Carson Strong's article “Cloning and Infertility”
has initiated a conversation in this journal about the ethical
and policy issues surrounding the question of who, if anyone,
should be allowed access to human reproductive cloning technology,
should somatic cell nuclear transfer ever become technically
feasible and safe. Strong's position in that article is that
infertile opposite sex couples for whom cloning is the last resort
for having a genetically related child are the only people who should
be granted access to such technology, primarily because this need
to have a genetically related child would give such couples
respectable reasons for cloning themselves. Also, every child
has a basic right to a “decent minimum opportunity for
development.” Thus it would be morally wrong, other things
being equal, to clone a person with cystic fibrosis or spina bifida
but morally permissible to clone a nearsighted person, because
nearsightedness is not sufficiently disabling to violate the child's
birthright. With this caveat, he concludes that protecting reproductive
freedom requires that physicians be allowed to provide cloning services
only to that small subset of infertile opposite sex couples who would
need it as a last resort, should human reproductive cloning
ever become safe and feasible.