Gene Therapy: Genocide and Eugenics or Striving for a More Perfect Population Controversy and Ethics Just as there are different types of people who look at one glass of water and describe it as half full or half empty, the public has many different views on the future of our society. Gene therapy is also a glass that can be viewed in different angles – different perspectives. Some say it has great potential to shape the ideals of our future, while others believe it signifies intolerance for disabilities, imperfections that supposedly deplete from a person’s interests, opportunities and welfare (quoted by Peter Singer, xviii). This global issue has brought people with different opinions in the open, arguing their views using history, morality and foresight. “It is human nature to strive to improve everything.” (as quoted from Ron Harris by Singer, xxii) As the world moves forward in science and technology, it seems that only humans themselves are lagging behind. Success and perfection are so important as to even play a role in determining human characteristics – once thought to be inalterable – right down to gene selection. In our increasingly capitalist society, parents want their children to be born with as much an opportunity to excel as others. It is the same well-meaning motivation that drives parents to make more money to buy a bigger house in a better community, so their children could live better and attend a higher-scoring school (Singer xvi). So with equal or greater conviction, they want their children to be born with a relatively high IQ, good looks and a healthy body. This mentality is adequately represented by a website: ronsangels.com, which sells eggs of women “with beauty and brains” to the highest bidder (... ... middle of paper ... ...ne starts life with an equal chance of health and success. Yet, gene therapy can also be thought of as a straight route towards a dark outlook, where perfection is the first priority, genes are seen as the ultimate puppeteer, and personal freedom to thrive based on one’s self isn’t believed to exist. With the emergence of each new technological discovery comes the emergence of each new ethical debate, and one day, each viewpoint on this momentous issue may be able to find a bit of truth in the other. Eventually, our society may reach a compromise on gene therapy. Bibliography: Cambridge. The Ethics of Inheritable Genetic Modification. Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy Press, 2006. Rpt. in The Ethics of Inheritable Genetic Modification. Collins, Francis S. "Foreward." Playing God? 2003. By Ted Peters. 2nd ed. Great Britain: Routledge, 2003. Rpt. in Playing God?
The eugenics movement started in the early 1900s and was adopted by doctors and the general public during the 1920s. The movement aimed to create a better society through the monitoring of genetic traits through selective heredity. Over time, eugenics took on two different views. Supporters of positive eugenics believed in promoting childbearing by a class who was “genetically superior.” On the contrary, proponents of negative eugenics tried to monitor society’s flaws through the sterilization of the “inferior.”
The second article I have chosen to evaluate for this topic is The Designer Baby Myth written by Steven Pinker. This article starts off by explaining how many people fear the idea of genetic enhancement. Several citizens are concerned about creating the ultimate inequality or changing human nature itself. Many will say technology in medicine is increasing to the point where genetic improvement is inevitable. Steven presents his position on the matter in his thesis statement; “But when it come to direct genetic enhancement-engineering babies with genes for desirable traits-there are many reasons to be skeptical.” He makes it clear that genetic enrichment is not particularly inevitable or likely in our lifetime. He bases his skepticism around three sources; the limits of futurology, science of behavioral genetics, and human nature.
The ethics behind genetic engineering have been discussed and argued for years now. Some arguing points often include competitive advantages, playing God, and the polarization of society, but Sandel takes a different approach in explaining society’s “unease” with the morality of genetic engineering. Broadcasted through several examples throughout the book, Sandel explains that genetic engineering is immoral because it takes away what makes us human and makes us something else. He states that by taking control of our genetic makeup, or the makeup of our progeny, we lose our human dignity and humility. Our hunger for control will lead to the loss of appreciation for natural gifts, whether they are certain talents, inherited from the genetic lottery, or the gift of life itself.
...safe place ended in refugee camps for homosexuals. One popular safe camp for them was located in San Francisco. Carl Whittman speaks about his experience of being in an unsafe environment and moving to a camp in San Francisco to escape.
“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
The idea of a blonde-haired, blue-eyed race is often credited to Adolf Hitler. The not as well-known part is that this idea was around before Hitler and actually was spread to Germany by eugenics scientists in the United States. In this paper we will look into the full history of eugenics and how the idea was spread across the world. Along the journey we will encounter many major donors that may be of surprise to some of us. Eugenics has been a dark presence in the history of America and will continue to be until real strides are made to end racism.
The concept of eugenics has to do with the belief or practice of improving the genetic quality of the human race (“Eugenics” 2010). The concept was first introduced by Francis Galton, a researcher who wished to apply Darwin’s theory of evolution to the human race. Much like many endeavors that start off with good intentions, the results of applying this concept in real life were gross crimes against humanity. The eugenics movement in the early 20th century perverted the original concept by employing morally objectionable techniques including forced sterilization, marriage restrictions, segregation, internment camps, and genocide (Black 2012). In War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black discusses the root of the eugenics movement in the United States of America and how this ultimately influenced the horrifying actions taken by the Nazis in pursuit of the pure Aryan race.
Imagine a parent walking into what looks like a conference room. A sheet of paper waits on a table with numerous questions many people wish they had control over. Options such as hair color, skin color, personality traits and other physical appearances are mapped out across the page. When the questions are filled out, a baby appears as he or she was described moments before. The baby is the picture of health, and looks perfect in every way. This scenario seems only to exist in a dream, however, the option to design a child has already become a reality in the near future. Parents may approach a similar scenario every day in the future as if choosing a child’s characteristics were a normal way of life. The use of genetic engineering should not give parents the choice to design their child because of the act of humans belittling and “playing” God, the ethics involved in interfering with human lives, and the dangers of manipulating human genes.
The Nazi’s perpetrated many horrors during the Holocaust. They enacted many cruel laws. They brainwashed millions into foolishly following them and believing their every word using deceitful propaganda tactics. They forced many to suffer doing embarrassing jobs and to live in crowded ghettos. They created mobile killing squads to exterminate their enemies. Finally, as part of “The Final Solution to the Jewish Question”, they made concentration and killing camps. Another thing the Nazi’s did was to use eugenics as another mean to micromanage the population. What is eugenics, you might ask? It’s the field of scientific study or the belief in genetically improving qualities, attributes and traits in the human race and/or improving the species as a whole—usually done by controlled/selective breeding. Those with positive, desirable, and superior traits are encouraged to reproduce and may be given monetary incentives by the government to have large families. Those with negative, undesirable, or inferior traits may be discouraged from having offspring. They may be sterilized, or undergo dangerous medical procedures or operations with high mortality rates. I chose this topic because it appealed to me and seemed interesting. In the following paragraphs, the tactics, methods, and propaganda the Nazi’s used will be exposed.
The eugenics movement originally started in the late 1870s because of the idea that inferior classes, criminals, poverty, feeble-minds, and disease were hereditary and reproducing would create an unfit population in the United States. Forced sterilizations and the introduction of birth control began with the demand to wipe out populations that were constructed as inferior. The early history of the birth control pill was a form of eugenics, and was not only oppressive towards women of color but to women across the United Sates.
“It 's not easy as “I want to buy and egg,” states, the director of the Donor Egg Bank, Brigid Dowd. “Not everyone realizes what 's involved, and then when they hear the cost, many just pass out.” (CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,” par. 13) It is a fact that having certain traits are valuable, so this shows that the mere modification used on the designer baby, the more the cost. “If you are too rigid or become too obsessed with finding the perfect image you have in mind, the choice can become more difficult,” says Dowd. (“CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,”par. 16) The practice of human genetic modification will not be fair because only the wealthy will have enough money to spend on designing a baby. Therefore, the wealthy will have much more advantages such as longer, healthier, and successful lives. If only people of high class are able to afford designer babies, it will cause an even greater inequality between the rich and the poor (“The Ethics of Designer Babies”). It will also create a society based on “Social Darwinism”- The survival of the fittest. If creating designer babies will cause more inequalities and Social Darwinism, why should we allow this practice? (“The ethics of Designer Babies”)
Savulescu, Julian. “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Human Beings.” Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. Ed. David Kaplan. 2nd ed. Lanham: Roman & Littlefield, 2009. 417-430.
Eugenics, the belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, is one that is still used to this day. The issue with this belief, as with many other beliefs, is that it is very flawed for more reasons than one. One of the issues that can be found with the eugenics theory can be found through its data. The other issues can be categorized in either interpretation or in the overall outcome of eugenics. Although this belief began long before Hitler, possibly in the Victorian age, it became very popular during his time in power. During this time the seemingly perfect person had blue eyes, blond hair, and was white, all others were deemed unfit for the Nordic race and were likely killed as a result of it. The eugenics movement began with great observation of family trees from many families. Ant families that had diseases of defects of any type were shunned and taken away so that there would be no more generations to come.
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.
The belief of eugenics was well-known in the 20th century and the set of its ideals were adopted by many societies across the nation. Eugenics is a study of improving human species by keeping all of the desirable races or breeds. It developed a controversial science regarding to human heredity and personal traits such as positive and negative eugenics. For example, it stated that in order to improve the genetic quality of human race, the society should encourage individuals with superior genes to produce more offspring and discourage reproduction who are considered as socially unfit. These biased eugenics ideas were inspired by Darwin’s theory of natural selection and as well as Galton’s theory of hard heredity. Even in today’s society, people