Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note on Eugenics
eugenics and its impact
effects of genetic testing on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Short note on Eugenics
The history of harmful eugenic practices, spurring from the Nazi implementations of discrimination towards biologically inferior people has given eugenics a negative stigma (1,Kitcher, 190). Genetic testing, as Kitcher sees it through a minimalistic perspective, should be restrained to aiding future children with extremely low qualities of life (2,Kitcher, 190). He believes that genetic engineering should only be used to avoid disease and illness serving the role of creating a healthier human race. He promotes laissez-faire eugenics, a “hands off” concept that corresponds to three components of eugenic practice, discrimination, coercion and division of traits. It holds the underlying works of genetic testing, accurate information, open access, and freedom of choice. Laissez-faire eugenics promises to enhance reproductive freedom preventing early child death due to genetic disease (3,Kitcher, 198). However there are dangers in Laissez-faire that Kitcher wants to avoid. The first is the historical tendency of population control, eugenics can go from avoiding suffering, to catering to a set of social values that will cause the practice of genetics to become prejudiced, insensitive and superficial. The second is that prenatal testing will become limited to the upper class, leaving the lower class with fewer options, creating biologically driven social barriers. Furthermore the decay of disability support systems due to prenatal testing can lead to an increased pressure to eliminate those unfit for society (4,Kitcher, 214). Kitcher introduces Utopian eugenics, as a solution that improves the quality of an embryonic life. He envisions a world where education is used to enlighten peoples understanding of molecular genetics and allows t... ... middle of paper ... ...of eugenics to create tailored humans with customized characteristics. The eugenic decision-making that drives all aspects of life in Gattaca strays from the basic principles of determinism. While the advancement of genetic technology should allow for more power and freedoms to express an individuals own values and experiences like Kitcher and Stock imagine, in Gattaca social pressures drive eugenic decisions. The film illustrates actual possibilities of how human life and human societies may operate if responsible eugenics isn’t practiced. It is human nature to advance and adapt to our changing environments, improvements in technology are merely new means of doing so. But as humans we embody ethical values and morals that will always influence our decisions. As a culture influenced by our inherent biology, who is to say that our culture will not remold our biology?
To choose for their children, the world’s wealthy class will soon have options such as tall, pretty, athletic, intelligent, blue eyes, and blonde hair. Occasionally referred to as similar to “the eugenics of Hitler’s Third Reich” (“Designer Babies” n.p.), the new genetics technology is causing differences in people’s opinions, despite altering DNA before implantation is “just around the corner.” (Thadani n.p.). A recent advance in genetically altering embryos coined “designer babies” produces controversy about the morality of this process.
When James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA in 1959, they could not have known that their discovery would one day lead to the possibility of a human factory that is equipped with the capabilities to mass produce perfectly designed, immortal human beings on a laboratory assembly line. Of course, this human factory is not yet possible; genetic technology is still in its infancy, and scientists are forced to spend their days unlocking the secret of human genetics in hopes of uncovering cures for diseases, alleviating suffering, and prolonging life. In the midst of their noble work, scientists still dream of a world—a utopia—inhabited by flawless individuals who have forgotten death and never known suffering. What would become of society if such a utopia existed? How will human life be altered? Leon Kass, in Life, Liberty and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics, acknowledges genetics technology’s greatness, and applauds it for its invaluable, benevolent contributions to mankind. However, Kass argues that if left to their devises and ambitions, geneticists—with the power of their technology—will steal away society’s most precious asset; genetic technology will rob society of its humanity. Genetic technology can, and will, achieve great things, but unless it is regulated and controlled, the losses will be catastrophic and the costs will far exceed the benefits.
“The problem with eugenics and genetic engineering is that they represent the one-sided triumph of willfulness over giftedness, of dominion over reverence, of molding over beholding” (Sandel, 2004, p.59).
...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.
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.
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.”
Perkins, H.F.. A Decade of Progress in Eugenics: Scientific Papers of the Third International Congress of Eugenics. 1993 Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company.
"Eugenics: Did the Eugenics Movement Benefit the United States?" History in Dispute. Ed. Robert J. Allison. Vol. 3: American Social and Political Movements, 1900-1945: Pursuit of Progress. Detroit: St. James Press, 2000. 17-23. Canada In Context. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
In the motion picture Gattaca directed by Andrew Niccol questions the ability of allowing genetic potential, calculated by birth, to establish the fate of an individual. The determination of a person’s destiny proved impossible and preposterous as mankind were defined by their capability to make decisions on their own concerning their future. The film exhibits the problems in a genetically engineered society. Development of science technologies has advanced exceedingly to the extent where immediately after birth an infant’s destiny can be identified just by taking a blood sample. This gives a glimpse at the person’s future and the opportunity to discriminate: ‘…no longer determined by social status or the colour of your skin. We now have discrimination down to a science’. Society in Gattaca was divided into two classes valids and in-valids.
Ronald M. Green answers that there are four major objections to the concept of ‘building babies” through gene engineering, arguing that basic human nature counters the possibility that parental love or people’s appreciation of their nature counters the possibility that parental love or people’s appreciation of their natural abilities will decline; that a society making extensive use of gene manipulation is as likely to move towards egalitarianism as toward oligarchy; and that no religion expressly forbids genetic engineering. Green’s major four points are first, they worry about the effect of genetic selection on parenting. He states that will the ability to choose our children’s biological inheritance lead parents to replace unconditional love with a consumerist mentality that seeks perfections? Second, they ask weather gene manipulation will diminish our freedom by making us creatures of our genes or our parents’ whims. An example Green uses is “In his book Enough, the techno- critic Bill Mckibben asks: if I am a world- class runner, but my parents inserted the “Sweatworks2010 Gene Pack” in my genome, can I really feel pride in my accomplishments? Third, he states that many critics feat that reproductive genetic will widen our social division as the affluent “buy” more competitive abilities of their offspring. Green also states that will we eventually see “speciation,” that emergence to two
Regardless of one’s reason to practice eugenics, either to solve medical issues or commit discrimination, the misuse of this technology can affect the genetic diversity of the entire specie. Since the decline in genetic diversity threatens the existence of the specie, people must put regulations on the practice of genetic modification, and eugenics as a whole, to preserve genetic diversity. In Owning Genetic Information and Gene Enhancement Techniques, professor Adam D. Moore wrote, “If humans were to achieve genetic homogeneity (a genetic uniformity obtained by gene enhancement techniques), then a newly emerged disease could decimate the entire human population, since all individuals would be susceptible.” Furthermore, during an United Nation
When created in 1923, the American Eugenics Society exemplified an air of reform with a seemingly positive purpose, however this cannot be further from the truth. In reality, the society polluted the air with myths of weeding out imperfections with the Galtonian ideal, the breeding of the fittest (Carison). The founder of the society, Charles Davensport , preached that those who are imperfect should be eliminated(Marks). From the school desk to the pulpit, the fallacies of the eugenics movement were forced into society. Preachers often encouraged the best to marry the best while biology professors would encourage DNA testing to find out ones fate (Selden). A...
Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development, is the book in which Sir Francis Galton first mentioned the term eugenics. In the book he says that “humans believe that humans were disrupting evolution in maintaining the weak and sickly through social welfare programs, mental institutions and the like.”
Eugenics began to dynamically thrive after the rediscovery of Mendel's theory in 1900. He argued that the biological make up of organisms are formed by certain aspects, later identified with genes (Kevles). The dispute that the gene pool was a very important factor in reproduction led to the action of picking out only the “desirable” individuals. Through lab work, reports, and articles from scientist it was assumed that every individu...