I remember learning about the Holocaust in elementary school. Just a quick overview: The Holocaust was the persecution and murder of about six million Jews, in Europe, by the Nazi regime beginning in the 1930s and ending in the 1940s. Germans were viewed as "racially superior" and believed the Jews, the disabled, and other non-Germans to be "inferior," thus a threat to German society. The Final Solution was the killing of these “inferior” groups of people (genocide).
I couldn’t help but reflect on The Holocaust as I read Harriet Washington’s The Black Stork: The Eugenic Control of African American Reproduction. In this piece Washington addresses the medical philosophy eugenics. Eugenics is the use of science to “improve” the genetic make-up of a population. “Eugenicists proposed that society use medical information about disease and trait inheritance to end social ills by encouraging the birth of children with good, healthy, and beautiful traits” (Washington, 191). Eugenicists also support the “weeding out of undesirable society elements by discouraging or preventing the birth of children with “bad” genetic profiles” (Washington, 191). Washington mentions how eugenics is derived from the Greek work eugenes, meaning well-born. She also mentions that well-born can be interpreted as “born healthy” and “born wealthy,” which definitions she describes as “fitting,” seeing as though the concepts of biological hereditary fitness are often confused with class and race (Washington, 191). This concept of eugenics plays on the idea of white supremacy that we have discussed this semester; “black is wack, white is right.” Knowing that the Holocaust did occur, and is apart of our history, I don’t know why it is still shocking to me that science/medicine has gone so far as to unrightfully sterilize African American women in an effort to “purify” the human race.
I read about a lady named Elaine Riddick who after being raped by her neighbor in 1967 in North Carolina, and becoming pregnant, the doctors cut and tied her fallopian tubes after the birth of the child. This African American woman was not informed about that procedure. Come to find out, a eugenics board voted and ruled on her sterilization saying that poverty, promiscuity, and alcoholism were inheritable traits and a threat to society’s gene pool. In this aspect, eugenics is just a way to eliminate the black population, a secretive/discreet form of genocide?
Is eugenics ever okay? I’ve seen a mentally challenged mother carrying what seemed to be a mentally challenged baby. Admittedly, I thought is this humane? Should that woman and people in conditions similar to her's be “allowed,” dare I say it, to reproduce? What about the quality of life those children might endure because of heredity/genetics? I personally know a mentally ill female who aspires to be a mother. Again, what about the quality of life that child might endure? So I ask, is it EVER appropriate for someone other than that particular individual to make drastic reproduction decisions?. . .Who’s to say that individual has the mental capacity or is in the right state of mind to make those types of decisions for themselves?
I am in a sociology class this semester and we talked about eugenics and just about every question you brought up. I think the big one is "is eugenics ever okay?" and that is such a complex question. It's so hard to answer because it is not a yes or no question, but a question that dances in the grey area (like much of what we talk about in this class). Saying eugenics is okay causes a huge problem and I wouldn't doubt that it would start. Saying no to eugenics takes out of the equation people who are mentally or physically unable to have/care for the child. There are so many angles to the debate it is hard to even make a strong point.
ReplyDeleteIn my sociology class we talked about the college process being a form of eugenics. You don’t think so…well think some more. We apply to colleges where they look for people with the highest level of achievement. This includes family name, family income, high school (private/public), hometown, race and more. Is it not a “weeding out” process of those who are inferior to the standards?
I have always felt that genetically tampering with our population in order to breed the 'ideal offspring' (and what is ideal, anyway?) is wrong. There are inherently far more important things than genetics which ultimately form people into what they become later in life. If someone is impoverish, promiscuous or alcoholic more likely is it a factor of their upbringing than their genes. Race, learning disabilities and other factors are just a small portion of a person's character, and trying to weed the 'bad apples', as some might label them, out of our gene pool is certainly bordering on ethnic cleansing.
ReplyDeleteBut then there are instances in which those eugenics aren't necessarily aimed towards crafting an idealized version of our population, but rather improving one's immunity towards potentially fatal diseases. Making us live longer. Are eugenics okay then?
As Dayna pointed out, it's a complicated matter. On the one hand, eugenics is an inherently awkward proposal simply because it suggests that all humans aren't necessarily created equal. That there are ideal examples of human specimen.
On the other hand, we always strive to improve the quality of life here on earth. That is our ultimate goal.
But when does striving to achieve that goal become an ethical dilemma?
I think you bring up some very complex and powerful questions. I do not believe that there will ever be one simple correct answer and there will always be a debate with many sides. From reading Washington article, I came to the conclusion that eugenics in some ways is a human rights violation. Eugenics is a form of control and oppression on the body. Its ultimate goal is to create the perfect human, but no one is perfect. Our genes do not reflect what kind of person we will become later in life, rather a way to construct ideal looks of a human. It is an extremely shallow concept that I do not think the human race will ever escape.
ReplyDeleteWe never know what quality of life a person will experience, coming from any sort of mother--alcoholic, mentally ill, etc. Assuming that a child will be negatively influenced because their mother and/or father are white or black or anything associated with a specific experience, is difficult. This is why eugenics doesn't really make sense to me.
ReplyDeleteWe don't know what decisions are the right ones, and assuming a child born with medical conditions won't be as influential or important as a child born without, is wrong.