Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T22:45:59.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eugenics Is Alive and Well: A Survey of Genetic Professionals around the World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Dorothy C. Wertz
Dorothy C. Wertz
Affiliation:
Division of Social Science, Ethics and Law Shriver Center, Waltham, Massachusetts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A survey of 2901 genetics professionals in 36 nations suggests that eugenic thought underlies their perceptions of the goals of genetics and that directiveness in counseling after prenatal diagnosis leads to individual decisions based on pessimistically biaed information, especially in developing nations of Asia and Eastern Europe. The “non-directive counseling” found in English-speaking nations is an aberration from the rest of the world. Most geneticists, except in China, rejected government involvement in premarital testing or sterilization, but most also held a pessimistic view of persons with genetic disabilities. Individual, but not state-coerced, eugenics survives in much modern genetic practice.

Type
Genetic Services Eugenic Practices?
Information
Science in Context , Volume 11 , Issue 3-4 , Autumn-Winter 1998 , pp. 493 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, Garland E. 1989. “Eugenics and American Social History.” Genome 31:885–889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, Pamela, and Wertz, Dorothy C.. 1997. “Genetic Counseling Practices in Germany: A Comparison Between East German and West German Geneticists.” Journal of Genetic Counseling 6:61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, F. Clarke. 1974. “Genetic Counselling.” American Journal of Human Genetics 26:636–661.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 1996. The Lives to Come. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Mao, Xin, and Wertz, Dorothy C.. 1997. “China's Genetic Service Providers' Attitudes Towards Several Ethical Issues: A Cross-Cultural Survey. Clinical Genetics 52:100–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mill, J. S. 1855 [1991]. On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Paul, Diane B. 1992. “Eugenic Anxieties, Social Realities, and Political Choices.” Social Research 59:663–683.Google Scholar
Qiu, Ren-Zong. 1994. “Medical Ethics and Chinese Culture.” In Transcultural Dimensions in Medical Ethics, edited by Pellegrino, Edward, 155–174. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C. 1993. “Prenatal Diagnosis and Society.” Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies, New Reproductive Technologies: Ethical Aspects, 191–332.Google Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C. 1997a. “Is There a ‘Women's Ethic’ in Genetics? A 37-Nation Survey of Providers,” Journal of the American Medical Women's Association 52:33–38.Google Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C. 1997b. “Society and the Not-So-New Genetics: What Are We Afraid Of?” Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 13:299–346.Google Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C. 1997c. “International Perspectives on Privacy and Access to Genetic Information.” Microbial and Comparative Genomics 2:53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C., and Fletcher, John C.. 1989. Ethics and Human Genetics: A Cross-cultural Perspective. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C., and Fletcher, John C.. 1993. “A Critique of Some Feminist Challenges to Prenatal Diagnosis.” Journal of Women's Health 2:173–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wertz, Dorothy C., and Fletcher, John C.. 1998. “Ethical and Social Issues in Prenatal Sex Selection.” Social Science and Medicine 46:255–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wertz, Dorothy C., Fletcher, John C. and Mulvihill, John J.. 1990. “Medical Geneticists Confront Ethical Dilemmas: Cross-cultural Comparisons A18 Nations.” American Journal of Human Genetics 46:1200–1213.Google Scholar