The New Eugenics
By Michael Dorsey,
World Watch
| 06. 30. 2002
On a not too distant horizon, advances in human biotechnology
may enable us to engineer the specific genetic makeup of our
children. Only a few months ago, the headlinemaking Italian
doctor Severino Antinori claimed to have implanted cloned embryos
in several women. We are already at the stage where we can selectively
terminate our offspring if certain genetic criteria are not
met. Soon it may be possible to discern, and ultimately select
for or against, individual traits in our children.
It is at this juncture that the promise of biotechnology runs
head-on into the history and the horrors of eugenics— the
quest for biological “improvement” through reproductive
control.
At the start of the 20th century, British scientist Francis
Galton coined the term eugenics, from the Greek eugenes, for
“well-born.” He later distinguished two major kinds
of eugenics, positive and negative. “Positive eugenics”
was preferential breeding of socalled “superior individuals”
in order to improve the genetic stock of the human race. “Negative
eugenics” meant discouraging or legally prohibiting reproduction
by individuals thought to have “inferior” genes and
was to be “achieved...
Related Articles
By Rob Stein, NPR [cites CGS' Katie Hasson] | 08.06.2025
A Chinese scientist horrified the world in 2018 when he revealed he had secretly engineered the birth of the world's first gene-edited babies.
His work was reviled as reckless and unethical because, among other reasons, gene-editing was so new...
By Susanna Smith, Genetic Frontiers | 07.28.2025
Key Topics
How does the American far right view genetics and genetic technologies?
What is the history of the American cultural pursuit of trying to choose smarter children? What has science shown us about the relationship of heredity and intelligence...
By Arthur Caplan and James Tabery, Scientific American | 07.28.2025
An understandable ethics outcry greeted the June announcement of a software platform that offers aspiring parents “genetic optimization” of their embryos. Touted by Nucleus Genomics’ CEO Kian Sadeghi, the $5,999 service, dubbed “Nucleus Embryo,” promised optimization of...
By John H. Evans, Craig Callender, Neal K. Devaraj, Farren J. Isaacs, and Gregory E. Kaebnick, Issues in Science and Technology | 07.04.2025
The controversy around a ban on “mirror life” should lead to a more nuanced public conversation about how to manage the benefits and risks of precursor biotechnologies.
About five years ago, the five of us formed a discussion group to...