Ethical Issues in Somatic Cell Cloning: Where are the Ethical Boundaries of Life Cloning Acceptable?

The birth of Dolly, a cloned sheep, represented an advance in somatic cell cloning technology, but it also sparked an ethical debate. Dolly’s birth is at the center of the debate, raising the question of whether or not a fertilized egg can be considered a life.

 

Biotechnology, and in particular, cloning, is now an integral part of our society and is directly linked to ethical issues. The question of what level of cloning is ethically acceptable and recognizable is one that anyone who studies or is interested in biotechnology has probably thought about at least once. In particular, issues such as embryo cloning, somatic cell cloning, and genetic manipulation raise a variety of bioethical questions. In this article, we’ll discuss the ethical issues surrounding somatic cell cloning, most notably the cloned sheep Dolly.
In 1997, Dolly the cloned sheep was born, the first cloned animal to have its somatic cells implanted. Wolmert created a cloned sheep fertilized egg by removing the nucleus from one sheep’s egg and injecting it with the nucleus of another sheep’s somatic cell. The fertilized egg was then implanted in the surrogate’s uterus, and after 276 attempts, Dolly was born on the 277th attempt. Dolly was a cloned sheep that resembled the sheep that provided the nucleus, and was the first mammal to be created without fertilization using the nucleus of a somatic cell.
Dolly’s birth has two important embryological implications. First, she was the first cloned sheep to be created from a fully grown adult cell. Before Dolly’s birth, it was believed that once a cell had differentiated into a cell with a specific purpose, it could not be switched to a different purpose. However, her birth proved that adult cells could be repurposed. Second, the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep showed that asexual reproduction of higher animals is possible. This means that it is possible to replicate new life in a way that is not sexual reproduction.
While the experiment had important implications, it was also criticized for sacrificing 276 innocent lives to create Dolly. This is one of the main reasons why opponents of life cloning are against it. They argue that cloning is a desecration of life, sacrificing many lives for the sake of one. But was Dolly the cloned sheep created by a life-destroying method that sacrificed many lives? In order to answer this question, we must answer the question of whether a fertilized egg is a life, and consider whether it is possible for a fertilized egg that has not even implanted to develop into a life.
Can a fertilized egg that has not yet developed be recognized as a life just because it has the potential to develop into a life? Most countries restrict research on the cloning of embryonic cells to post-fertilization or within 14 days of cloning. In a country that recognizes the dignity of human life, it is unacceptable to conduct experiments on human life. If a fertilized egg is a life, then why do most countries that recognize the dignity of life allow embryonic cells to be used for research purposes within 14 days of fertilization? This suggests that the fertilized egg itself is not a life.

Even if we assume that a fertilized egg that has not developed is recognized as a life, is a fertilized egg that has not implanted a life? In order for a life to be born, a fertilized egg must implant in the uterus and then develop through the gestation period. During pregnancy, the fertilized egg is nourished by the mother and develops into a fetus. Before implantation, the process of ovulation, fertilization, and egg release is not considered pregnancy. Before implantation, a fertilized egg cannot receive nutrients from the mother and cannot develop into a fetus, so it is unlikely to develop into a life. Therefore, an unimplanted fertilized egg is not considered a life.
For the above reasons, the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep was not the result of the innocent sacrifice of 276 lives to create a single life. This is because the fertilized egg itself is not a life. To argue that the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep violates bioethics, one would have to either establish that the fertilized egg is a life, or find other evidence that Dolly’s birth was the result of the innocent sacrifice of other lives.
Earlier, we discussed the somatic cell cloning method that created Dolly the cloned sheep and whether a fertilized egg can be considered a life. The evidence that a fertilized egg that has not developed is not a life can be found in the criteria by which most countries have restricted embryo cloning, and the evidence that a fertilized egg that has not implanted is not a life can be found in the definition of pregnancy. Therefore, the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep does not constitute a disrespect for life. If the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep were a disrespect for life, then embryonic cell cloning research should not take place at all, and fertilized eggs should be able to receive nutrients from their mothers immediately after fertilization and develop into fetuses. The somatic cell cloning technology used to create Dolly the cloned sheep does not constitute a disrespect and endangerment of life.