Part A

First, research the opposing position to your own and define the arguments that support that position. You should be as comprehensive as possible and cite the sources you use. Pay particular attention to the focus of the cloning subject you are presenting. That is, is the position focused on the clone or another beneficiary of the cloning process? What are the justifications, benefits, and rationale for the position? What is the accrued value to the patient, family, or society? Examine the position from medical, ethical, moral, and public policy perspectives. Finally you should summarize the opposing position. (25 points)

Part B

Critique the position you presented in Part A. Focus your critique on the three (3) areas identified below. (35 points)

1.

What is the impact of the opposing position on the primary beneficiary of cloning?

2.

What is the impact of cloning on others who are not the primary beneficiaries of cloning?

3.

What is the potential impact of cloning on our society?

You must properly reference and document your examination and analysis of the opposing position in APA style and present a summary of your conclusions.

Part C

Now present your position and argue its benefits. You must provide at least four (4) justifications for the argument you are making. Your argument should be broad in scope, addressing medical, social, ethical, moral, and religious as well as political dimensions of the issue. Your conclusions should point to a constructive course of action that should be taken to advance our understanding of the subject. (40 points)

You should consider the following four (4) principles of medical ethics in building your defense.

1.

The principle of autonomy, which means ensuring free and informed consent for all medical treatment or research; that is, the patient must be able to understand the situation and the proposed treatment and decide to receive it.

2.

The principle of nonmalfeasance, which prohibits treatment in which the harm done to a patient is greater than the resulting benefit.

3.

The principle of beneficence, which refers to the positive efforts on the part of the caregiver to improve or enhance the health of the patient without excessive cost or risk to ourselves or others.

4.

The principle of justice, which in a medical context refers to how good or bad care is distributed to the patient based on merit, need, and ability – that is, who gets what, who gets left out, and how are these decisions made?

You must properly reference and document your examination and analysis of the opposing position in APA style and present a summary of your conclusions.