The creation of a genetically identical copy of a human being through somatic cell nuclear transfer or other techniques. Debate distinguishes between therapeutic cloning for medical research and reproductive cloning to create a new human individual.
Therapeutic cloning — producing patient-matched stem cells for disease treatment — has a compelling medical rationale entirely distinct from the more controversial prospect of reproductive human cloning. The two should be assessed independently on their own merits.
The distinction between therapeutic and reproductive cloning is technically unstable: the same somatic cell nuclear transfer technique underlies both. Permitting one reliably develops the technical capacity for the other, making the distinction difficult to enforce as a regulatory boundary.
A human clone would be a unique individual shaped by different experiences and environment, not a mere copy. The science of epigenetics demonstrates that genetic identity does not translate into personal identity; fears about clone individuality are largely unfounded.
Creating a human being with the deliberate purpose of replicating another person instrumentalizes the resulting life from conception. Even if the clone develops their own identity, the intent to replicate treats human existence as a reproducible artifact rather than a unique event.
Patient-specific therapeutic cloning would allow the development of perfectly matched tissues for transplantation, avoiding organ rejection without immunosuppression. The medical potential for treating degenerative diseases is substantial and distinguishable from reproductive applications.
Induced pluripotent stem cell technology achieves comparable research goals without creating and destroying human embryos. The unique justification for therapeutic cloning has been significantly weakened by the development of these ethically less controversial alternatives.
Nearly all countries have adopted laws prohibiting reproductive cloning, reflecting an unusual degree of cross-cultural ethical consensus. This regulatory landscape can be maintained while permitting carefully governed therapeutic research under strict institutional oversight.
The history of reproductive technology shows that practices once considered unthinkable — IVF, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, egg freezing — become normalized over time. The unthinkability of reproductive cloning today is not a reliable guarantee against its future normalization.