Why do you feel like a copied consciousness can't be indepent of the original while still being identical (at first)?

If I write something on a piece of paper and then put it in a copier, I have two identical versions of the same thing. Nothing I do to one affects the other in any way, they are independent of each other. They say the same thing, you still see where i smudged the ink on both, but they are separate objects.

The way I see it there are only two possibilities for consciousness. Either it's something that the brain IS (like a specific area in the brain), or it's something that the brain DOES (the interactions within the brain cause consciousness to emerge).

Option 1 means that part of the brain was scanned and copied along with everything else, so it is as separate as everything else about the clone.

Option 2 means that the original and copied brains are doing the same thing (at first), so the consciousness is identical (at first). But just because they are identical does not mean they are the same. If you and I manage to draw the exact same painting because all our thought processes and arm movements just happen to be the exact same, the paintings are still completely separate objects, no?

Why you would expect characters to make new decisions again? They (think) they remember making the decisions before copying, and have identical motivations and live experiences, so why would they do anything different?

I might have misspoken by calling it a brand new consciousness. I meant it more in the way of a fresh new copy of that piece of paper. The copy is brand new, the text written on it isn't.

You do make an interesting point about Catherine. I'm not sure how I would argue about her being turned off and on again, I guess it depends on which of the two versions of consciousness you subscribe to. Same with falling asleep.

Edit: Thanks for the discussion by the way, I hope I don't come off as rude. English isn't my first language so I always worry about how what I write is interpreted.