MOBILITY AND AGEING FIGG 2~~OO: BROADENI~G. .. "l THE-5'PHERE -,. ii# OF ACTIVITY THE KENYA CAMPAIGN

Transcription

1 MOBILITY AND AGEING FIGG 2~~OO: - BROADENI~G.. "l THE-5'PHERE -,. ii# OF ACTIVITY THE KENYA CAMPAIGN

2 A DEBATE ON THE MORAL AND LEGAL PERSPECTIVES OF HUMAN CLONING BANNIN G THE CLONE! Despite widespread suspicion of and medical objections to the concept of human cloning, there remain ethical and pragmatic arguments in favour of the practice - tempting some scientists to push the limits of experimentation by exploiting loopholes in fledgling attempts at international regulation. Professor of Law, Lori Andrews, discusses the various viewpoints TEXT LORI ANDREWS On the 5th of December 1997, Richard Seed shocked the scientific community by announcing that he intended to begin cloning human beings. Seed, the maverick founder of an American reproductive technology company, planned to use the techniques that Ian Wilmut and Keith Campbell in Scotland had developed to create Dolly the sheep, the first cloned mammal. Dolly resulted from the transfer of nucleic DNA from an adult mammary tissue cell to the enucleated egg cell- one in which the nucleus had been extracted - of an unrelated sheep, followed by gestation in a third, surrogate mother sheep.l ~ 16

3

4 SPECIAL REPORT: GETTING TO THE HEART OF CLONING One rationale 1'01' Inoves to ban cloni ng steins rroln the potential risk or Inedical or psychological hann to the resulting cl1ildrcn Governments worldwide reacted strongly to the idea of human cloning. In Europe, 19 countries immediately signed an accord outlawing the practice. In the USA, President Clinton denounced Seed's plan in a national radio address and renewed his efforts to get the US Congress to adopt a five-year moratorium on human cloning. Mr Clinton's bill is not the only proposed law banning or regulating human cloning. Seven other bills have been introduced in the USA to ban the creation of children through cloning techniques but, by A;:il)999, there was still no US federal ban. However, three of the 50 states of the USA - California, Michigan and Rhode Island - have enacted human cloning bans and another, Missouri, has prohibited the use of government funds for research involving the cloning of humans. Internationally, many medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the World Medical Association and the World Health Organization, find the cloning of human beings unacceptable. In fact, the majority of the 32 scientific societies surveyed by the US National Bioethics Advisory Commission in 1997 opposed the procedure, although, notably, the professional infertility societies did not go along with advocating a ban. The Roman Catholic Church opposes the technique as well. In reaction to the cloning of Dolly the sheep, an editorial in the Vatican daily, L'Osservatore Romano, stated that a "person has the right to be born in a human way. It is strongly hoped that states will immediately pass laws that ban the application of cloning in humans and that, in the face of pressures, they have the force to make no concessions". THE OBJECTIVES OF CLONING Mammalian cloning is the manipulation of a cell from an animal in order to create a virtual copy of that animal with identical nucleic DNA. In effect, cloning is a way of creating a later-born twin of an individual who is living or has lived. Unlike naturally occurring twins, however, the clone will not bel 00 per cent genetically identical because it will have mitochondrial DNA from the donor of the enucleated egg. In the case of Dolly the sheep, an adult mammary cell containing a copy of every gene needed to make a lamb was extracted, then starved of nutrients, forcing the cell into a quiescent state. This cell was subsequently fused with an enucleated egg cell and an electric current was passed through the fused cell, activating it and causing it to begin to divide. The dividing cells were then implanted into a surrogate mother and the fetus was carried to term. In humans, cloning may be an attractive means of creating a child in a variety of situations. If one or both members of a couple are infertile, for example, cloning presents a reproductive option. Alternatively, if one member of the couple has a genetic disorder that the couple does not wish to pass on to a child, they could clone the unaffected member of the couple. If both husband and wife are carriers of a recessive gene for an inheritable disease and are unwilling to run the 25 per cent risk of bearing a child with the disorder, they may seek to clone one or other of themselves. This may be the only way in which the couple will be willing to have a child that will carryon line. THE OBJECTIONS TO CLONING their genetic One rationale for moves to ban cloning stems from the potential risk of medical or psychological harm to the resulting children. Many scientists, including Dolly's creators, worry that it would be premature to begin human cloning without first addressing the many safety concerns through animal research. Reactivating a cell's genes is risky. An already differentiated adult cell contains a complete complement of genes, but only a small proportion are activated in order to perform the specialized tasks of that cell. The high rates of miscarriage and death among cloned mammals suggest that cloning may in fact damage the cell's DNA (or activate hidden mutations), and scientists urge that Dolly should be closely monitored for genetic abnormalities which, although they did not kill her as a fetus, may have long-term harmful effects. The gross deformities and early deaths observed among cloned animals raise the possibility that initial trials of human nuclear transplantation will also meet with disastrous results.2 For example, researchers in the USA and Japan have found that often the clones die late in pregnancy or soon after birth.3 Some of the gestating mothers die as well. In addition, new information about Dolly herself showed that while she is only three years old, her cells appear to be nine years 01d.4 The telomeres capping her chromosomes, which shorten with age, are 80% of their proper length, indicating that they started out at the age of her six-year-old donor:' One of Dolly's creators, Ian Wilmut, is specifically concerned with the ethical issues 18 ORGAr-:Or-:'S MAGAZI:>1E or-: WOMEN & HEALTH

5 raised by any such defective births. He responded to the announcement that Richard Seed intended to clone human beings within two years by stating: "Let me remind you that one quarter of the lambs born in our experiment died within days of birth. Seed is suggesting that a number of humans would be born but others would die because they didn't properly develop. That is totally irresponsible." Animal researchers around the world are rushing to try the nuclear transfer technique in a range of species. This may aid the development of cloning technologies that are less physically risky to offspring. Yet even if cloning appeared to be physically safe and had reached a certain level of efficiency, other forms of harm may occur to the offspring or to society. In the USA in particular, the notion of replicating existing humans seems to conflict fundamentally with liberal beliefs that emphasize the protection of individuality and uniqueness. Developmental psychology research has signalled the need for a child to have a sense of an independent self. A clone may not feel independent but more like a replica of the genetic donor, especially if cloned from a member of the parenting couple or from a previous child who died. Even with identical twins who are dressed alike and given the same toys, most parents recognize the children's need for individuality. That recognition, though, is less likely to occur when a genotype is intentionally chosen to carryon the traits of another individual. The danger is that, in attempting to cull out from the resulting child the favoured traits of the loved one or celebrity who has been cloned, the social parents will probably limit the environmental stimuli to which the child is exposed. The child could ~ be viewed as being in a type of 'genetic bondage' with improper constraints on his or her freedom. Some philosophers and lawyers argue that the child has instead a "right to an open future". Cloning might also bring detrimental changes to the institution of the family. Theologian Lisa Sowhill Cahill is concerned that cloning may lead to the commodification of human beings and their genes and to the manipulation of human genetics to achieve more socially desirable children. Allen Verhey, a Protestant ethicist, warns that cloning could desensitize society into regarding children as products. Other opponents envision a world where clones are "cannibalized for spare parts" - cloned solely for medical purposes such as donation of their organs. Now, a quarter of a century later, governments throughout the world are taking Watson's advice to heart and are beginning to enact restrictions on the creation of children through cloning. For example, human cloning is illegal in Britain, Germany and several other European countries. Furthermore, in 1997, both the European Union and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) declared bans on human cloning. In November 1998, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights adopted the first international guidelines on bioethics. These guidelines, co-sponsored by 86 countries, called for a worldwide ban on human cloning. In legal terms, however, there are a number of problems. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights' guidelines do not have the force of law and the European Union's ban extends only to member countries. Thus, there are numerous places in the world where cloning can be performed legally. Scientists are aware of this loophole and at least one - Richard Seed - has promised to move to another country to clone a human. Seed announced in December 1998 that he intended to set up a cloning and fertility laboratory in Japan; Japan has not outlawed human cloning even though a government panel condemned such research as "socially impermissible for moral, ethical and safety reasons". Moreover, also in 1998, researchers in South Korea claimed to have cultivated a cloned human embryo, created by somatic cell nuclear transplant, through to the four-cell stage. Subsequent inquiry into this by the Korean Medical Association, however, indicated that the South Korean researchers may not have actually created the cloned embryo they claimed. Nevertheless, the incident encouraged the South Korean Parliament to consider legislation banning human cloning, though by April 1999 no ban had been enacted. It is perhaps significant that the two countries where scientists claim to be actively pursuing human cloning - the USA and South Korea - have, so far, failed to outlaw the practice. Lori B. Andrews is Professor of Law at the Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, USA I'W, -'" LOOPHOLES IN THE LEGISLATION It was many years ago, in 1971, that James Watson, joint Nobel prizewinner for discovering the structure of DNA, authored a seminal article for the American political and cultural review Atlantic entitled 'Moving toward the clonal man'." He explained then how cloning could be done and he tried to alert ethicists and scientists to the fact that human cloning was "a matter far too important to be left solely in the hands of the scientific and medical communities". REFERENCES 1 Wilmut I, et 01. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 1997; 385: Pizzulli Fe. Asexual reproduction and genetic engineering: A constitutional assessment of the technology of cloning_ S Cal L Rev 1974; 47: Bigger, not better. New Scientist 1999; 161 (2170): At age 3, Dolly the sheep's DNA shows signs of premature aging. Transplant June 14, 1999; 11: 9. 5 Shields, PG, et 01. Analysis of telomere lengths in cloned sheep. Nature 1999; 399: Watson JD. Moving toward the clonal man. Atlantic 1971; 50. ORGY~ :'\