Global Business & Development Law Journal Volume 14 Issue 1 Symposium: Biotechnology and International Article 13 Law 1-1-2001 Protecting Human Dignity and Individuality: The Need for Uniformity in International Cloning Legislation Alexandra Hawkins University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/globe Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Alexandra Hawkins, Protecting Human Dignity and Individuality: The Need for Uniformity in International Cloning Legislation, 14 Transnat'l Law. 243 (2001). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/globe/vol14/iss1/13 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals and Law Reviews at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Global Business & Development Law Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Protecting Human Dignity and Individuality: The Need for Uniformity in International Cloning Legislation Alexandra Hawkins* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................... 244 II. BACKGROUND ............................................... 246 A. History ................................................ 246 B. Techniques .............................................. 248 1. Blastomere Separation ................................. 249 2. Nuclear Transfer ...................................... 251 C. Usesfor Cloning ......................................... 254 1. Agriculture and Livestock Applications .................... 255 2. Reproductive Cloning .................................. 256 a. Infertility Treatments ............................ 257 b. Genetic Selection Via Reproductive Cloning ............. 260 3. Therapeutic Cloning ................................... 262 a. Organ and Tissue Generation ........................ 263 b. Genetic Therapy ................................... 265 c. MitochondrialDisease Treatment ..................... 266 d. Moral Dilemma of Nuclear Transfer ................... 267 I. INTERNATIONAL REACTIONS TO CLONING ........................... 268 A. InternationalPolicies ..................................... 268 1. United Nations Educational,Scientific, and Cultural Organization ......................................... 268 2. World Health Organization ............................. 269 B. InternationalLaws and Treaties ............................. 269 1. European Convention on Human Rights andBiomedicine ..... 270 2. European Union ..................................... 271 3. United Kingdom ...................................... 272 4. United States ......................................... 274 5. Germany ............................................ 276 6. Other Countries ...................................... 278 * J.D. University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, to be conferred May, 2002; B.S., Psychology, University of California, Davis. Much gratitude is owed to my family for their never failing love and encouragement. Not enough thanks can be given to my Father, Richard, and my Mother, Linda, for being such superb role models and giving me a star to shoot for. This Comment is dedicated to Paul Asterlin, for bringing so much sunshine into my life, for being my inspiration, and for always believing in me. Your brilliance, humor, and charm can never be cloned. Agratz6. 243 2001 / The Need for Uniformity in InternationalCloning Legislation IV. NEED FOR UNIFORMITY ........................................ 280 A. Problems with InconsistentInternational Cloning Legislation ...... 280 B. The Weight of the Evidence ................................. 284 1. Reproductive Cloning .................................. 284 2. Therapeutic Cloning ................................... 286 C. ProposedAction ......................................... 288 1. Reproductive Cloning .................................. 290 2. Therapeutic Cloning ................................... 291 V. CONCLUSION ................................................ 293 I. INTRODUCTION Nuclear transfer cloning continues to be the subject of intense scrutiny and excitement since its first international publicity surrounding the birth of the sheep Dolly in 1997.' The potential application of technology to clone humans has caused international conflict. At this time, at least nineteen countries have bans on reproductive cloning.2 However, cloning technology is also used therapeutically to help in organ transplants, drug treatments, and prevention of diseases. 3 Regardless of these benefits to medicine and to society as a whole, many people still oppose therapeutic cloning because the process requires the use of human embryos. 4 A balancing approach developed in which the need for the embryos is weighed against the rights of the embryos' potential lives.- Several countries already have regulated nuclear transfer cloning technology. 6 However, there are still many nations that have no such legislation, including the 1. See Ian Wilmut, CloningforMedicine, SCI. AM., Dec. 1998 at 58, 58, available at http://www.sciam. com/1998/1298issue/1298wilmut.html (stating that the birth of Dolly generated much press scrutiny due to the theoretical possibility of cloning humans). 2. See Cult in the First Bid to Clone Human, ExPREss, Oct. 11, 2000, available at 2000 WL 24217743 [hereinafter Cult] (arguing that any attempts to clone a human at this time would be unacceptable in many modern societies). 3. See 1 NATIONAL BIOETHICs ADVISORY COMMISSION, CLONING HUMAN BEINGS: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL BIOETHICS COMMITTEE 13 (1997) [hereinafter NBAC] (documenting the numerous potential applications of cloning). 4. See Department of Health, Stem Cell Research: Medical Progress with Responsibility 1 17-21, at http:llwww.doh.gov.uk/cegc/stemcellreport.htm (last modified Aug. 16, 2000) [hereinafterMedicalProgress](copy on file with The Transnational Lawyer). 5. See id. (mentioning that ethical considerations must be taken into account when establishing laws regarding cloning and embryo research). 6. See Cult, supra note 2 (indicating that many countries feel that human cloning is morally and scientifically questionable at this time). The TransnationalLawyer/ Vol. 14 United States.7 The potential problem arising from the legislative discrepancy is that a rule banning cloning in one country could be easily circumvented by traveling across borders.8 Cloning poses ethical and moral threats to society because the actual production of a human clone would cause irreversible harm. There is a need for all countries to work together to develop an international agreement to ban reproductive cloning and to regulate the use of therapeutic cloning. Such an agreement is the best way to protect the moral and ethical integrity of international society. In order to develop a cohesive plan that best serves the interests of the international society, cloning technology uses must be examined, and the benefits and risks of such procedures must be balanced. To fully understand the importance of uniform cloning legislation, a look at the history of cloning and the evolution of modem techniques is necessary; most important to this Comment is the revolutionary discovery of nuclear transfer. After gaining a rudimentary understanding of such preliminary matters, the applications of nuclear transfer should be carefully examined in order to realize the importance of allowing research that further develops this technique for scientific purposes. By then looking at the ways international society has dealt with the implications of nuclear transfer, a plan may be created that allows for the broadest use of nuclear transfer for medicine while preventing human cloning and giving deference to the potential life of the embryo. This type of plan should be adopted on an international level to protect human dignity and individuality. This Comment explores the considerations necessary for an international cloning agreement and the possible mechanisms to achieve a successful plan. Part II.A. first provides a brief history of the development of cloning technology. Part II.B. discusses the most morally questionable techniques, blastomere separation and nuclear transfer. Part II.C. then describes the usages of nuclear transfer for agricultural, therapeutic, and reproductive purposes. Parts llI.A. & fl.B. document the various international policies enacted in response to cloning technology. Part II.C. discusses possible changes and amendments to those policies. Part IV concludes that there is a need for uniform cloning legislation to correct the problems created by inconsistent national laws. Finally, Part IV concludes with a mechanism proposed for achieving successful uniformity in cloning legislation which best optimizes the balance of moral integrity and scientific advancement. 7. See id. (noting that neither the United States nor many third world countries, such as the Bahamas, have cloning legislation). 8. See Jeannine Hunter, Cloning: Oak Ridge Symposium Tackles Tough Questions,KNOXVILLE NEws- SENTINEL, Oct. 7, 2000, availableat 2000 WL 22592128. 2001 /The Need for Uniformity in InternationalCloning Legislation II. BACKGROUND A. History Cloning is not an idea novel to the twentieth century. Cloning ideology is present throughout history in agricultural, horticultural, viticultural, and biological technologies. 9 For example, most modem plant species are clones of a "parent" that possessed the desired and prosperous