Terms of Discussion
Before reading the texts, explain the following notions.
Using your background knowledge, answer the following questions.
What do you do with a Genie out of the Bottle? It is impossible to reverse knowledge, but it is society's prerogative to state which pieces of knowledge should remain unused - "can do" never implies "must do". It is illegal to clone a human being in the US, for example, but it would not be beyond human perversity for someone to try to do it elsewhere in the world. It would appear that some are attracted by the idea, but maybe they have not fully understood the implications. Even supposing someone would try, there are many serious obstacles to be overcome. There is firstly the risk of imprisonment. A scientist would take the risk of ostracism from a disapproving medical and scientific establishment, and know that a journal would possibly refuse to publish any paper on the subject. Then he or she would have to persuade or induce dozens of people to take part in prolonged illegal experiments. It would need donors, egg cell recipients and surrogate mothers in fairly large numbers, to take part in experiments.
There are many reasons why what is scientifically possible is not always done. It is a commonplace that most active research scientists create far more potential research ideas than they have the time, people and money to pursue.
EUROPE: In January 1998, officials of 19 European states signed an agreement outlawing human cloning.
"Nothing will be resolved by banning certain practices in one country if scientists and doctors can simply work on them elsewhere," French President Jacques Chirac told a conference of Europe's national ethics committees. "It is only at the international level that we will be able to prohibit cloning and genetic manipulation that could alter the characteristics of the human race," he said in opening the conference.
Troubled by a US scientist Richard SeedТs stated desire to clone a human, President Clinton called for a five-year ban on human cloning experiments. Richard Seed, a Harvard University-educated physicist, caused an uproar when he said he was ready to set up a clinic to clone human babies and predicted that as many as 200,000 human clones a year would be produced once his process was perfected. He boasted that he could produce a human clone within 18 months.
Significantly, Britain was not among the 19 members of the 40-member Council of Europe which signed the anti- cloning agreement.
The accord prohibits "any intervention seeking to create a human being genetically identical to another human being, whether living or dead." It rules out any exception to the ban. The text, which became a part of the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, allows the cloning of cells for research purposes.
The agreement will become binding on the signatories as soon as it has been ratified in five states. Signatories were Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Moldova, Norway, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Macedonia and Turkey.
THE US: Lawmakers have prepared legislation to ban human cloning after a Chicago physicist announced plans to produce a "bouncing baby clone" by the end of 1999. Seed says if he is barred from establishing the clinic in the United States, he will set up a laboratory in Mexico.
In Illinois, a bill has been introduced to make human cloning a felony punishable by up to three years in prison. The measure also bans public funds for human cloning research. A Connecticut measure imposes a five-year sentence and a $5,000 fine.
Most proposed bans on human cloning would still leave plenty of legal loopholes for Richard Seed or other scientific mavericks who want to make carbon copies of people. Even if permanent ban on cloning embryos had not been voted down in Senate, there would still be ways around it for a determined cloner and his lawyers.
Besides, the bans against creating a genetically identical human being might not apply to the creation of a headless organ donor, which some might argue, does not count as an individual.
Nevertheless, some experts state that the cloning debate is fuelled by ignorance and a fear that the technology is running amok. As a result, the debate is tackling the wrong questions.
Within days of the published report on Dolly, President Clinton instituted a ban on federal funding related to attempts to clone human beings. In addition, the President asked the recently appointed National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) to address within ninety days the ethical and legal issues that surround the subject of cloning human beings. This provided a welcome opportunity for initiating a thoughtful analysis of the many dimensions of the issue, including a careful consideration of the potential risks and benefits. It also presented an occasion to review the current legal status of cloning and the potential constitutional challenges that might be raised if new legislation were enacted to restrict the creation of a child through somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning.
There are, however, no current federal regulations on the use of private funds for this purpose.
The Commission came to the following conclusions and recommendations:
A democracy is designed to facilitate a balance between competing interests, to achieve the maximum benefit for the maximum number of its citizens. The introduction of new technology challenges a democratic society to decide who gets what, when, where, and how much. The advent of cloning presents the inevitability of new and important social changes, and new issues concerning this power, and who controls it, are at hand.
Is human cloning banned because it is dangerous?
In fact, cloning is safer than conventional reproduction, because the resulting offspring
is known to have no significant hereditary birth defects. Government decisions are not
necessarily correct. Remember that the US government once banned interracial
marriages, or the consumption of alcoholic beverages.
Will humans be cloned to provide organs for transplant?
It is preposterous to think that any human will not enjoy full legal rights merely because he or she was produced by cloning instead of sexual intercourse. Nobody will have any more right to seize a clones' kidney than anybody else's. However, there could be laboratories that can clone organs only - just a heart, for instance.
I. Answer the following questions.
II. Study the words and expressions in the boxes below and explain their meaning. Complete the following texts with these expressions, using them in the appropriate form.A.
In 1990 the UK ___________ making human cloning research __________ , but currently it is allowed in the USA and several European countries with very different ____________. Some form of international ________ should be called for according to which no country would ________ cloning research to be carried over from humans to animals. Realistically, there would be no way to stop a _____________ or a dictatorship from ignoring such a treaty, but the lines need to be drawn.
A second line of defence is also called for - the notion of the ethical scientist, for whom it would be against all _______________ to pursue such research. Some have argued that research should be permitted for the sake of transplant organs. This would require more careful ______________, but the danger of a "slippery slope" to full human cloning would be looming over such an enterprise. Some legislators have sought to ________ human cloning and cloning research. The ____________ has successfully lobbied for research freedom, claiming that cloning studies could __________ coping with medical illnesses without ever having to actually create humans.B.
In October 1995 President Clinton created the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) to provide advice and recommendations regarding principles of governing the ___________ of cloning research. In June 1997 , NBAC Chairman recommended to President Clinton a ____________ on all federal __________ of human cloning research. The Committee also recommended a ______________ of the issue after a 3-to-5 years period of study. After this period of debate and discussion, NBAC will recommend an ethical code governing human cloning. СWe feel quite strongly that most of the legal and _________________ raised can only be resolved, even temporarily, by a great deal more _________________ and education. This type of national discussion is especially necessary in a democratic and _______________ for the following reasons: there is no universally accepted ethical theory; Americans hold various religious and moral perspectives on these issues; conflicting values are _______________ .Т
C. Using the passages above as reference material, compare the European and the American attitudes towards the issue of the legalisation of cloning research.
II. Fill in the gaps with the prepositions from the box and paraphrase the expressions in bold type.
III. Give synonyms for the following words.
¬ €нваре 1998 года 19 ≈вропейских государств подписали международную конвенцию, запрещающую
эксперименты по клонированию человека. ќднако, подписание тех или иных международных
документов, запрещающих клонирование, вопросов не решает. ƒолжна ли –осси€ присоединитьс€ к этой
конвенции? ѕоскольку у нас по онституции приоритет международного права, тем самым фактически
запрет на клонирование человека будет введен.
¬опросы о правовом регулировании хода научных изысканий в области клонировани€ должны решать специалисты, люди, которые в этом разбираютс€. “олько когда будут проведены все необходимые эксперименты на животных, взвешены все за и против, окончательное решение должны прин€ть ученые. Ќаши законодатели - это не специалисты, они будут руководствоватьс€ эмоци€ми. “ак что последнее слово за учеными, а не за √осударственной ƒумой.
I. Study the phrases below which contain words and expressions used to talk about
In class, work in pairs. Make up 5 statements on the topic of
Let your partner contradict each of your statements.
Now, using these expressions, think of at least 7 sentences of your own, referring to the legal aspects of cloning.
II. Study the following points of view obtained as a result of an opinion poll conducted in Moscow. Translate them into English and say if you share these opinions.
ћЌ≈Ќ»я ќѕ–ќЎ≈ЌЌџ’ Ќј “≈ћ” Ђ ј ¬џ ќ“Ќќ—»“≈—№ ЋќЌ»–ќ¬јЌ»ё? ’ќ“≈Ћ» Ѕџ ¬џ, „“ќЅџ ќѕџ“џ ѕќ ЋќЌ»–ќ¬јЌ»ё „≈Ћќ¬≈ ј ѕ–ќ¬ќƒ»Ћ»—№ » ¬ ЌјЎ≈… —“–јЌ≈?ї –ј«ƒ≈Ћ»Ћ»—№ ѕ–ј “»„≈— » ѕќ–ќ¬Ќ”:
Sum up the public attitude towards cloning in Russia, using the articles from the Appendix as reference material.
Think About The Clone's Interests, Urge Scientists
The rights of the clone are in danger of being ignored in the debate about whether to clone humans. Brought into the world as a carbon copy of someone else who could be several decades older, deeply confused about the identity of his or her parents, the clone's life would be a traumatic one. Yet the ethical debate, particularly in America, has instead considered the issue in terms of adults' rights to have children in any way they choose.
Cloners should consider the question: Is it good for the clone? It might not be in your interests to be a clone because you are taking the greatest genetic test ever imposed on people. In your parents, you will see what will happen to you biologically. As they go through life you will know that you will become bald at 40 and depressed at 50 and die of stomach cancer at 62. The clone involuntarily knows a lot more because he is going to have all this biological information thrust upon him. The focus has to be on the interests of the person made in this way.
People may have the right to do what they want in the bedroom but when they have to use unusual means to make children then society has an interest in whether it is in the child's interests to be made in this way.
Another problem for clones would be in working out who their parents were. This has already proved to be an important question for children born as a result of in-vitro fertilisation and who have begun long searches for their biological parents. A baby cloned from an adult would share that person's parents, biologically speaking, but there would also be surrogate mothers and others to consider.
Dr Ian Wilmut, of the Roslin Institute in Scotland, leader of the team that cloned Dolly the sheep, said "I have not heard of a reason for copying people that I find ethically acceptable. By contrast, there are some other techniques that I think deserve a lot of careful thought."
B. Prepare reports on behalf of the members of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (or any other similar body you can think of) on the following issues. Be ready to argue each otherТs views.
When One is Found Guilty
by M. Stanley Bubien
The bailiff stated, "All rise," as the jurors entered.
II. Find out and tell the class what role each of the following plays in court.
III. Find out the meaning of all the words from the text which are printed in bold type.
IV. TRUE or FALSE? Find in the text the evidence supporting your opinion. Take advantage of the legal vocabulary.
V. In class, divide into small groups. Develop your own version of what had happened before the trial. What kind of crime had been committed? What were the motives of the criminal?
VI. In groups, think of the continuation of the story.
VII. Imagine you are a lawyer. Give your opinion on the case and the legislation which was applied to it.
VIII. Write a speech you would deliver at the trial if you were