Skip to main content

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

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics volume 22, pages 47–56 (2005)Cite this article

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Jasanoff S: The life sciences and the rule of law. J Mol Biol 2002;319:891– 899

    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

    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

    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

    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

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burley J: The ethics of therapeutic and reproductive human cloning. Cell Dev Biol 1999;10:287– 294

    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

    Google Scholar 

  11. O’ Mathuna DP: What to call human cloning. EMBO Rep 2002;3(6):502– 505

    Google Scholar 

  12. Everett M: The social life of genes: Privacy, property and the new genetics. Soc Sci Med 2003;56:53– 65

    Google Scholar 

  13. Maienschein J: On cloning: Advocating history of biology in the public interest. J Hist Biol 2001;34:423– 432

    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

    Google Scholar 

  15. Illmensee K: Cloning in reproductive medicine. J Assist Reprod Genet 2001;18(8):451– 467

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zavos PM: Human reproductive cloning: The time is near. BioMed Online 2003;6(4):397– 398

    Google Scholar 

  17. Reiss MJ: Ethical dimensions of therapeutic human cloning. J Biotechnol 2002;98:61– 70

    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

    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

    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

    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

    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

    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

    Google Scholar 

  28. Best S, Kellner D: Biotechnology, ethics and the politics of cloning. Democracy Nat 2002;8(3):439– 465

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Work, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Crete, Stavromenos, Heraklion, 71500, Greece

    Georgia Tzamalouka, Maria Papadakaki, Sevasti Chatzifotiou & Joannes El. Chliaoutakis

  2. Department of Education and Professional Studies, School of Social Science and Public Policy, King’s College London, United Kingdom

    Pelagia Soultatou

  3. Unit for Human Reproduction, 1st Department Ob/Gyn, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Basil Tarlatzis

Authors
  1. Georgia Tzamalouka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pelagia Soultatou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Papadakaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sevasti Chatzifotiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Basil Tarlatzis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joannes El. Chliaoutakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tzamalouka, G., Soultatou, P., Papadakaki, M. et al. Identifying the Public’s Knowledge and Intention to Use Human Cloning in Greek Urban Areas. J Assist Reprod Genet 22, 47–56 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-005-1493-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-005-1493-5

Key words

  • Acceptability
  • Greece
  • human cloning
  • intention
  • knowledge
  • understanding