Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics logoLink to Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
. 2005 Feb;22(2):47–56. doi: 10.1007/s10815-005-1493-5

Identifying the Public’s Knowledge and Intention to Use Human Cloning in Greek Urban Areas

Georgia Tzamalouka 1,✉, Pelagia Soultatou 2, Maria Papadakaki 1, Sevasti Chatzifotiou 1, Basil Tarlatzis 3, Joannes El Chliaoutakis 1
PMCID: PMC3455477  PMID: 15844729

Abstract

Purpose: The understanding of the public’s knowledge on human cloning (HC) and its acceptability are considered important for the development of evidence-based policy making. The aim of this research study was to investigate the demographic and socioeconomic variables that affect the public’s knowledge and intention to use HC in urban areas of Greece. Additionally, the possible association of religiousness with the knowledge and the intention to use HC were also investigated.

Methods Individual interviews were conducted with 1020 men and women of urban areas in Greece. Stratified random sampling was performed to select the respondents. Several scientists, experts in HC, evaluated the content of the instrument initially developed. The final questionnaire was consequently the result of a pilot study.

Results Almost half of the respondents (51.5%) believed that “HC is a sort of in vitro fertilization” and 42.9% that “it has already been applied to human being.” They were not aware that “the cloned fetus grows in the woman’s uterus” (41.5%) and that “HC could regenerate human organs” (41.7%). The acceptability of human cloning for the cure of terminal diseases and transplantation need is very high (70.7% and 58.6%, respectively). The public’s intention to have recourse to cloning on the grounds of “bringing” back to life a loved person or because of reproductive disorders was reported as desire by 35% and 32.5%, respectively. The occupational category (scientists, self-employed, and artists), the Intention to use HC, and the number of children are highly significant predictors of valid knowledge about HC. Low rates of church attendance appeared to relate with high reported Intention to use HC, and increasing scores of valid knowledge about HC increased the public’s Intention to use HC.

Conclusions A number of specific demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and high scores of knowledge provide a persuasive justification in demonstrating intention toward HC. The current study suggests that these findings should receive further attention by policymakers and scientists within the Greek context.

Key words: Acceptability, Greece, human cloning, intention, knowledge, understanding

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (109.0 KB).

References

  • 1.Jasanoff S. The life sciences and the rule of law. J Mol Biol. 2002;319:891–899. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(02)00337-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Etkin LD. The debate about human cloning. Differentiation. 2002;69:145–146. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Pattinson SD. Reproductive cloning: Can cloning harm the clone? Med Law Rev. 2002;10:295–307. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/10.3.295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Neresini F. And man descended from the sheep: The public debate on cloning in the Italian press. Public Understanding Sci. 2000;9:359–382. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Einsiedel EF. Cloning and its discontents— a Canadian perspective. Nat Biotechnol. 2000;18:943–944. doi: 10.1038/79419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Evans JH. Religion and human cloning: An exploratory analysis of the first available opinion data. J Sci Stud Religion. 2002;41(4):747–758. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Chliaoutakis JE. A relationship between traditionally motivated patterns and gamete donation and surrogacy in urban areas of Greece. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(8):2187–2191. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.8.2187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chliaoutakis JE, Koukouli S, Papadakaki M. Using attitudinal indicators to explain the public’s intention to have recourse to gamete donation and surrogacy. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(11):2995–3002. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.11.2995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Burley J. The ethics of therapeutic and reproductive human cloning. Cell Dev Biol. 1999;10:287–294. doi: 10.1006/scdb.1999.0313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tambor ES, Berbhardt BA, Rodgers J, Holtzman NA, Geller G. Mapping the human genome: An assessment of media coverage and public reaction. Genet Med. 2002;4(31):31–36. doi: 10.1097/00125817-200201000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.O’ Mathuna DP. What to call human cloning. EMBO Rep. 2002;3(6):502–505. doi: 10.1093/embo-reports/kvf122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Everett M. The social life of genes: Privacy, property and the new genetics. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:53–65. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00007-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Maienschein J. On cloning: Advocating history of biology in the public interest. J Hist Biol. 2001;34:423–432. doi: 10.1023/a:1012994614765. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Finkler K, Skrzynia C, Evans JP. The new genetics and its consequences for family, kinship, medicine and medical genetics. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57:403–412. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00365-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Illmensee K. Cloning in reproductive medicine. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001;18(8):451–467. doi: 10.1023/A:1016642906286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zavos PM. Human reproductive cloning: The time is near. BioMed Online. 2003;6(4):397–398. doi: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)62154-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Reiss MJ. Ethical dimensions of therapeutic human cloning. J Biotechnol. 2002;98:61–70. doi: 10.1016/s0168-1656(02)00086-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Dawson V, Schibeci R. Western Australian school students’ understanding of biotechnology. Int J Sci Educ. 2003;26(1):57–69. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kirkman C. Proposed regulation of human cloning: Paving the way for degenerative disease therapeutics. DDT. 2001;6(18):919–920. doi: 10.1016/s1359-6446(01)01926-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Sanchez-Sweatman LR. Reproductive cloning and human health: An ethical, international, and nursing perspective. Int Nurs Rev. 2000;47(1):28–39. doi: 10.1046/j.1466-7657.2000.00002.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Priest SH. Cloning: A study in news production. Public Understanding Sci. 2001;10:59–69. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Mavroforou A, Giannoukas A, Michalodimitrakis E. A review of Greek law on human cloning. Med Law. 2003;22(1):55–62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Romeo-Casabona CM. Embryonic stem cell research and therapy: The need for a common European legal framework. Bioethics. 2002;6(6):557–567. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Katayama A. Human reproductive cloning and related techniques: An overview of the legal environment and practitioner attitudes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001;18(8):442–450. doi: 10.1023/A:1016690822216. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Lujan JL, Moreno L. Public perception of biotechnology and genetic engineering in Spain: Tendencies and ambivalence. Technol Soc. 1994;16(3):335–355. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Human Genetics Commission: Public attitudes to human genetic information: People’s Panel Quantitative Study conducted for the Human Genetics Commission, London (2001), Human Genetic Commission, 68 leaves, HD Hum, http://www.servicefirst.gov.uk/2001/panel/hgc/index.htm
  • 27.Macer DRJ. Public acceptance of human gene therapy and perceptions of human genetic manipulation. Hum Gene Ther. 1992;3:511–518. doi: 10.1089/hum.1992.3.5-511. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Best S, Kellner D. Biotechnology, ethics and the politics of cloning. Democracy Nat. 2002;8(3):439–465. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics are provided here courtesy of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

RESOURCES