Nature vs. Nurture Human Cloning

Nature vs. Nurture Human Cloning

Human cloning though considered highly unethical and even illegal in many nations is theoretically possible. There is however currently a ban on human cloning, despite the fact that science will likely continue to try to develop the technology to clone humans, mostly for the purpose of reproductive treatments. It is also safe to say that animal cloning will continue unabated even by legal restrictions. Some even contend that the first, cloned human pregnancy has already occurred. The presupposition of the fact is that human cloning has been used or will be used in the future not to produce two identical twins but clones of parents, that will then be biologically related to the parents, as an infertile individuals' only opportunity to produce biological offspring. ("The Case for Human," 2002, p. 20)

It is for this and many other reasons that many argue the nature vs. nurture debate with regard to human cloning. Some ask, would the cloned human have a personality that would more closely match that of the person he or she was created from or would the individual be a completely unique person as a result of environmental influences. To answer this question one must engender a more complete understanding of the current theoretical knowledge regarding the nature vs. nurture debate. (Myers, 2006) In many ways the current theories about nature vs. nurture attest to the idea that nature and nurture are helpmates of one another, though this does not exclude opinions based upon a scale where some believe that nature has way more to do with it while others contend that nurture has primacy over nature.

Margaret and Marie, who, as natural identical twins, are about as close as possible to being pure clones. They share the same genotype, and they look remarkably alike. They even share a passion for dancing. Naturally gifted, they danced their way together from Newport, Rhode Island, to Stephens College in Missouri, becoming part of its faculty; now they run their own successful studio. At the same time, they are decidedly different in numerous ways. They are worlds apart in disposition and personality. Even in the domain of dance, they have different specialties -- the temperament for ballet is radically unlike that for modern jazz.The moral of this tale is clear. Even with natural clones such as my sisters, precise genetic copies do not translate into exact duplicates. In contrast to science fiction, science fact indicates that exact copies of Hitler, Mozart, and so on are impossible. What is possible has been demonstrated to us through the birth of Dolly: just as we had formerly produced genetic copies of molecules, cells, and plants, we could now produce genetic copies of animals. The more stunning news, however, is that we can now use adult cells as donors, cells that have already become specialized and differentiated. (Brannigan, 2001, p. 1)

From the biopsychosocial perspective of the debate would indicate that like identical twins living in different times and likely different places and therefore environments the two individuals would be a lot alike in temperament and personality but would still become different people. Furthermore as it would be impossible to completely reproduce the real environment of the donor the clone would therefore logically be offered different opportunities which would result in real individuality. (Myers, 2006, p. 99)

The clone's adult personality would still likely closely resemble that of the donor, but would not likely be an exact match of the other. The issue of temperament has a great deal to do with decisions, as when certain offerings are made to the individual infant, the individual infant will likely respond in a consistent manner according to his or her temperament. Temperament, according to Myers, is the least variable aspect of the individual, as seen by adoptive studies associated with what adoptive parent's can influence or change and what they can not. (p. 98)

The adult personality of monozygotic twins clearly differs, despite the fact that they share exactly the same DNA and presumably grew up in the same household. Where such individuals grew up in different households, such as is the case in adoptive twin situations the two individuals still share certain basic personality traits, i.e. those associated with temperament and therefore would make decisions when offered the same environment in a similar though not completely identical manner. (Parker & Bergmark, 2005, p. 350) It is therefore safe to assume that identical twins created in an artificial manner, i.e. through cloning will follow similar patterns of temperament, personality and identity development. The "truth" is likely somewhere closer to the middle, where nature determines many responses and opportunity changes and defines the individual.