Sources of Consent:

By right, in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, a mother has the right to choose to abort the baby within the first trimester provided it does not harm the mother. Any further than that and it becomes illegal for the mother do to so. It brings me to the point of consent regarding the source of genetic material in the creation of embryos for therapeutic cloning.

If a parent can make a choice regarding whether of not she wants to abort the child within the first trimester, while critics say it is morally unacceptable, it is still an accepted on grounds that the child is not self aware and thus the parent has a right to make a choice to keep it or not.

In the same context, if the parent also has a right to choose whether their aborted embryo or foetus or unimplanted embryos as a result of invitro fertilization are to be used in research. Such actions again, while morally objectionable, are ethically sound in given the fact that all parties would be making an informed decision over what becomes over something that might otherwise be discarded.

However, in the case of therapeutic cloning however, it is not about using discarded foetal tissues or embryos with consent, it is about creating embryos for the sole purpose of research. Basic ethical principles of research demands that those who are involved must fulfill two requirements which are:

1. The requirement to acknowledge autonomy.
2. The requirement to protect those with diminished autonomy.

If the genetic donor gives an informed consent and is compensated for this, then it would not be a problem no matter how morally unacceptable it can be considered to be and it is unlikely that cloned embryos are to raise objections to whether or not they would want to be researched on and thus the responsibility of the decision falls back to that of the parent donor.

Conclusion:

Coming full circle, the entire ethical basis behind the pro-stance towards human therapeutic cloning is that human rights, decency and well-being are protected because cloned embryos do not fit the criteria as a self-aware human being. Any rights and protection extended would be to the genetic donor or the dependant who would have the necessary information to make an informed rational decision on whether or not his or her genetic material should be used in research or as a therapeutic agent.

The possible benefits that come out of human therapeutic cloning far justifies any moral objection regarding the sanctity of life that pro-life supporters claim human embryos to have. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. We believe that given proper information to the public, the fears in which human therapeutic cloning was disagreed upon, will eventually be dispelled.

Pages: 1 2 3