Problem
It is the year 2025. A young and wealthy married couple in their early thirties-Doug and Mary S. have just experienced a parent's worst nightmare. Their 2-year-old daughter Emma was killed playing in her front yard by a drunk driver. Due to severe internal bleeding, Emma lost her life before she could be rushed to the hospital. Six months after the accident the parents have not been able to recover from the devastating loss. The emotional toll on each spouse has put distance between them, and their marriage has been suffering for it. Though the idea of having another child has been discussed by them, both feel that any child would be unable to replace their beloved Emma. One day the U.S. government announces that it has approved human cloning since the technology has been perfected. Since the parents are aware that a sample of Emma's blood has been stored from a prior blood test, they are considering whether to produce an identical clone of their deceased daughter. While the process would be very expensive, the prospect of having another baby Emma immediately brings hope and joy back to their lives. The couple consider whether they should attempt to produce a clone embryo of Emma and have it implanted inside of Mary S.'s uterus.
Task
I. Do you think it would be morally permissible for Doug and Mary S. to produce a clone of their deceased daughter? Why or why not?
II. Assume for the sake of argument that it was morally permissible for the couple to clone Emma. Furthermore, suppose that it is possible for Doug and Mary to genetically enhance the clone so that dying due to blood loss from a major injury would decrease by 50%. Do you think it would be morally permissible for Doug and Mary to genetically enhance the clone of Emma? Why or why not?