|
For those of you who find this cloning scenario difficult to believe, I ask you to engage in an uncomfortable thought experiment. Let's say you have a Child with a bright future and most of their lives ahead of them. Your child is diagnosed with Cancer. You are fortunate indeed. Only a few short years ago this particular type of cancer would have destined them to an early death after much suffering. But now it can be cured with a series of simple injections, the latest result of extensive scientific research. This miracle drug, like many others in the last 10 years or so, can only be produced through the use of human organs, which have previously undiscovered properties promising, in time, cures for just about anything.
Now let's assume that you know nothing about how the drug is produced. As a moral person, do you have a duty to enquire into how that drug was developed and produced? And then allow your child to die? Perhaps the solution is to save your child? After all, quantities of the drug are available. The damage done in producing it cannot be undone. You can then fight to bring the program to public attention, denying others the ability to save their loved ones in the future if you succeed. A lovely rationalisation.
Does your answer change if you have heard vague rumours about the program? How about if you had watched TV specials and read newspaper articles exposing it? Together, of course, with the balancing view. These are not human beings. Only clones created specifically for this purpose. Not people. They have no souls. Another lovely rationalisation. But human beings love rationalisation.
The fact is that as much as we may talk about knowing what we would do and congratulate ourselves on our virtue, the only true test comes when we ourselves are placed in that position. Which I fervently hope none of us are. For myself, I think I would save my child. I doubt I would bother with the rationalisations. Afterwards I'd probably just try not to think about it. If my sleep was really disturbed perhaps I would campaign against the practice, having reaped its benefits. But the reality is that if faced with the same choice later, my decision would likely be the same. Perhaps I could refuse the drug for myself in some circumstances, but I doubt I could do so for a loved one.
|