Task 1

Task 1.1

As its name suggests, ‘Research problem’ is an issue in concern. In defining what a

research problem is, it can be a real or explicit statement regarding an area of interest, a
situation to be worked upon, a challenge to be avoided, or a disturbing question that appears
in scientific literature, in philosophy, or within current experience that points to a need for
substantive interpretation and careful inquiry. A research dilemma does not state how to do
something, give a vague or broad proposition, or raise a value challenge.

However, going in line with the definition above, the research problem that I have chosen for
my research is, “A critical analysis of the ordinary practices of Biotechnology that violates the
dignity and nature of the Human Person.”

As far as the objectives of my research is concerned, I would say that Biotechnology brings
power to humanity. But it should be kept in mind, with much power, comes much
responsibility. These powers should remind us of our responsibility to nature and the
environment, to all of life, to the future, and to human nature and personhood. Therefore, the
objectives of this research paper is to:

 To provide a comprehensive understanding of the philosophical notion of human

person, its nature and dignity.
 To contrast the religious and philosophical understandings of human person with the
idea portrayed by biotechnology.
 To critically review and analyse the current biotechnological practices which
dehumanize and depersonalize people.
 To outline solutions to resolve the conflict between biotechnology and bio-ethical
laws and regulations from a futuristic perspective.

The result of this research will be valuable to those in this industry to redefine their ethical
boundaries and for us to understand the relationship that ought to prevail between
biotechnology and ethical laws, thus we may not put ourselves as mere objects at the mercy
of biotechnological interventions.

A research hypothesis is a real, simple, and testable proposition or prediction regarding the
likely outcome of a scientific research study based on a specific property of a population,
such as assumed discrepancies between groups on a certain variable or relationships
between variables. In accordance with the above definition, I would propose the hypothesis
of my research as thus: It is high time that the ethical and legal parameters of biotechnology
be analysed and reaffirmed. This requires a critical analysis of such practices of
biotechnology and immediate action to be taken to stop biotechnology from mastering over
humanity.
Task 1.2

Scoping will aid the researcher in planning which steps must be taken to refine the study
priorities, identify the resources and costs needs and, among others, identify key areas. The
complexity, scope and depth of the evaluation or analysis are simply defined. Thus, research
scope in other words mean that the point to which the research area will be investigated in
the work, as well as the criteria that will be used in the analysis. As per the research problem
that I have chosen, my scope of study is the impact of biotechnological interferences upon
the human personhood. My research study would be mainly focused on the new artificial
reproductive methods like IVF, Artificial insemination, Gamet-intrafallopian transfer (GIFT)
etc., cloning, and stem cell researches which have posed a threat to humanity. Moreover,
with the rush and race to create something new, biotechnology has begun to manipulate
human person. Stem-cell research, in-vitro fertilization, human cloning, genetic engineering
are examples where biotechnology has loosened its ethical and lawful ties.

As such problems arise, as to whether the scientists are playing God with human
personhood and whether inside the so-called laboratories humans are stripped off their
personhood and tried simply as lab-rats used for experiments. Is it justifiable to kill those
whom we consider to be human non-persons? How will it affect us to treat human lives as
commodities to be manipulated and destroyed at will? Is it merely to destroy hundreds of
human embryos at will to extract the stem cells?

The research paper would analyse these methods to identify the threat it poses to human
personhood and goes on to discuss the philosophical and humanitarian aspects of
personhood violated, consequently suggesting new practical solutions that could be
internationally applied to limit the ongoing domination of biotechnology on humanity.

However these practices have reduced the value of human being to a mere biological value.
It is a kind of a genetic reductionism that humans are heading to. Thus such misconceptions
lead to reduction of the notion of human person and to consider him/her as an object of
research. These biological understandings about the human person would provide only a
partial view of humanity. Humanity is more than a dissected corpse. It is in this fact that the
significance of the research study is embedded.
Task 1.3

The Plan of the research was drawn for 7 weeks (49 days). The first table illustrates the
action plan and the second table shows the actual plan to which the research was done.

Number of Weeks (May & June)

Month of May Month of June
Research Activity
Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

General Introduction

Chapter One

Chapter Two

Chapter Three

Chapter Four

Conclusion and Bibliography

Task 1.4

*Research Proposal attached above

Task 2

Task 2.1

In defining what a literature review is, one could say that it is an examination of books,
scientific publications, and all other references relating to a specific topic, field of study, or
theory, and offers a definition, overview, and objective assessment of these works in relation
to the research problem under consideration. In other words, literature reviews are intended
to provide readers a rundown of the references you used when studying a certain subject
and to show them how your writing blends into a broader area of study.

Literature Review

Biotechnology is a recent phase of the technological revolution. The advancement of

scientific knowledge paved the way for the modes of technical intervention on the physical
contribution of humans, animals, vegetation and environment in general. Giving the definition
of Biotechnology in a broader sense, International Encyclopaedia of Ethics (2013) defines it
as “technologies available to facilitate human reproduction”. These ideas, which were
dreams decades ago, have now been a reality, which in fact has unleashed experimentation
on the structure of organic life as stated in Jonathan’s, Kenneth’s and Susan’s Biology
(2010).

In reality, as stated by George Church in Benefits & Risks of Biotechnology, the most
promising biotechnology breakthroughs in recent years have occurred at the microscopic
level inside cell membranes. After decades of fundamental study into decoding the chemical
and genetic structure of cells, biologists initiated a multi-decade whirlwind of research and
breakthroughs in the mid-20th century. Their work has resulted in the strong cellular
instruments available to biotechnologists today. Scientific researchers use biotechnology
techniques to modify cells with increasing accuracy in the coming decades, from precision
DNA editing to synthesizing whole genomes from their simple chemical building blocks.
Upon these foundations, biotechnology built its ideology of looking at life as “something that
can be known, controlled and even modified” (Paul Rohan, 2008). And it has assumed a
greater authority over life by obtaining the power to alter and change it.

As far as the answer to the question about the meaning of life and human dignity is
concerned, Edwin Suchendra’s The Philosophy of Form and the Human Person (2004),
answers the question. It goes on to say that Person comes from the Latin root words per and
sonare which means through and sound respectively and put together, person means one
who speaks through. Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas identifies person as
something singular and individual. Yet Thomas Aquinas, in a much simpler way, would
define person as a rational subsistent which is perfected in the nature of human person:
“Person signifies that which is most perfect in all of nature, that is, what subsists in rational
nature.”

Speaking of the biotechnological intervention in altering the genetic composition of human

person which is its core constituent element, Clark Wolf, in his article on Biotechnology
(2013) states that evolution of human species in Darwinian understanding was based on
natural selection. But in the future, evolution of human species will not be based on natural
selection but on genetic selection or biotechnological manipulation. In other words,
biotechnology has developed to the extent that it has the power of designing the future
generations and the future of human existence. Metaphysics, 1978 poses this question to its
readers, “Ever wondered why DNA is microscopic in such a way as it is hidden in the
deepest core of human person?” In answering the question it concludes saying that the
reason why human DNA is microscopic might be that it was created in a way to be unseen
and untouched by humans, so that they will not create a chaos out of it by meddling with
them.

In the use of biotechnological approaches, legal questions have arisen. New methods, in
particular, such as stem cell biology, gene therapy, and the human genome project, have
created many problems in society, which must be resolved for the satisfaction of those
undergoing care or benefiting from these techniques (Harold Wheeler, Miracle of Life, 1963).

Scientists and technologists can manipulate the building blocks of living things at will,
allowing them to play actual games with God/Nature. Regardless of the ostensible gains, it is
a risky game in which they are promoted, helped and abated, sponsored and subsidized by
dominant companies and businesses for profit purposes (L. Bogliolo, Metaphysics. 1987).
The recently evolved molecular techniques of gene recognition, genetic modification, and
artificial reproduction procedures mark a quantum leap in our capacity to control life itself, an
area long thought to be the domain of a supernatural agency by tradition and religion. The
use of biological methods to reveal the privacy and dignity of human beings has been
opposed by religious scholars. The topic of stem cell technology has been taken very
seriously by some religions. According to Paul Rohan (2008), embryonic stem cell study is
equivalent to killing humans. Religious researchers have also been harsh in their
assessment of the human genome experiment. Religious people also contend that
biotechnological interventions are not normal or that they violate any divine or natural order
of nature.

The uniqueness of human person is described by Immanuel Kant by saying that human
person is a possessor of rational nature and thus he affirms that dignity due to the human
person. In Kantian ethics, he argues that human person is a person because by its nature it
is not means but end in itself (The Philosophy of Form and the Human Person, 2004). Thus
a conclusion is made upon the above facts and arguments that human persons are never to
be means or objects at the hand of any biotechnological intervention. Since human beings
are ends in themselves, they cannot be means or any object for random experiment. Human
person is integral, complex and whole and is an enigma. To know more about this mystery
and to experiment it have reduced human being to a biological value overlooking the
ontological understanding of the human being. But what should be done is that this
ontological understanding of human person should be fused into biotechnology so as to
guarantee a better and a holistic awareness of human person because at present human
person is regarded as a bundle of genetic information and not in their actual certainty. The
mystery of life having thus been reduced to a code of DNA that is available to be decoded
and modified at will (L. Bogliolo, Metaphysics. 1987).

It is true that biotechnology has paved new ways and means of knowing human person in a
different perspective and in a deeper way. Yet the problem arises when biotechnology
crosses its limit and goes to the extreme of considering person as a reduced and a
mechanical entity. Thereby human person has lost its respect and dignity as a person.
Human is referred as only a material entity or rather a complex machine which needs
alteration in its deeper cores in order to reduce its limitation of space and time. (Paul Rohan
2008) Therefore, we as human persons ourselves, have gone so far that it is high-time for us
now to give up these pluralistic misapprehensions on personhood and to fit in to the
ontological understanding of personhood along with the relevant biomedical laws and ethics,
so that the future of humanity would be saved from being victims to biotechnological
extremes.

References

Books

Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica.

Bogliolo, L. Metaphysics. Bangalore: Theological Publications, 1987.

Hasker, William. “The Dialectic of the Soul and Body,” in American Catholic Philosophical
Quarterly 87. Summer 2013.

Jonathan, B. Losos, Kenneth A. Mason, and Susan R. Singer, eds. Biology. NY: Tata Mc
Graw Hill Education Private Publication, 2010.

Mondin, Battista. Philosophical Anthropology. Bangalore: Theological Publications, 1985.

Rohan, Paul. “The Philosophical Anthropology of St. Thomas Aquinas and the Philosophical
Biology of Hans Jonas: An Investigation of the Philosophical Anthropology Implications in
the Contemporary Issues of Biotechnology”, Extractum ex Dissertatione ad Doctoratum in
Facultate Philosophiae. Vatican: Pontifica Universitas Urbaniana, 2008.

Savundea, Edwin. The Philosophy of Form and the Human Person. Colombo: Wisdom
Publication, 2004.

Wheeler, Harold, ed. The Miracle of Life. Bangalore: The Home Library Club, 1963.

Wilson, Margaret D. The Essential Descartes. Meridian Publication, 1983.

Ven. Nanamoli and Ven. Bodhi, trans. The Middle Length Discourses of Buddha. Kandy:
Buddhist Publication Society, 1995.

Encyclopaedias and Dictionaries

The International Encyclopaedia of ETHICS, vol.1, 2013. s.v. “Personhood, Criteria of” by
David Shoemaker.

The International Encyclopaedia of ETHICS, vol.1, 2013. s.v. “Biotechnology” by Clark Wolf.

E-articles

George Church. BENEFITS & RISKS OF BIOTECHNOLOGY.

https://futureoflife.org/background/benefits-risks-biotechnology/
Task 2.2

The conceptual "how" of any piece of analysis is referred to as research methodology. It's
about how a researcher conducts a project in a structured way to ensure valid and
consistent conclusions that address the study's goals and objectives. Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed-methods methodologies are differentiated by whether they
emphasize sentences, numbers, or both. Quantitative analysis focuses on calculation and
measuring using numerical data, while qualitative research focuses on gathering and
evaluating words and textual data. Such “softer” data points, such as body language or
visual elements, may be the subject of qualitative research.

Qualitative Research Quantitative Research

The aim is a complete, detailed description.
Data is in the form of words, pictures and
numbers
Qualitative data is more rich, time
consuming and less able to be generalized
Subjective – individual interpretation of the
events
The aim is to classify features, count them
and to construct statistical data
Data is in the form of numbers and
statistics.
Quantitative data is more efficient but may
miss contextual data
Objective – seeks precise measurement
and analysis of target concepts

After briefly understanding the concept of research methodology and the various types of
methodologies, the research methodology for this research paper is presented below, which
includes the research technique, research method, research approach, data collection
techniques, sample selection, and research procedure.

Research Strategy

The research that was done in view of this research paper titled, “A Critical Analysis of the
Impact of Biotechnological Interventions on the Nature and Dignity of Human Person” was a
new research. Many researches had been conducted previously on bioethics but what
distinguished this particular research is the fact that it is concerned with the biotechnological
interventions that distort the nature and dignity of human person analysing it in a
philosophical and legal perspective. Therefore, this particular research takes the form of a
new research yet done on an existing research subject.

Research Method

As far as the research method for this research is concerned, it is a qualitative research. The
key feature of qualitative research is that it is best suited for small samples, and the results
aren't measurable or quantifiable. Its primary benefit, as well as its primary distinction from
quantitative research, is that it provides a comprehensive definition and interpretation of a
research topic without restricting the scope of the study or the nature of participant
responses. Therefore, in this particular research, qualitative research methodology is used
because the research problem in question requires a qualitative approach rather than a
quantitative one.

Data collection and sample selection

For the success and efficiency of this research, interviews were conducted on individuals
who are practicing in the field of biotechnology. As far as research ethics is concerned, the
identity of the interviewees are kept confidential at their request. Personal interviews and
questionnaires were the main ways used to collect data. Personal interviews have many
advantages, including personal and direct communication with interviewers and
interviewees, as well as the elimination of non-response rates. But due to the prevailing
CoViD-19 pandemic, personal interviews were done via online platform. Also for the purpose
of data collection, the above mentioned references were also referred and a questionnaire
was prepared for the same interviewees to answer.

Purposive selection was used for the sampling for this particular research. Selected sample
members for the interviews and questionnaire were selected based on their knowledge and
experience. The sample participants chosen had a particular connection to the phenomena
under study, as well as reasonable and proper work experience in the field of biotechnology.

Data analysis

The information obtained from personal interviews was analysed using content analysis.
One of the key benefits of content analysis is that it aids in the reduction and simplification of
data while still providing outcomes that can be calculated using quantitative methods.
Furthermore, content analysis enables researchers to organize qualitative evidence in a
manner that meets the achievement of research objectives. Human error, on the other hand,
is heavily implicated in content analysis, since there is a possibility that analysts will
misunderstand the data collected, leading to misleading and inaccurate results.
Task 3

Task 3.1

As the word suggests, research process is the methodology in conducting the research.
There is no one research process so to say that all researches should be conducted in the
same way. But in every research process, there should be some salient steps for its
effectiveness and success. To carry out research efficiently and sequence the steps inherent
in the process, you must first consider the research process.

The general steps of the research would be:

1. Finding a supervisor
2. Clarifying the doubts
3. Selecting the right topic
4. Preparing the research plan and keeping the plan a realistic one
5. Research schedule
6. Starting with the research proposal and continuing

In starting with the research, the contents of the research are very specific. It plays as the
backbone and the framework of the whole research guiding it in its due and proper direction.
The appropriate content of my research is:

INTRODUCTION

1. PRELIMINARY FUNDAMENTALS
1.1. Thesis Statement
1.2. Research Problem
1.3. Research Objectives
1.4. Literature Review
1.5. Research Methodology

2. THE BACKGROUND STUDY

2.1. Introduction
2.2. Analysis of the concepts of Biotechnology and Human Person
2.2.1. The Concept of Biotechnology
2.2.2. The Concept of Human Person
2.2.3. Human Dignity and its Roots

3. THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM

3.1. Biotechnological attitude towards Human Person
3.2. The Conflict: Biotechnology and Human Personhood
3.2.1. In-Vitro Fertilization
3.2.2. Cloning
3.2.3. Stem Cell Extraction
3.2.4. Eugenic Sterilization
3.3. Personal View on the Conflict concerning the Embryos
4. Towards solving the Problem
4.1. Philosophical reintegration of Human Personhood
4.2. Bioethical and Legal regulations on Biotechnology
4.2.1. Bioethical perspective
4.2.1.1. Bioethics on Cloning
4.2.1.2. Bioethics on Stem Cell Research
4.2.1.3. Bioethics on Eugenic Sterilization
4.2.2. Legal Perspective
4.2.2.1. Laws on Cloning
4.2.2.2. Laws on Stem Cell Research
4.2.2.3. Laws on Eugenic Sterilization
4.3. Possible solutions to the problem

GENERAL CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Task 3.2

For the success and efficiency of this research, as primary data collection, interviews were
conducted on individuals who are practicing in the field of biotechnology. As far as research
ethics is concerned, the identity of the interviewees are kept confidential at their request.
Personal interviews and questionnaires were the main ways used to collect data. Personal
interviews have many advantages, including personal and direct communication with
interviewers and interviewees, as well as the elimination of non-response rates. But due to
the prevailing CoViD-19 pandemic, personal interviews were done via online platform. Also
for the purpose of data collection, the above mentioned references were also referred and a
questionnaire was prepared for the same interviewees to answer. As secondary data,
books, encyclopaedias, eBooks, web articles, and web sites were used in the gather of
information.

Task 3.3

As stated above, the method used for the primary gathering of data was through
questionnaires instead of interviews due to the prevailing Pandemic situation. However, the
importance of analysing and interpreting the information that has been collected through
primary sources is based on the fact that it can be used it understand the pulse of the
people. Interpreting the data collected validates our research and basing solely on
secondary sources will be a stumbling block on the path to a successful research.

The questionnaire that was used to collect data from the general public on the topin oc
biotechnological interventions is attached below:

The Survey Questionnaire

Hello,
I am Deven Shivantha and I am reading for a degree in Law. As such, I have decided to
conduct my research on "The Critical analysis of the practices of Biotechnology on the
dignity of Human Person". I'd love to know your ideas on this subject matter. The survey
should only take a few minutes of your precious time, and your identity is completely
anonymous and confidential.

I really appreciate your kind participation and I hope that you would be genuine in providing
information.

Thank you

* Required

1. Name (If you wish)

2. Age Group *

Below 20

20 - 39

40 - 59

60- 79

Above 80

3. Field of study/profession

4. There are these biotechnological advancements throughout the centuries. In-vitro

Fertilization, Stem Cell Research, Cloning etc. are some of these practices. Are you
aware of such existing practices of biotechnology on humans? *

Yes / No

5. There are ethically acceptable reasons for biotechnological interventions to exist. *

Yes / No
6. There are quite a lot ethical issues when analyzed from philosophical, religious and
legal perspectives in these technological practices. As far as you are concerned, do
you see such a conflict? *

Yes / No / Probably

7. Some people believe that life begins at conception, and that to destroy a human
embryo would be immoral, even to save or reduce suffering in an existing human life.
Do you agree with this? *

Yes / No / Probably

8. Philosophically speaking, the concept of human dignity has its roots in the concept of
human person. Do you think the either blastocyst or an embryo possess the dignity
due of a human person? *

Yes / No

9. Embryonic material from conception onwards must be considered a living person *

True / False

Reproductive Biotechnology

10. I am aware of the different options available with regard to reproductive technologies *
Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral Disagree

Strongly Disagree

11. Do you think it is ethical for a couple to choose artificial reproductive methods like in-
vitro fertilization, surrogation? *

Yes, I agree / No, I disagree

12. The separation of sex from reproduction as a result of reproductive technologies would
create ethical problems *

Yes / No

13. I would consider using reproductive technologies (not only cloning reproductive
methods are meant here) to assist in pregnancy for myself or for my partner. *
 Strongly agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Stem Cell Research

14. I am aware of research conducted with embryonic and adult stem cells *
Yes / No

15. Do you think that you know enough about stem cell research? *
Yes, I am very aware of it

No, I've never heard about it before today

I've heard about it, but I don't know very much about it

16. As far as Stem Cell Research Projects are concerned, scientists extract Embryonic
Stem Cells from the inner cell mass of a blastocyst. If asked the same question, what
do you think the blastocyst to be? *

A lump of matter

A Human Person

Something in between

17. In a scale of 1 - 5, how would you rate your answer? *

1 2 3 4 5

18. "Embryonic stem cells are thought by most scientists and researchers to hold potential
cures for spinal cord injuries, diabetes, Parkinson's disease, cancer, heart disease,
hundreds of rare immune system and genetic disorders and much more." Do you think
that the potential benefits of this research outweighs the drawbacks of the cost of
research and the destruction of the human embryo? *

Yes

No

Maybe
19. Many religions also oppose stem cell research and treatment. Do you think its
acceptable for some parents to refuse stem cell treatment for their children as it goes
against their religious beliefs, even if the treatment could be lifesaving? *

Yes / No / Maybe

20. Do you think that less money should be spent on embryonic stem cell research and
more spent on funding adult stem research in order to avoid the moral issues involving
human embryos? *
Yes / No / Maybe

21. Finally, do you think that stem cell research has a positive future? *
Yes / No / Maybe

Cloning Technology
22. I have substantial knowledge regarding cloning technologies *
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Strongly disagree

23. Cloning people will seriously have an effect on an individual's uniqueness? *

Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Strongly disagree

24. The cloning of humans for the purpose of harvesting organs for transplant is ethically
acceptable *
Yes / No

25. The cloning of animals for research purposes is an ethically acceptable practice *
Yes / No

26. Technologies that result in manufactured rather than naturally reproduced humans,
would be dehumanizing for the human race over time *
Yes / No
27. The cloning of entire human beings is ethically acceptable *
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral Disagree
Strongly disagree

Task 4

Task 4.1

*Attached above

Task 4.2

Biotechnology is a recent phase of the vast technological evolution which developed so

quickly and dramatically that it was the centre for all philosophical discussions.
Biotechnology deals with human beings which are considered to be the masters of creation.
Like any other technology biotechnology too has its own benefits and drawbacks.
Biotechnology has helped people to be protected from their illnesses and natural disasters,
by its technological developments. The core of biotechnology is about understanding the
deeps of life and its functions. In the eyes of biotechnology, life is something that can be
known, controlled and even modified. The benefits of biotechnology can be celebrated for
how it benefits the humanity, yet the dark side of it has adverse effects on human person.
And for this reason, biotechnology requires a careful re-examination of its many dimensions
and implications.

Throughout the history of thought, life had its definition changed due to upcoming postulates
of scientific theories. Life which was thought as a gift of God by our forefathers is now
considered by evolutionary theories of chance and natural selection. Yet, at present in the
midst of all these biotechnological endeavours, life is seen as a medium with unknown
possibilities. Life is something that can now be engineered in an industrial sense even to the
point where the evolution of our own and other species might be directed. Evolution is now
replaced by construction. It is no more a natural selection but a deliberate selection; no more
by chance but by machines. The main threat is that this may lead to a position where life
loses all its moral and spiritual values and thus human beings becoming living machines.

A philosophical analysis of the root causes of the present biotechnological crisis shows that
lack of a metaphysical vision of the substantial unity of human person, have caused this
paradigm shift in the notion of person. These deviations in the philosophical understanding
of human person have undermined the notion of human and thus brought unwanted
experiments on the human person. These trials have shaken the very foundations of
knowledge on human person and destroyed the human values. In addition these
enthusiasms to know more and to make new experiments on human which are motivated by
empirical perspectives have reduced the value of human being to a mere biological value. It
is a kind of a genetic reductionism that human beings are heading to. Thereby it proves that
empirical and biological understandings would provide a partial view of human person.
All in all, this was to understand how the ordinary practice of Biotechnology violates the
dignity due to human person. In this research paper biotechnological practices are
understood and their effect on the personhood of human are analysed philosophically. This
research paper conclude that biotechnology with the boundaries of pure science is vital to
understand human person in a different perspective, but practically when it causes its line
and put its hand meddle with the inner most cause of human person, there arises an issue
regarding the dignity and the personhood of person.

Therefore, basing on the research objective, the final findings of the research, to be put in a
nutshell, would be that biotechnology is necessary and is not evil in itself. But due to its
possibilities and vulnerability along with that of humans who control it, biotechnology as a
science should always build on a strong and coherent philosophical, ethical boundaries and
especially guarded by legal principles.

Task 4.2

This section tries to show the dangers connected to certain ways of cloning and to provide
alternatives and long-time solutions for the problems that arise within.

Practical solutions to Cloning

As far as cloning is concerned, many gender-identical couples opt to clone their offspring.
But, this can give rise to many serious legal and ethical issues such as what happens if the
donor of the clone’s genome lives near the child? Then the child would be regularly
confronted with the older version of himself. This situation can be more serious, if the donor
brings up the child. The child will suffer identity crisis and psychological imbalances. A
solution to this problem could be the use of alternatives other than cloning. One such
alternative is adoption. The simplest method for gender-identical or infertile couples to have
children. There are many underprivileged children across the world who are forced to grow
up without parents, making adoption not only a humanitarian alternative to cloning but also
to natural reproduction.

Another theory is that particular abilities, such as the ability to play musical instruments or
"intelligence," are passed down through generations. There are certain abilities that are
passed down the generations, but the majority are acquired via training. And intelligence is
the information that shapes us into the people we are, and it has nothing to do with biological
facts. Clones who are raised in the hopes of fulfilling their donors' desires for immortality or
brilliance are likely to disappoint them, and as a result, they may grow up in social isolation,
not loved by their "parents," and expected to achieve at a higher level than "ordinary
people." Immortality is impossible to obtain, both with and without cloning.

As a solution or alternative to those who want to clone for themselves offspring with high
intelligence, education would suffice. If a person does not want to clone himself but simply
wants to produce "smart kids," he or she may opt to offer excellent education to his or her
children. At the same time, he might increase his own knowledge. This is arguably the most
progressive option, especially if the so educated child decides to educate his offspring in the
same way, and each child's knowledge base is superior to that of its parents.
"How about buying this little island and placing 500 male clones on it and seeing how they
develop without being able to reproduce?" While this type of research may provide
fascinating results, the risks to involuntarily participating human clones are significant. To
begin with, the outcomes are uncertain. In the scenario presented above, the clones may be
able to form peaceful societies, but they may also kill one another. Their decision is
impacted by the surroundings rather than being free.

The scientists conducting these studies are frequently solely concerned with the outcomes
and not with the participants. As a result, cloned individuals may be overlooked or sent to
"clone villages." Because the clones had spent their whole lives as test subjects, the
psychological harm would very certainly be severe. While the experiments are
fundamentally intriguing, they are far too hazardous to be carried out without first being
evaluated by "ethical investigators." The occupancy of the clones when the project is
completed, in particular, must be ensured. But there are several effective and inexpensive
alternatives to using clones in sociological research. The use of computers to get the
required knowledge is perhaps the most intriguing.

Practical solutions to Embryonic Stem Cell Research

When we focus our attention towards Stem Cell Research, a concern some people have
about embryonic stem cell research is that it would lead to a world where human embryo
farming is routine and baby cloning is no longer considered unethical. They tend to believe
that if we don't have an issue with killing a human embryo, we'll go on to do other unethical
things in the name of research. They are concerned that society's attitudes on procreation
may shift. This fear arises from the possibility of creating embryos only for the sake of
research and embryonic stem cell collection.

In finding a solution, with the introduction of induced pluripotent stem cells, however, viable
answers to these ethical and moral concerns may already be available. The issue of embryo
destruction, which is essential to the argument against embryonic stem cell research, does
not exist with induced pluripotent stem cells, removing a significant portion of the ethical
concerns. Embryo usage and destruction would be impossible since induced pluripotent
cells are derived from adult cells such as fibroblasts. Induced pluripotent methods also avoid
the issue of human cloning and the worry that embryonic stem cell research would lead to
embryos being commodified and produced to fit our needs. The procedure does not
necessitate the use of embryos, and the only cells required are those found in the adult
human body. Because induced pluripotent stem cell techniques may also create organs,
there would be no need for the embryo farming that some have suggested.

Furthermore, adult stem cells, rather than embryonic stem cells, appear to have the ability to
detect the site of damage and dying cell types, allowing just those cells that are absent to be
rebuilt. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, do not necessitate the loss of any embryos or the
utilization of unfertilized eggs. Adult stem cells can be found in the majority, if not all, of a live
organism's tissues. While adult stem cells cannot differentiate into any other cell in the body,
they can differentiate into any cell in the organ from where they originated. Because these
cells are already present in an individual's body, the regenerated tissue is unlikely to be
rejected by the immune system.