New eugenics

Last updated February 13, 2024

New eugenics, also known as liberal eugenics (a term coined by bioethicist Nicholas Agar),^[1] advocates enhancing human characteristics and capacities through the use of reproductive technology and human genetic engineering. Those who advocate new eugenics generally think selecting or altering embryos should be left to the preferences of parents, rather than forbidden (or left to the preferences of the state). "New" eugenics purports to distinguish itself from the forms of eugenics practiced and advocated in the 20th century, which fell into disrepute after World War II.^[2]

History

New eugenics is distinguished from previous versions of eugenics by its emphasis on informed parental choice rather than coercive governmental control.^[3]

Eugenics is sometimes broken into the categories of positive eugenics (encouraging reproduction among the designated "fit") and negative eugenics (discouraging reproduction among those designated "unfit"). Another distinction is between coercive eugenics and non-coercive eugenics. According to Edwin Black, many positive eugenic programs were advocated and pursued during the early 20th century, but the negative programs were responsible for the compulsory sterilization of hundreds of thousands of persons in many countries, and were contained in much of the rhetoric of Nazi eugenic policies of racial hygiene and genocide.^[4] New eugenics belongs to the positive eugenics category.^[5] Bioethicists generally consider coercive eugenics more difficult to justify than non-coercive eugenics, though coercive laws forbidding cousin marriage, for example, are widely considered justified. Compulsory sterilization of those deemed unfit is a form of coercive eugenics that has been overwhelmingly rejected in the 21st century,^[6] and is illegal under many national and international laws.

New eugenics practices

New eugenics generally supports genetic modification or genetic selection of individuals for traits that are supposed to improve human welfare. The underlying idea is to improve the genetic basis of future generations and reduce incidence of genetic diseases and other undesirable traits. Some of the practices included in new eugenics are: pre-implantation diagnosis and embryo selection,^[7] selective breeding,^[8] and human enhancement through the use of genetic technologies,^[9] such as embryo engineering or gene therapy.^[10]^[11]

Ethics

New eugenics was founded under the liberal ethical values of pluralism, which advocates for the respect of personal autonomy, and egalitarianism, which represents the idea of equality for all people. Arguments used in favor of new eugenics include that it is in the best interest of society that life succeeds rather than fail, and that it is acceptable to ensure that progeny has a chance of achieving this success.^[11] Ethical arguments against new eugenics include the claim that creating designer babies is not in the best interest of society as it might create a breach between genetically modified individuals and natural individuals.^[12] Additionally, some of these technologies might be economically restrictive further increasing the socio-economical gap.^[8]

Dov Fox, a law professor at the University of San Diego, argues that liberal eugenics cannot be justified on the basis of the underlying liberal theory which inspires its name. Instead he favors traditional, coersive eugenics, arguing that reprogenetic technologies like embryo selection, cellular surgery, and human genetic engineering, which aim to enhance general purpose traits in offspring, are not practices a liberal government leaves to the discretion of parents, but practices the state makes compulsory.^[13] Fox argues that if the liberal commitment to autonomy is important enough for the state to mandate childrearing practices such as health care and basic education, that very same interest is important enough for the state to mandate safe, effective, and functionally integrated genetic practices that act on analogous all-purpose traits such as resistance to disease and general cognitive functioning. He concludes that the liberal case for compulsory eugenics is a reductio ad absurdum against liberal theory.^[13]

The United Nations International Bioethics Committee wrote that new eugenics should not be confused with the ethical problems of the 20th century eugenics movements. They have also stated the notion is nevertheless problematic as it challenges the idea of human equality and opens up new ways of discrimination and stigmatization against those who do not want or cannot afford the enhancements.^[14]

In popular culture

Writer and director Andrew Niccol makes direct reference to new eugenics in his movie, Gattaca , via genetic discrimination between those who were altered and those who were not; with those who were not being barred from better jobs and treated differently.^{[ citation needed ]}

Related Research Articles

Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter human gene pools by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior or promoting those judged to be superior. In recent years, the term has seen a revival in bioethical discussions on the usage of new technologies such as CRISPR and genetic screening, with heated debate around whether these technologies should be considered eugenics or not.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">In vitro fertilisation</span> Assisted reproductive technology procedure

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is a process of fertilisation where an egg is combined with sperm in vitro. The process involves monitoring and stimulating a patient's ovulatory process, removing an ovum or ova from their ovaries and letting sperm fertilise them in a culture medium in a laboratory. After the fertilised egg (zygote) undergoes embryo culture for 2–6 days, it is transferred by catheter into the uterus, with the intention of establishing a successful pregnancy.

Reproductive technology encompasses all current and anticipated uses of technology in human and animal reproduction, including assisted reproductive technology (ART), contraception and others. It is also termed Assisted Reproductive Technology, where it entails an array of appliances and procedures that enable the realization of safe, improved and healthier reproduction. While this is not true of all people, for an array of married couples, the ability to have children is vital. But through the technology, infertile couples have been provided with options that would allow them to conceive children.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is the genetic profiling of embryos prior to implantation, and sometimes even of oocytes prior to fertilization. PGD is considered in a similar fashion to prenatal diagnosis. When used to screen for a specific genetic disease, its main advantage is that it avoids selective abortion, as the method makes it highly likely that the baby will be free of the disease under consideration. PGD thus is an adjunct to assisted reproductive technology, and requires in vitro fertilization (IVF) to obtain oocytes or embryos for evaluation. Embryos are generally obtained through blastomere or blastocyst biopsy. The latter technique has proved to be less deleterious for the embryo, therefore it is advisable to perform the biopsy around day 5 or 6 of development.

Human genetic enhancement or human genetic engineering refers to human enhancement by means of a genetic modification. This could be done in order to cure diseases, prevent the possibility of getting a particular disease, to improve athlete performance in sporting events, or to change physical appearance, metabolism, and even improve physical capabilities and mental faculties such as memory and intelligence. These genetic enhancements may or may not be done in such a way that the change is heritable.

Sex selection is the attempt to control the sex of the offspring to achieve a desired sex. It can be accomplished in several ways, both pre- and post-implantation of an embryo, as well as at childbirth. It has been marketed under the title family balancing.

Surrogacy is an arrangement, often supported by a legal agreement, whereby a woman agrees to delivery/labour on behalf of another couple or person, who will become the child's parent(s) after birth. People may seek a surrogacy arrangement when a couple does not wish to carry a pregnancy themselves, when pregnancy is medically impossible, when pregnancy risks are dangerous for the intended mother, or when a single man or a male same sex couple wish to have a child.

A designer baby is a baby whose genetic makeup has been selected or altered, often to exclude a particular gene or to remove genes associated with disease. This process usually involves analysing a wide range of human embryos to identify genes associated with particular diseases and characteristics, and selecting embryos that have the desired genetic makeup; a process known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Screening for single genes is commonly practiced, and polygenic screening is offered by a few companies. Other methods by which a baby's genetic information can be altered involve directly editing the genome before birth, which is not routinely performed and only one instance of this is known to have occurred as of 2019, where Chinese twins Lulu and Nana were edited as embryos, causing widespread criticism.

Human enhancement is the natural, artificial, or technological alteration of the human body in order to enhance physical or mental capabilities.

Julian Savulescu is an Australian philosopher and bioethicist of Romanian origins. He is Chen Su Lan Centennial Professor in Medical Ethics and director of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics at National University of Singapore. He was previously Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford, Fellow of St Cross College, Oxford, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, and co-director of the Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities. He is visiting professorial fellow in Biomedical Ethics at the Murdoch Children's Research Institute in Australia, and distinguished visiting professor in law at Melbourne University since 2017. He directs the Biomedical Ethics Research Group and is a member of the Centre for Ethics of Pediatric Genomics in Australia. He is a former editor and current board member of the Journal of Medical Ethics, which is ranked as the No.2 journal in bioethics worldwide by Google Scholar Metrics, as of 2022. In addition to his background in applied ethics and philosophy, he also has a background in medicine and neuroscience and completed his MBBS (Hons) and BMedSc at Monash University, graduating top of his class with 18 of 19 final year prizes in Medicine. He edits the Oxford University Press book series, the Uehiro Series in Practical Ethics.

Nicholas Agar is a New Zealand professor of ethics at the University of Waikato. Agar has a BA from the University of Auckland, an MA from the Victoria University of Wellington, and a PhD from the Australian National University. He has been teaching at Victoria since 1996.

The genetics and abortion issue is an extension of the abortion debate and the disability rights movement. Since the advent of forms of prenatal diagnosis, such as amniocentesis and ultrasound, it has become possible to detect the presence of congenital disorders in the fetus before birth. Specifically, disability-selective abortion is the abortion of fetuses that are found to have non-fatal mental or physical defects detected through prenatal testing. Many prenatal tests are now considered routine, such as testing for Down syndrome. Women who are discovered to be carrying fetuses with disabilities are often faced with the decision of whether to abort or to prepare to parent a child with disabilities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eugenics in the United States</span>

Eugenics, the set of beliefs and practices which aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population, played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States from the late 19th century into the mid-20th century. The cause became increasingly promoted by intellectuals of the Progressive Era.

Georgiann Davis is an associate professor of sociology at the University of New Mexico and author of the book Contesting Intersex: The Dubious Diagnosis. Davis formerly held similar positions at University of Nevada, Las Vegas and Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Born with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, she writes widely on intersex issues and the sociology of diagnosis.

Human germline engineering is the process by which the genome of an individual is edited in such a way that the change is heritable. This is achieved by altering the genes of the germ cells, which then mature into genetically modified eggs and sperm. For safety, ethical, and social reasons, there is broad agreement among the scientific community and the public that germline editing for reproduction is a red line that should not be crossed at this point in time. There are differing public sentiments, however, on whether it may be performed in the future depending on whether the intent would be therapeutic or non-therapeutic.

Intersex people are born with natural variations in physical and sex characteristics including those of the chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones, or genitals that, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies". Such variations may involve genital ambiguity, and combinations of chromosomal genotype and sexual phenotype other than XY-male and XX-female. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis allows the elimination of embryos and fetuses with intersex traits and thus has an impact on discrimination against intersex people.

Bioconservatism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes caution and restraint in the use of biotechnologies, particularly those involving genetic manipulation and human enhancement. The term "bioconservatism" is a portmanteau of the words biology and conservatism.

Moral enhancement, also called moral bioenhancement, is the use of biomedical technology to morally improve individuals. MBE is a growing topic in neuroethics, a field developing the ethics of neuroscience as well as the neuroscience of ethics. After Thomas Douglas introduced the concept of MBE in 2008, its merits have been widely debated in academic bioethics literature. Since then, Ingmar Persson and Julian Savulescu have been among the most vocal MBE supporters. Much of the debate over MBE has focused on Persson and Savulescu's 2012 book in support of it, Unfit for the Future? The Need for Moral Enhancement.

Vardit Ravitsky is a bioethicist, researcher, and author. She is president and CEO of The Hastings Center, a full professor at the University of Montreal, and a senior lecturer on Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. She is immediate-past president and current vice-president of the International Association of Bioethics, and the director of Ethics and Health at the Center for Research on Ethics. She is a Fellow of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, where she chaired the COVID-19 Impact Committee. She is also Fellow of The Hastings Center and of the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences.

Dmitri Dozortsev is a Russian-American physician scientist, inventor and researcher. Dozortsev's contributions in research and publications are mostly in the areas of human reproductive medicine and biology. In particular, he is best known for his studies of in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer. Dozortsev currently serves as President of the American College of Embryology and as Director of Omni-Med laboratories.

References

↑ Agar N (2004). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. ISBN 1-4051-2390-7.
↑ Goering, Sara (2 July 2014). "Eugenics". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 29 November 2014.
↑ Cavaliere, Giuli (2018). "Looking into the shadow: the eugenics argument in debates on reproductive technologies and practices". Monash Bioethics Review. 36 (1–4): 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s40592-018-0086-x . PMC 6336759 . PMID 30535862.
↑ Black E (2003). War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race . Four Walls Eight Windows. ISBN 1-56858-258-7.
↑ Witzany G (March 2016). "No time to waste on the road to a liberal eugenics?". EMBO Reports. 17 (3): 281. doi:10.15252/embr.201541855. PMC 4772985 . PMID 26882552.
↑ Buchanan A (2011). Better than Human: The Prospect and Perils of Enhancing Ourselves. p. 123. ISBN 9780190664046.
↑ King, D. S. (1999-04-01). "Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the 'new' eugenics". Journal of Medical Ethics. 25 (2): 176–182. doi:10.1136/jme.25.2.176. ISSN 0306-6800. PMC 479204 . PMID 10226925.
1 2 Hoffman, Allison K (2017-12-01). "Review of The New Eugenics: Selective Breeding in an Era of Reproductive Technologies". Journal of Law and the Biosciences. 4 (3): 671–677. doi:10.1093/jlb/lsx025. ISSN 2053-9711. PMC 5965496 .
↑ Vizcarrondo, Felipe E. (August 2014). "Human Enhancement: The New Eugenics". The Linacre Quarterly. 81 (3): 239–243. doi:10.1179/2050854914Y.0000000021. ISSN 0024-3639. PMC 4135459 . PMID 25249705.
↑ King DS (April 1999). "Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and the 'new' eugenics". Journal of Medical Ethics. 25 (2): 176–82. doi:10.1136/jme.25.2.176. PMC 479204 . PMID 10226925.
1 2 "Regulating Eugenics". Harvard Law Review. 2008. Retrieved May 2, 2015.
↑ Galton, DJ (2005-01-01). "Eugenics: some lessons from the past". Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 10: 133–136. doi:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62222-5. ISSN 1472-6483. PMID 15820025.
1 2 Fox D (2007). "The Illiberality of Liberal Eugenics". SSRN 1072104.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
↑ "Report of the IBC on Updating Its Reflection on the Human Genome and Human Rights" (PDF). International Bioethics Committee. October 2, 2015. Retrieved October 22, 2015. The goal of enhancing individuals and the human species by engineering the genes related to some characteristics and traits is not to be confused with the barbarous projects of eugenics that planned the simple elimination of human beings considered as 'imperfect' on an ideological basis. However, it impinges upon the principle of respect for human dignity in several ways. It weakens the idea that the differences among human beings, regardless of the measure of their endowment, are exactly what the recognition of their equality presupposes and therefore protects. It introduces the risk of new forms of discrimination and stigmatization for those who cannot afford such enhancement or simply do not want to resort to it. The arguments that have been produced in favour of the so-called liberal eugenics do not trump the indication to apply the limit of medical reasons also in this case.