Is Animal Cloning Morally Right?

...

As more cases of animal cloning happen, animals continue to suffer from lack of identity (Bruce and Bruce 121). The first cases of animal cloning enabled animals to receive special names, which emphasized their identity and uniqueness. Nowadays, cloned animals receive regular letters or numbers that do not help in their identification. Moreover, Bruce and Bruce (123) claim that animal cloning increases the commoditization of animals. The main purpose of animal cloning is to intensify livestock production. Animals are further seen as just purchase items rather than means to themselves. Cloning makes animals suffer from the lack of attention and thus may be treated in any manner. The society may fail to see the essence of treating animals in a humane manner. Such suffering is contrary to animal rights and welfare, and thus is morally wrong.

Cloning results in premature deaths of the animals (Brunk 56). A majority of animal cloning cases fail, particularly during pregnancy. Additionally, some birth defects may occur. These defects end up manifesting themselves resulting in lethal complications for the clone. Case in point, a cloned calf was born having two faces. Later on, the calf could not survive and, as a result, died because the two faces became huge complications for the animal (Brunk 56). Moreover, premature deaths occur in animal cloning because there is a low probability of successful development of a cell nucleus. Most cell nuclei fail to grow into legitimate offspring. There are high instances of pregnancy loss after the eggs having cell nuclei are transferred to the recipient animals. For example, only a mere 9% of cloned embryos develop into calves. This figure shows a failure rate of over 90%, which presents dire consequences (birth complications) to animals (Brunk 57). Additional research shows that approximately 45% of cloned animals do not live beyond the delivery period or 150 days. This percentage is despite the level of veterinary care the animals may receive.

Brunk (58) argues that to some extent, animal cloning may lead to false promising or fraud. For instance, pet owners may be lured into the idea of cloning so as to bring back their pets. Cloning the pet may not bring back that particular pet, and thus, the owner may feel cheated. Animal cloning does not influence key factors such as personality or character, which shape animals (Brunk 59). Cloning dead pets present unreal expectations. Furthermore, animal cloning violates our moral duty as human beings on earth. Cloning makes human beings creators of life, which presents a controversial issue (Brunk 59). Cloning is controversial because it crosses the thin line between facilitating life and creating life. Therefore, animal cloning becomes religiously incorrect since all religions acknowledge God as the only creator of life. Scientists involved in animal cloning become dehumanizing beings who devalue earth’s nature.

Animal cloning, particularly, pet cloning, is not morally correct because it leads to a high number of unwanted animals (pets) (Brunk 59). Research shows that the number of pets being euthanized is very high. Producing more pets via animal cloning will mean that this number may increase. Animal cloning may also result in great numbers of stray pets (cats and dogs) as people are increasingly abandoning their pets after some time. Additionally, pet cloning uses substantial money and effort that can be applicable to other important activities. For instance, the money and effort spent in pet cloning may be used to save a stray pet from euthanasia through adoption. Furthermore, the effort and money can also be crucial in serving the interests of animals.

Animal cloning fails to be morally right as it presents various challenges regarding nature. For instance, cloning guarantees no results as there is a high possibility of medical accidents. Furthermore, animal cloning leads to anomalies such as irregular fetal development and Hydrops. Cloning animals also causes agony to animals, for example, through painful labor, exposure to chronic diseases, lack of identity and so forth. Additionally, animal cloning may be responsible for premature animal deaths, especially during pregnancy and immediately after pregnancy. Animal cloning may further contribute to false promising or fraud in cases where the idea of cloning lures pet owners.

Works Cited

Bruce, Donald and Ann Bruce. Engineering Genesis: Ethics of Genetic Engineering in Non-human Species. London: Routledge, 2014.

Brunk, Conrad Grebel. Designer Animals: Mapping the Issues in Animal Biotechnology. Toronto: University of Toronto, 2012.

MacKinnon, Barbara. Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues, Concise Edition. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2012.

Panno, Joseph. Animal cloning: the science of nuclear transfer. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2014.

Verma, Ashish and Anchal Singh. Animal Biotechnology: Models in Discovery and Translation. Cambridge: Academic Press, 2013.