reasons that show this are that creation the perfect human could be harmful for the future species of man kind, the perfect human could be very well impossible to find and make, and finally that before the perfect human would be made, the world would need to fix problems it already has. Creating the perfect human could do more damage to the human race than it could do good. Scientists are finding ways to figure out more and more about children before they are born, such as the sex of the child or whether or not the child is diseased with a mental disability.
‘Gattaca’ doesn’t condemn the genetic experimentation itself, but it condemning the way it is used, and why it is used. Even though the genetic engineering can save the lives of the people, it is used blindly and the reason for using it is wrong. It doesn’t better people personality, it rather makes more selfish and narrow minded. According to the society of ‘Gattaca’ science means everything, it cannot be flawed and will always be accurate, but as shown in the film Vincent prevails science and reaches his dream. People rely on DNA and science too much, which could potently corrupt our society.
Although, what about the patients’ right to know their health conditions? There are many conflicts to bioethics principles, but discarding the embryos and hiding health information from the patient are two important moral issues. Even though embryo research can treat medical diseases, discarding infected or unused embryos raises ethical dilemmas. Discarding embryos, freezing them and allowing them to die are against the bioethics beneficence principle, which means act in a way so that the results are the best and the least harm(p. 202). In the case study 1 ”Controversial Transplant a Success,” Steve Karnowski writes about the case of a 6 year old girl, Molly, who suffered from a genetic disorder that is seldom seen, called Fanconi anemia, which interrupts the body from manufacturing bone marrow and that would lead to her death.
The main ethical issue is that many people, due to their religion or personal opinion believe that destroying human embryos is a form of murder. However many other people believe it is furthering our knowledge of science. I personally believe that scientific research is very important to our everyday lives, as it brings us new understandings and knowledge on how the world works. Although the opposite opinion of my own is very hard to justify as it is considered unnatural and wrong, I believe that the benefits for curing diseases and repairing important parts of the body, out way the negatives. Scientists have also begun looking at adult specialised cells, and figuring out how to make them unspecialised again so this ethical problem won’t be an issue anymore.
The third is the formula of the kingdom of ends. When applying Kantian ethics to the use of embryos in research all consequences should not be considered as deontological ethics only focus of intentions and actions and therefore all potential gains to medical development cannot be considered, only the action of testing on and destroying embryos. Emotion should also be excluded and therefore especially with IVF where couples can’t have children, the emotions linked with that situation cannot be considered. The formula of an end in itself can also be applied to embryo research as it can be argued that the embryo is being used as a means to an end. However this would only apply if the embryo is regarded as a rational moral agent but the status of the embryo is unclear.
All the questions and more are what plague the minds of scientists when trying to perfect this technology. If we corrupt this new science field, and try to play God and create super humans we will be disturbing nature and this will bring about humanities down fall. The difference between the themes of the book and movie is that the book focuses on when one has the power to change nature; events can have a devastating and bad outcome. While the movie is stating more that science is elusive and dangerous. The construction accident at the beginning shows how dangerous and costly it is to operate a park like this.
Arguments for abortion suggest that the diminished quality of life, pain of treatment, and cost outweigh the value impaired child’s and that abortion is the best utility to minimize harm. Arguments for birthing the child suggest that parents may be a poor comparison other for severely impaired children, that quality of life is inherently precious and should be preserved, and that the cost of birthing does not outweigh the obligation of society to care for all children. There are some important considerations for our topic of whether or not it is morally just for parents to have a child who will suffer from a lethal or even serious genetic disease after genetic testing reveals that the embryo is positive for the gene. First and foremost, the term child may to represent a fetus that may or may not be carried to birth in the case of a diagnosis of a disease. In addition, a criterion definition for what is to be considered a lethal or serious genetic disease is needed.
Babies by Design By Ahmad Theibich July 16, 2012 BABIES BY DESIGN Outline Thesis: Designer baby, a new medical invention has led to much debate in society where many affirm that changing the traits of a baby is a good thing while opponents refuse it believing it is a bad thing. I- The invention of designer baby is a good thing. A- Physical 1- Appearance 2- Health B- Mental 1- IQ 2- Memory C- Social 1- Education 2- Mortality rate II- The invention of designer baby is a bad thing. A- Physical 1- Disease 2- Mutation B- Ethical 1- Religion a- Christianity b- Islam 2- Freedom of choice C- Social 1- Social gap 2- Resemblance BABIES BY DESIGN Since the beginning of humanity, human beings started to search and invent new things to make their lives easier. During the 19th century, the world had witnessed several huge medical revolutions; patients who previously died from specific diseases are surviving now because of vaccination and new treatments.