Eugenics acquired a bad press when the only way of determining the presence of deleterious genes was by observation of the parental phenotype, but today the store of genetic knowledge and reproductive technology is vastly greater than at any time in the past and the rate of acquisition of new knowledge and techniques for avoiding the transmission of defective genes to future generations is accelerating. The author discusses the brightening future for voluntary eugenic intervention, but warns against the dangers inherent in government regulation. Key Words: bioethics, Galtonian Revolution, eugenics, reproductive technologies, in vitro fertilization, cryogenic preservation, nuclear substitution The first century or two of the new millennium will almost certainly be a golden age for Through application of new genetic knowledge and reproductive technologies the Galtonian Revolution will come to fruition. This new revolution in the new millennium, which I call the Galtonian Revolution (Whitney, 1995; 1997a) will be more momentous for the future of mankind than was the Copernican Revolution or the Darwinian Revolution. For with the Galtonian Revolution, for the first time, the major changes will not be to ideas alone, but rather the major change will be to mankind itself. In order to briefly discuss some of the reproductive technology that will contribute to the new eugenics, I need first to define the term eugenics. So many different people with so many different agendas have appropriated this neat word, coined by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, that the word by itself can stand for almost anything (Whitney, 1990). Surely to some is a route to prevention rather than mere treatment of the ills of humanity. Also a path to the greatest good for the greatest number. To others is a new blasphemy, a devil-word; a term of hate and abhorrence, a term that in word associations is supposed to be linked with Hitler, Holocaust, genocide and the murder of innocents. For the purposes of today's talk the definition of eugenics is one given by Sir Francis Galton himself, In 1904 at a meeting of the Sociological Society, Sir Francis said: Eugenics is the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those that develop them to the utmost advantage. It is interesting, and overlooked by many, that Galton's own definition included both nature and nurture approaches to the improvement of humanity. In that same talk Galton (1904) went on to briefly address what is meant by improvement. is meant by the syllable Eu in Eugenics, whose English equivalent is good? First of all, he explained, the goodness of a trait depended upon the balance of that trait with others in appropriate proportions, thus goodness was relative to the balance of traits in the individual and also to the make-up of the population. What was good might be much influenced by education, and the goodness or badness of traits was not an absolute, but relative to the current form of civilization. Thus Galton suggested that as much as possible we should keep morals out of the discussion and avoid absolutes, to keep out of endlessly entangling philosophical distinctions. One wishes that some of our current crop of so-called bioethicists would heed this advice. Galton suggested that although no agreement could be reached as to absolute morality, the essentials of Eugenics may be easily defined. All creatures would agree that it was better to be healthy than sick, vigorous than weak, well fitted than ill-fitted for their part in life. In short that it is better to be good rather than bad specimens of their kind, whatever that kind might be. So with men.'(Galton, 1904: 36). And so with men. As we approach the new millennium we have at our call a reproductive technology that is beyond any imagined by the early eugenicists. …
Read full abstract