Therapeutic and reproductive cloning: a critique

Bowring, Finn

doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00206-5

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly the focus group discussions indicated that when people are left to their own devices they do not spontaneously differentiate these two facets. Both the focus group discussions and the media analysis show the use of the "slippery slope" metaphor (Bowring, 2004) affords a way of framing considerations of therapeutic and reproductive cloning.…”

Section: Therapeutic Versus Reproductive Cloningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A subsidiary set of arguments around human cloning arises from the potentially arbitrary nature of the distinction between therapeutic and reproductive cloning (Bowring, 2004). The reasoning behind what may be termed the "slippery slope" argument is that advances on therapeutic applications of cloning will inevitably lead to reproductive cloning, regardless of its legal status.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards an understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning

Shepherd

Barnett

Cooper

et al. 2007

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of scientists to apply cloning technology to humans has provoked public discussion and media coverage. The present paper reports on a series of studies examining public attitudes to human cloning, bringing together a range of quantitative and qualitative methods to address this question. These included a nationally representative survey, an experimental vignette study, focus groups and analyses of media coverage. In all of the analyses therapeutic cloning was viewed more favourably than was reproductive cloning. However, while participants in the focus groups were generally negative about both forms of cloning, and this was also reflected in the media analyses, quantitative results showed more positive responses. In the quantitative research, therapeutic cloning was generally accepted when the benefits of such procedures were clear and although reproductive cloning was less accepted there was still substantial support. Participants in the focus groups only differentiated between therapeutic and reproductive cloning after the issue of therapeutic cloning was explicitly raised; initially they saw cloning as being reproductive cloning and saw no real benefits. Attitudes were shown to be related to underlying values related to scientific progress rather than to age, gender or education, and although there were a few differences in the quantitative data based on religious affiliation, these tended to be small effects. Likewise in the focus groups there was little direct appeal to religion but the main themes were "interfering with nature" and the "status of the embryo", with the latter being used more effectively to try to close down further discussion. In general there was a close correspondence between the media analysis and focus group responses, possibly demonstrating the importance of media as a resource or that the media reflect public discourse accurately. However, focus group responses did not simply reflect media coverage. Abstract word count: 293

show abstract

Section: Therapeutic Versus Reproductive Cloningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning

Shepherd

Barnett

Cooper

et al. 2007

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Through this method, Dolly the Sheep became the first mammal to be cloned in July 1996. In therapeutic cloning, an embryo is harvested for stem cells rather than brought to term (Wilmut et al , 1998: 21; Bowring, 2004: 402–403; Isasi et al , 2004: 628; United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies, 2007: 6). Although therapeutic cloning is held by many to have great potential medically, as a source of compatible tissue and organs for those who need transplants, it generates considerable controversy.…”

Section: Human Cloning and Its Current International Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The global governance of human cloning: the case of UNESCO

Langlois

2017

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since Dolly the Sheep was cloned in 1996, the question of whether human reproductive cloning should be banned or pursued has been the subject of international debate. Feelings run strong on both sides. In 2005, the United Nations adopted its Declaration on Human Cloning to try to deal with the issue. The declaration is ambiguously worded, prohibiting “all forms of human cloning inasmuch as they are incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life”. It received only ambivalent support from UN member states. Given this unsatisfactory outcome, in 2008 UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) set up a Working Group to investigate the possibility of a legally binding convention to ban human reproductive cloning. The Working Group was made up of members of the International Bioethics Committee, established in 1993 as part of UNESCO’s Bioethics Programme. It found that the lack of clarity in international law is unhelpful for those states yet to formulate national regulations or policies on human cloning. Despite this, member states of UNESCO resisted the idea of a convention for several years. This changed in 2015, but there has been no practical progress on the issue. Drawing on official records and first-hand observations at bioethics meetings, this article examines the human cloning debate at UNESCO from 2008 onwards, thus building on and advancing current scholarship by applying recent ideas on global governance to an empirical case. It concludes that, although human reproductive cloning is a challenging subject, establishing a robust global governance framework in this area may be possible via an alternative deliberative format, based on knowledge sharing and feasibility testing rather than the interest-based bargaining that is common to intergovernmental organizations and involving a wide range of stakeholders. This article is published as part of a collection on global governance.

show abstract

“…Research into embryonic stem cells requires embryos. If embryonic stem cell research is to lead to viable forms of regenerative medicine, cloned human embryos will almost certainly be required for this enterprise 13 . The main reason for this is that replacement cell therapy, like organ transplants, must overcome the obstacles posed by immune‐system incompatibility.…”

Section: Human Embryonic Stem Cell Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioethical aspects of regenerative and reproductive medicine

Yoshimura

2006

Human Cell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The birth announced in 1997 of Dolly, the lamb cloned from the somatic mammary cells of an adult ewe, and the discovery of human embryonic stem cells in 1998 have been the most exciting developments in the biological sciences in the past decade. Reproductive somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) in additional species has been inefficient in that relatively few births, harmful side effects and high fetal and neonatal death rates have resulted from many attempts. Ongoing debates about the ethics of reproductive SCNT have revealed that some researchers regard human reproductive SCNT as morally unacceptable in all circumstances, others see merit in reproductive SCNT in certain circumstances and others await more information before making judgment about the ethical status of the procedure. Regenerative medicine and emerging biotechnologies started to revolutionize the practice of medicine. Advances in stem cell biology, including embryonic and postnatal somatic stem cells, have made the prospect of tissue regeneration a potential reality. Mammal cloning experiments have provided new impetus to the prospect of regenerative medicine through stem cell research. The procedure of SCNT could be used to create the raw material to replace defective or senescent tissue as a natural extension of the biology of stem cells. Researchers working in reproductive medicine should consider the potential hope given to many patients against the requisite and ethically contentious creation of human blastocysts for therapeutic intent.

show abstract

Therapeutic and reproductive cloning: a critique

Cited by 17 publications

References 22 publications

Towards an understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning

Towards an understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning

The global governance of human cloning: the case of UNESCO

Bioethical aspects of regenerative and reproductive medicine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About