You are on page 1of 36

BIO ETHICAL ISSUES

The term, bioethics was coined in 1971, with the foundation of an institute in Washington DC. The Kennedy Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction and Bioethics Bioethics refers to the moral issues and problems that have arisen as a result of modern medicine and medical research

Human Cloning Euthanasia Organ Donation. Drug Testing On Animals.

Are there human clones?


Yes Identical Twins

What is cloning?

Cloning is the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another. This means that every single bit of DNA is the same between the two.

Cloning & Ethics

Should humans be cloned?

Permissibility Conditions for Animal Cloning:

It must bring about a real benefit to all people, it must not result in harm which is greater than the benefit it has produced It must not bear any kind of harm to the animal used in the process; causing harm or torture to an animal is forbidden in Islam

Human Cloning Is Forbidden in Islam


It contradicts with diversity of creation. If human cloning is permitted. Cloning contradicts with the pattern of creating things in pairs. Knowing that man cannot live alone even in Paradise

For Christians, this comes down to God's created order that we marry and produce children through His predestined means of procreation.
Human cloning goes against this and risks the manipulation and murder of another human life. Therefore, the cloning of full human beings would be wrong since it rebels against God's created order of having a mother and a father, of using the God-ordained procreative means, and it take over God's sovereign right to be the author of the life in the womb.

Euthanasia means a good death, dying well.


What is a good death? Peaceful Painless Lucid With loved ones gathered around

Voluntary euthanasia: When the person who is killed has requested to be killed. Non-voluntary: When the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent.

Islam categorically forbids all forms of suicide and any action that may help another to kill themselves. It is forbidden for a Muslim to plan, or come to know through self-will, the time of his own death in advance. If an individual is suffering from a terminal illness, it is permissible for the individual to refuse medication. Examples include individuals suffering from kidney failure who refuse dialysis treatments and cancer patients who refuse chemotherapy.

Catholic teaching condemns euthanasia as a "crime against life" and a "crime against God". Euthanasia rests on several core principles.

Sanctity of human life Dignity. Human rights Proportionality in casuistic remedies

Maximizing utility will increase happiness and lessen suffering for all of society. Euthanasia will decrease misery and pain then it is morally right. One has complete sovereign over their body and any decisions to be made about it. If one prefers to die than suffer anymore pain, it is ultimately their own decision and the government should have no riht to interfere.`

Organ donation is the process of removing tissues or organs from a live, or recently dead, person to be used in another. The former is the donor and the latter is the recipient. People of all ages can become donors. People of all ages can become donors

Some organs can be donated by a living person . Almost all organs can be donated by someone dead but this has to reach the recipient within a few hours after the donor's death. In case of live donation the donor should give his consent . In case of cadaver donation, relatives need to provide consent

Organs for Donation Some of the organs that are commonly donated : Kidneys Eyes (cornea) Heart Lungs Liver Pancreas Skin

ORTHODOX VIEW

The tenets of Islam prescribe that the body is sacred and belongs to God. The Muslims believe that the body must be buried as soon as possible after death.

Violating the human body, whether living or dead, is illegal in Islam.


At same time, there are some scholars who view it as permissible. The majority of the Indo/Pak scholars are of the view that organ transplant is not permissible, while, the Arab scholars and some scholars of the Indian subcontinent give its permission under certain conditions

The view of impermissibility :

Allah Most High says: And verily we have honoured the children of Adam (Surah al-Isra, V.70). As such, it is a well established principle of Shariah that all the organs of a human body, whether one is a Muslim or a non-Muslim, are sacred and must not be tampered with. To take benefit from any part of a human is unlawful (haram). Allah Almighty made humans the best of creations and created everything for their benefit. Allah Most High Says: It is He, who has created for you all things that are on earth. (Surah al-Baqarah, 2.29). Thus, it is permissible for a human to take benefit from every creation of Allah which includes animals (under certain conditions), plants and inanimate things. As such, it would be unreasonable to place humans in the same category of the above things .

The cutting of and tampering with a human body amounts to mutilation and deformation of a divinely created body (muthla), which has clearly been prohibited in Shariah.

Qatada (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) used to encourage giving in charity and prevent Muthla. (Sahih al-Bukhari, 2/206) . In another Hadith, the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: Abstain from Muthla. (Sahih Muslim, 2/82). The human body and parts are not in our ownership in that we may fiddle with them as we desire.

It is a trust that has been given to us by Allah Almighty. As such, it will be impermissible for one to sell, give or donate any organs of his body.

The view of permissibility Based on the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah permit the use of unlawful things in cases of extreme need and necessity.

In case of Necessity, certain prohibitions are waived, as when the life of a person is threatened the prohibition of eating carrion or drinking wine is suspended. Allah Most High says: He (Allah) has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name has been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then he is guiltless. For Allah is Most Forgiving and Most Merciful. (Surah al-Baqarah, v. 173).

With regards to the aspect of human sanctity.

Firstly, it is true that a human body, whether dead or alive, is honoured and respected, but does the modern procedure violate this sanctity? Islam ordered us to honour a human body but did not prescribe any fixed methods for it. Disgracing a human body may change from one time to another and from one place to another. It is stated in Tuhfat al-Fuqaha: If a pregnant woman died and the child in her stomach is still alive, her stomach will be cut open in order to take the child out, for in there is saving the live of a human, thus the sanctity of a human body will be overlooked. (Samarqandi, Tuhfat al-Fuqaha, 4/261 & Badaii al-Sanai).

GHAMDI VIEWS

For ones honour, family, country and religion a person sacrifices his life and this is termed as JIHAD. Just as we have the right to make a will about our wealth after our death, similarly, we also have the right to make a will regarding organ donation.

Similar is the case of violating the sanctity of a corpse.

It relates to ones intentions and motives. Inflicting harm is a crime.

However, if with the permission of the patient, a doctor severs his hand or foot, then no one can call him a criminal.

Christians consider organ donation as an act of love to humanity. Organ donation is considered acceptable to Roman Catholics and most Protestants. There are no objections to brain death. The Christian faith believes in bodily resurrections and its teachings state that, since the resurrection occurs with a new and perfect body, removing organs for transplant does not impede resurrection.

In his book Christian Ethics in Health Care, John Wilkinson writes that the first ethical principle on which organ donation and transplantation may be justified is that of "love for one's neighbor. This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:12-13). Pope John Paul II, in an address to the participants of the Society for Organ Sharing, said: With the advent of organ transplantation, which began with blood transfusion, man has found a way to give of himself, of his blood and of his body, so that others may continue to live.

Outcomes of a transplant are emphasized. Maximizing quality life years gained. Goal: transplant those most likely to die and have long quality life afterwards. Example: Transplanting a 28 year old with incurable disease over the 60 year old . Jeremy Bentham's approach states that the rightness or wrongness of an individual act is calculated by the amount of happiness that results from the act. He therefore proposed that all humans pursue the maximisation of pleasure and minimisation of pain.

Animal testing, also known as animal experimentation, animal research, and in vivo testing, is the use of non-human animals in experiments Most animals are euthanized after being used in an experiment

Cosmetics testing on animals is particularly controversial. Such tests, which are still conducted in the U.S., involve general toxicity, eye and skin irritancy, photo toxicity (toxicity triggered by ultraviolet light).

Animal research works because: Animal testing has helped to develop vaccines against diseases like rabies, polio, measles, mumps, rubella and TB

Animal testing is morally right because: Human life has greater intrinsic value than animal life

Antibiotics, HIV drugs, insulin and cancer treatments rely on animal tests. Other testing methods aren't advanced enough Scientists claim there are no differences in lab animals and humans that cannot be factored into tests

Legislation protects all lab animals from cruelty or mistreatment


Millions of animals are killed for food every year - if anything, medical research is a more worthy death Few animals feel any pain as they are killed before they have the chance to suffer

Many traditions recount that the Prophet (SAW) chastised those who cut up and caused pain to animals. Narated By Ibn Umar: The Prophet cursed the one who did Muthla to an animal (i e., cut its limbs or some other part of its body while it is still alive). [Bukhari Vol. 7, Book 67, #424]

Islam does allow testing and experiments on animals if it is for improving human health or human safety.
However Islam believes that you should not be cruel to animals and these experiments should only been done if absolutely necessary and are for the benefit of humans. These experiments or testing should not cause pain to the animal as the Qur'an says that animals have feelings (all animals should be slaughtered in a painless way) This is because the Qur'an says that animals are created by Allah (God).

Al-Hafiz BA Masri: According to the spirit and the overall teachings of Islam, causing avoidable pain and suffering to the defenseless and innocent creatures of God is not justifiable under any circumstances. No advantages and no urgency of human needs would justify the kind of calculated violence which is being done these days to animals Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), cited in Sahih Muslim. According to Al-Hafiz Masri, this hadith is concerned with the unnecessary causing of pain to an animal on the sensitive parts of his body, as well as the disfigurement of his appearance. Do not deal hastily with a being before it is stone dead.

Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), cited in Kitab al-Muqni It behooves you to treat the animals gently.

There is no doubt that the Islamic prohibition against the cutting or injuring of live animals, especially when it results in pain and suffering, does apply to modern vivisection in science.

Man both male and female is made in the image of God, and this marks us out from the rest of creation, giving us unique worth and moral value Genesis 1:26 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

In the language of the parable, we have been entrusted with resources. It is up to us to use these wisely, in a way that will please God and has been used to justify exploitation of the animal world, crushing nature to bring us food, power and wealth.
In John 13:1-17 where Christ washed his disciples' feet, he defined being a ruler as being a servant; we may rule the natural world but it is not ours to abuse and destroy rather it is entrusted to our care. The Christian perspective hands us the responsibility to decide how we can balance relieving suffering for humans, who are uniquely valuable in the sight of God, with the welfare of animals that God sustains and takes delight in.

Modern Christian thinking is largely compassionate to animals and less willing to accept that there is an unbridgeable gap between animals and human beings. The growth of the environmental movement has also radically changed Christian ideas about the role human beings play in relation to nature Few Christians nowadays think that nature exists to serve the human race, and there is a general acceptance that human authority over nature should be seen as partnership rather than power and abuse.

Arguments for animal research


Some Christians support animal research because: Humans have a unique status because of their relationship with God Mankind was "made in God's image" unlike other animal species God put mankind in charge of animals to "rule over them Humans have souls, non-human animals don't Some Christians oppose animal research because: All animals are made by God and are intrinsically valuable Many experiments are performed for curiosity's sake, or cosmetic purposes Not all Christians agree that animals lack a soul.

Those who argue that painful experimentation on animals should be halted, or at least curtailed, maintain that pain is an intrinsic evil, and any action that causes pain to another creature is simply not morally permissible. Those who argue for the continuation of painful experimentation on animals state that society has an obligation to act in ways that will minimize harm and maximize benefits, Indeed, pain is an evil to be minimized, and scientists do work to minimize pain when possible. Jeremy Bentham, claim that the morally relevant question about animals is not "Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer ?" And, animals do in fact suffer, and do in fact feel pain. If it is wrong to inflict pain on a human being, it is just as wrong to inflict pain on an animal.

UTILITARIANISM
Bentham does not imply that the pleasures and pains of animals are the same as ours. Still, the feelings of animals matter. This is how he reasons in order to make a case for animal rights:
Question Benefit for animals Are we permitted We are better off Being eaten by to eat animals? if we feed on us is less painful them. than by predators. Are we permitted We are better off This death is not to kill animals? without some the worst thing that molest us. for them. Are we permitted Some people to torment might have animals? sadistic pleasure. This suffering is unnecessary and does not benefit them. Benefit for us Answer Yes! This improves our nutrition. Yes! This improves our living conditions. No! The suffering of animals surpasses natural pain.