Procreative Liberty, Enhancement and Commodification in the Human Cloning Debate

Health Care Analysis 20 (4):356-366 (2012)

Authors
Sandra Shapshay
Hunter College (CUNY)
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to scrutinize a contemporary standoff in the American debate over the moral permissibility of human reproductive cloning in its prospective use as a eugenic enhancement technology. I shall argue that there is some significant and under-appreciated common ground between the defenders and opponents of human cloning. Champions of the moral and legal permissibility of cloning support the technology based on the right to procreative liberty provided it were to become as safe as in vitro fertilization and that it be used only by adults who seek to rear their clone children. However, even champions of procreative liberty oppose the commodification of cloned embryos, and, by extension, the resulting commodification of the cloned children who would be produced via such embryos. I suggest that a Kantian moral argument against the use of cloning as an enhancement technology can be shown to be already implicitly accepted to some extent by champions of procreative liberty on the matter of commodification of cloned embryos. It is in this argument against commodification that the most vocal critics of cloning such as Leon Kass and defenders of cloning such as John Robertson can find greater common ground. Thus, I endeavor to advance the debate by revealing a greater degree of moral agreement on some fundamental premises than hitherto recognized
Keywords Cloning  Commodification  Enhancement technology  Ethics  Eugenics  Procreative liberty  Rights
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10728-012-0227-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 39,669
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

[Book Review] the Worth of a Child. [REVIEW]Thomas H. Murray - 1999 - Hastings Center Report 29 (3):44.
Who's Afraid of Human Cloning?Gregory E. Pence - 1997 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Human Cloning: Three Mistakes and an Alternative.Françoise Baylis - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (3):319 – 337.
The Prohibition on Eugenics and Reproductive Liberty.Jacqueline A. Laing - 2006 - University of New South Wales Law Journal 29:261-266.
Cloning Humans From the Perspective of the Christian Churches.R. Cole-Turner - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (1):33-46.
Cloning and Identity.Nicholas Agar - 2003 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (1):9 – 26.
A Wolf in Sheep’s Cloning?Richard Hanley - 1999 - Monash Bioethics Review 18 (1):59-62.
Therapeutic Cloning and Reproductive Liberty.Robert Sparrow - 2008 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (2):1-17.
A Clone by Any Other Name.Katherin A. Rogers - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):247-255.
Ethical Issues in Livestock Cloning.Paul B. Thompson - 1999 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 11 (3):197-217.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-09-15

Total views
49 ( #151,354 of 2,326,070 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #95,489 of 2,326,070 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature