By ‘parent’ Walters here meant the non-parent original human being from whom the asexual attempt would be made to manufacture the clone. As a result — it might be objected — the clone could, admits Walters, possibly “become depressed or behave in an antisocial manner” (such as did Dr. Frankenstein’s monster in Marry Shelley’s novel). Nevertheless, explained Walters, this possibility should not deter scientists from cloning humans. “For this hypothetical argument could also apply, however, in the case of a child conceived in the normal manner.”
Indeed, even “the creation of multiple copies of…the nucleus Donor” need not “lead to loss of identity in the clones.” For “what distinguishes one human being from another is basically the unique pattern of roles and relationships he bears among his fellows, and not any dissimilarity of his body from theirs (Mackay).” Note that both Mackay and Walters had already assumed not only that humans could be cloned. They had also assumed that such clones would be made — and that they would still be humans.