English Discourse Site Menu:

Arguments of Cloning:
An Annotated Bibliography
Jay Soulek
Academic affiliation: Oklahoma State University
©Read the copyright notice at the bottom of this page
before reproducing this essay/webpage on paper,
or electronically, or in any other form.

Barglow, Raymond. “A Reply to Rifkin.” Tikkun 17.4 (2002): 26-30. Cloning is divided into two major categories, therapeutic and full birth. Where full birth is when the process starts in the womb and ends in the womb, therapeutic is a more logical approach in which the cell or embryo is donated to the research and the process is carried out in a laboratory. The banning of therapeutic cloning would end the path to solving cures for major hereditary diseases such as childhood leukemia, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease. The distinction between the two cloning processes is unclear and the government is needed to set efficient boundaries for each process. Because this article did not have any references, it was not researched well but it did present a pro cloning idea in a tone that be directed toward people that have acquired a higher education.

Brock, Dan W. "Human Cloning and Our Sense of Self." Science 296 (2002): 314-16. Possibly the strongest concern of the public about cloning is that it would have a negative impact on individuals' identity or self. Human cloning could produce two humans with identical genomes, but as with twins possessing the same genomes does not determine that they will be identical individuals. A person's identity is established by their environment such as family and religion. Another worry of people is that human cloning could cause a person's worth or value to diminish because then humans could be manufactured, instead of being conceived through sexual reproduction. How an individual is created is not the determinate of the beings' value, the nature of the person is the determinate of a person's value and worthiness of respect. This article uses a higher level of terminology that would only be comprehended by an higher educated person and the article uses seven references for three pages of text which means the that it was adequately researched.

Caplan, Arthur L. "Cloning Human Embryos." Western Journal of Medicine 176.2 (2002): 78-79. Public policy today has evolved around the idea that it is wrong to create and destroy human embryos; that the cloning of human embryos is immoral whatever the goal; and the arguments and discussions about cloning should be conducted in the private corporations. Researchers and scientists have promised positive results from cloning. Such promises should be retained to keep the public from developing false hopes. Corporations use these promises and premature announcements of accomplishments in the hope of gaining public consent for cloning. As a result patients and their families, in need of treatments of diseases, are left in agony and loss of hope. This article is very well research as it has many references and it is written in a common tone directed toward the common public.

Fields-Meyer, Thomas and Debbie Seaman. “Send in the Clones.” People 60.10 (2003).Proquest Direct. University of Oklahoma State Library. 21 Sept. 2003 http://80proquest.umi.com.argo.library.okstate.edu. By practicing cloning techniques scientists are capable of preserving certain plant and animal species from extinction. By using cloning processes scientists can use a common female bovine to give birth to a rare or endangered bovine. By saving a plant or animal species from extinction we also provide scientists with extra time to study these plants and animals in hope of possibly discovering a cure for a common disease. When saving a species from extinction the question of ethics that is developed is, is it right to save a species from the fate of extinction? When evaluating this question, a person should acknowledge that humans probably produce the cause of that certain species chance of extinction. This article is written in a tone that is directed toward the common public, it is not well researched as it does not consist of any references but it shows positive results of cloning can be applied to more species other than humans.

Gogarty, B. "What exactly is an exact copy? And why it matters when trying to ban human reproductive cloning in Australia." Journal of Medical Ethics 29.2 (2003):84-89. Unanswered questions of morality and ethics weaken society's support for cloning research. Society's major concern with cloning is the risk involved during the cloning procedure. Statistics show that small percentages of nonhuman clones are born. The clones that survive birth are subject to be affected by offspring syndrome that results in failure to vital organs. Diversity is developed between humans and human clones because of their different reproductive processes. Society also suggests that cloning is unnecessary because there is not scientific or medical justification for cloning. Cloning would cause depletion in human dignity and individuality as it replicates the genetic makeup of succeeding generations. This article's tone is acceptable toward all audiences; it consists many references that indicate that it was well researched.

Green, Ronald M. “The Ethical Considerations.” Scientific American 286.1 (2002). Proquest Direct. University of Oklahoma State Library. 21 Sept. 2003 http://80 proquest.umi.com.argo.library.okstate.edu. Since the beginning of cloning research, there have been questions of the ethical value of cloning. Cloning enables production of organs that might save the life of a child or an adult. But with this benefit comes the risk of dangers such as general anesthesia and bleeding for the donor female whom might give her embryos in order for the cloning process to begin. With the donating of embryos for money might pose the idea that human reproductive material is a commodity that can be traded for cash. The government does not allow a human to be sold is a human egg any different? This article is written on an easy reading level that makes it presentable to the public, it has references that conclude the article was research well.

Hanson, J-E. "Embryonic stem cells production through therapeutic cloning has fewer ethical problems that stem cell harvest from surplus IVF embryos." Journal of Medical Ethics 28.2 (2002): 86-88. The production of stem cells through therapeutic cloning creates two major concerns: the destruction of the pre-embryo at the blastocyst stage; therapeutic cloning uses the same initial stage that reproductive cloning performs where an egg cell is transplanted with a somatic cell and placed in a uterus to hope to produce an infant. If the pre-embryo at the blastocyst stage were considered to a human being it would prevent stem cell harvest because of the right to life. Because therapeutic cloning uses a same step as reproductive cloning, it is thought if therapeutic cloning is allowed to be practiced it would "pave the way" for more controversial issues to be allowed. This article is three pages long but has twelve references making it a well researched article that presents two strong arguments of why society disagrees with cloning and stem cell research in a tone directed to graduate students and doctors.

Mulkay, Michael. The Embryo Research Debate. New York: Cambride UP, 1997. The arrival of the Human Fertilization and Embryology Act enabled the research of embryos. It set rules such as the fourteen-day rule that forbids research on an embryo past the fourteenth day the embryo is produced. The HFEA set rules that were needed to appease society but creating these rules produced more confusion: should a female embryo donor receive payment for donating her embryo, should donors remain anonymous, should it be allowed to use eggs taken from aborted fetuses or from other cadavers? Ethical questions from society must be answered in order to gain public support for cloning research. This is an informative book that is well researched containing many references, it is directed toward people with a higher education.

Shannon, Thomas A. "Human Cloning." America 186.5 (2002): 15-18. Over the past years cloning has evolved from cloning of animals to the possible cloning of human beings. As cloning is being researched to produce medical healing, ideas of ethics are a concern as it is a necessity to obtain donor embryos to perform stem cell research. The destruction of the human embryo is a concern of many because the potential of that embryo becoming a human being is exterminated. There is also a concern that cloning research is proceeding to rapidly, overlooking imperfections. These are perhaps some of the reasons society has an uneasiness when acknowledging the benefits cloning research creates. This article is not well researched but presents a professional tone that is directed to the educated public.

Warnock, Mary. A Question of Life. Oxford: Blackwell, 1985. One moral concern that is developed when debating cloning, is are the embryos used in cloning research human? Some people see the human embryo as having the same status as a child. People agree that it is not acceptable to use a human being in research; therefore the human embryo should follow the same principals used in determining that it is unacceptable to use humans for research. In contrast, people that support embryonic research conclude that the embryo is just a bundle of cells that without the environment of the uterine it does not possess the potential to develop. This concludes that the embryo does not have the same status as a child or an adult. This book is well research as it contains many references and it is geared toward graduate students and doctors, as it is a critical reading.

Search English Discourse
WWW English Discourse

Copyright notice: this page will hereafter be referred to as the essay/webpage. All rights to the essay/webpage are held by its author. You may hyperlink to the essay/webpage electronically and without notifying either English Discourse—the e-journal or the author of the essay/webpage, but hyperlinks are allowed only for non-commercial and educational use. The essay/webpage may not otherwise be reproduced in hard-copy, electronically, or any other form, unless the written permission of its author is obtained prior to such reproductions. If you do link to the essay/webpage, part of the text in the hyperlink must contain the words "English Discourse—the e-journal".

You may quote from the essay/webpage, but only if the author and English Discourse—the e-journal are unmistakably cited in parenthetical citations and works cited page, endnotes, footnotes, bibliography page, or references page citations.

You may not otherwise copy or transmit the contents of the essay/webpage either electronically or in hard copies. You may not alter the content of the essay/webpage in any manner. If you are interested in using the contents of the essay/webpage in any manner except as described above, please contact "webmaster" at "englishdiscourse.org" for information on publishing rights, and the editor will arrange contact between your organization and the author of the essay/webpage. English Discourse—the e-journal, suggests that such emails should include a subject heading that reads "editorial contact," or "publishing rights." English Discourse—the e-journal will not act as an agent or accept any fees. The essay/webpage is the intellectual property of its author, who retains sole rights. The author has merely granted permission for English Discourse—the e-journal to publish the essay/webpage.