If you had a loved pet that died, would it be ethical to have it cloned?
Discuss.
It would not be unethical, but it would violate one’s intergrity.
I would say: don’t.
is there a difference?
You started it. Waht do you think?
It’s ethically neutral, like going to the bathroom.
Who’s integrity would it violate and why?
Ethics are a code of conduct governing one’s behavior, imposed from without.
Integrity is the principle of being honest with yourself and others. It is self-i,posed, & the concept implies that the lack of integrity equates with a form of self-destructive behavior.
Honor is a code of conduct, imposed by one’s self, based upon integrity.
Thus, it would not violate the laws of our society, nor would it be against the professional code of conduct of a biologist to clone a pet.
But cloning a pet would constitute lying to yourself, decieving yourself about the death of your pet. And that lacks integrity. Denying reality is self-destructive.
I am still on the fence with this issue. Just playing devils advocate.
I know some people would be denying reality, but maybe the person who cloned the pet did it because it was a very well balanced and healthy animal.
also they may realize it is not the same pet, but they just want one very similar.
I would think that in the long run the owner would be disappointed. It would be very difficult to have the same pet even with the same genetic material. The “personality” of the animal would be created from its experiences, and even if the owner tried to recreate the youth of the original, there would be inevitable variation. All they would have would be a pet that looks just like the departed one, and may share certain characteristics. I think it is healthier for the owner of a pet to grieve the loss and move on. Perhaps even adopt a new pet and create new memories rather that recreate old ones.
I don’t have any evidence but I think the pet would be alot similar. Reason being, even entire breeds have traits that most share. A dog or cats brain is not near as complicated as a human beings. I think a geneticaly identical dog trained the same way would be pretty darn similar.
You know, there’s this assumption that people who create clones are trying to recreate the genetic donor exactly. But since there are no people creating clones yet, doesn’t it seem a bit early to psychoanalyze the motives of cloners, before there are any cloners?
It seems to me that the vast majority of cloned animals will be created for animal husbandry…animals with known physical traits. If a few dogs or cats are cloned because someone wants a new dog a lot like their old dog, what exactly is unethical about that? If someone has a labrador retreiver would it be unethical for them to get another labrador retreiver because they like the breed?
Yes, if you think you’re going to have your old pet reborn, you’re suffering from a delusion. Since no one has actually done this it seems silly to accuse them of it.
I have a dog I would LOVE to clone.
Heck, if we had the technology, I’d like to supply his clones with adequately diverse genes that I could make him into a new breed.
He’s good-natured, loving, laid-back and very cute. He’s strong and low to the ground… but a lean 30 lbs.
When I take him to the dog park, everyone loves him, and quite a few people try to ask what breed he is so they can go out and ask for one.
All I can say is that I think he’s unique, and mention the various breeds I suppose were involved.
So, in my case, no deception of myself at all. I wouldn’t want to have another “Binky”. I would want to have an army of “The Northeast Ohio Bink”, a new breed.
Several post talk about this as if the owner is trying to bring back their dead pet. What if the owner simply wants a pet as similar to the 1st as possible, yet still knows on every level it’s a different pet and will likely have a different personality? Is that so different from getting a 2nd dog of the same breed with the same hopes?
I don’t see how it could be unethical, unless the new pet were abused or unloved for failing to meet the standard set by the old pet.
Though I do have two caveats:
-
I’m opposed to deliberate creation of new pets until the problem of unwanted pets is under control, and
-
I think cloning tends to introduce genetic anomalies that could cause infirmities in the new pet. Depending on the severity of that sort of problem, any sort of cloning might be unethical because it is cruel.
It’s certainly foolish. ANd I suspect it’s emotionally unhealthy. I wouldn’t regulate it maybe, but that hardly means I wouldn’t roll my eyes at people who do it.
I can imagine of one example that most people would find definitely unethical: Mr. A likes puppies and dogs younger than two years. Every two years he clones a copy of his two year old dog, which he then has put to sleep.
That’s a pretty big assumption about the motives of the pet owner, isn’t it? If the technology were available and affordable, I’d have my current dog cloned, because he’s an exceptionally handsome, healthy, and even-tempered dog, and these are qualities I would want in my next dog, as well. I would be under no illusion that he is the same dog, no more than I would assume two puppies from the same litter were the same dog. I certainly would not (for example) give him the same name as my current dog. Further, I might not necessarily wait for my current dog to die before getting a clone: he could use a playmate for when he has to stay home alone during the day.
However, I agree with jsgoddess about not creating new animals to be pets when there is such a glut of animals out there already that need a home. Every pet I’ve ever had has come from an animal shelter, with the exception of a few fish I had when I was eight, and one rat that was originally bred for the purpose of feeding a snake.
Given that there are lots of pets that are sitting abandoned in shelters and it costs an absurd amount of money to clone an animal at the moment, I would consider it mildly unethical just because it’s a frivolous waste of resources. But not any more than other luxury expenditures.
I don’t think it’s any more or less ethical than buying a purebred pet from a breeder instead of adopting a pet from a shelter or rescue group.
The vastly greater amount of money involved in cloning a pet, however, makes it much more foolish IMO than buying a purebred pet.
Bringing up the idea of purebred pets, what about the cloning of purebred pets, maybe Crufts winners, in order to make money as a breeder?