Kathinka Evers, “The Identity of Clones,” in May, Applied Ethics, 3^rd ed., 664-670.

Evers addresses a common misconception of clones—namely, that the cloned subject will be identical in all respects to the one from whom the subject was cloned. She points out that clones will be genetically identical to the ones from whom they are cloned, but genetic identity does not mean that the subject and the donor are identical in all respects.

Genetic identity is comparable to “identical twins,” according to Evers. Although two individuals share the same genotype, they are not identical in personality, temperament, and other important respects. Each is a separate individual with unique traits.

Fears of cloning may be addressed when people have accurate factual information, but inaccurate information has fueled irrational fears of cloning. The results of cloning in the actual world are likely to be less startling and fearsome than the opponents imagine, according to Evers.

Evers represents a utilitarian position in regard to cloning. The utilitarian position holds that the rightness or wrongness of an action should be determined by the likely results of the practice in the actual world. Assessment of the results can only be made if the practice is undertaken.