Sunday, May 28, 2006

Eugenic United Kingdom

The bioethics news out of the UK keeps getting worse. Now, according to The Sunday Times, doctors are performing late term abortions because of minor anomalies that could be surgically corrected, such as having club feet. Last year a baby was aborted at the 28th week because imaging showed it had a cleft palate! Apparently doctors are pushing this eugenic agenda. Those who pooh-pooh slippery slopes, take heed. Meanwhile, as noted earlier here, the UK now permits eugenic embryo selection based on a genetic propensity to adult onset cancer.

We will never know who we are selecting out either because of our desire not to be "burdened" by a disabled child or because we somehow don't want the child to suffer. But choosing death over a propensity to suffer would have deprived us of some of the greatest people who ever lived, not to mention some of the most wonderful who never made the history books. Indeed, by such judgments, if the current technology were available at the time, Abraham Lincoln might never have been born because he would have been tall and homely, with a depressive disorder, while Mother Theresa might have been rejected because she would be diminutive.

This striving for hyper control over our progeny is leading toward some very dark places.

1 Comments:

At May 28, 2006 , Blogger BAP said...

I think it's strange that the eugenic undercurrent among some in society seeks to claim a particular ideal of humanity or at least some supposedly sharpening picture of what humans are supposed to be physically (and psychologically if we define psychology in genetic terms as some choose to do). However, this ideal seems to be defined in general in terms of "optimal functionality," a utilitarian frame of mind.

I wonder what sorts of legal precedents and subsequent difficulties are on the horizon as we humans begin to pass laws governing the ideal humanity. As we learn more about biology in general and possibly seek to eliminate previous restrictions, we may find it difficult to repeal laws that may have unnecessarily regulated human physicality. The most effective defenses against such difficulties would be to refrain from allowing government approval of practices that would interfere with the natural development of our species while strengthening cultural traditions that cherish human life as it is, with all of its potential infirmities. We should be focusing on treating those infirmities to the best of our ability, not filtering them out by eliminating "defective" humans or some other form of "quality control." To embrace the QC mentality is to view human beings as commodities.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home