Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
FEATURE ARTICLE/ HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES Eugenics: Past, Present, and the Future main idea
Eugenics in America
Eugenics in America
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: FEATURE ARTICLE/ HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES Eugenics: Past, Present, and the Future main idea
When one contemplates the concept of eugenics, few think of modern contraception and abortion when in reality they are one in the same. The American Eugenics Society, founded in 1923, proudly proclaimed that men with incurable “conditions” should be sterilized. However these conditions were often none that could be helped, such as, one’s intelligence, race, and social class (Schweikart and Allen 529-532). The purpose of the society was to create the perfect class of men; elite in all ways. Likewise, Margaret Sanger’s feminist, contraceptive movement was not originally founded with this purpose. It was marketed as a way to control the population and be merciful to those yet to be born, again determined also by race and intelligence. The similarities in purpose actually brought the two organizations together to form a “liberating movement” to “aid women” known today as Planned Parenthood (Schweikart and Allen 529-532). The name may sound harmless, but the movement hid a darker purpose, to wean out the lower and less educated in order to create a perfect class. When created in 1923, the American Eugenics Society exemplified an air of reform with a seemingly positive purpose, however this cannot be further from the truth. In reality, the society polluted the air with myths of weeding out imperfections with the Galtonian ideal, the breeding of the fittest (Carison). The founder of the society, Charles Davensport , preached that those who are imperfect should be eliminated(Marks). From the school desk to the pulpit, the fallacies of the eugenics movement were forced into society. Preachers often encouraged the best to marry the best while biology professors would encourage DNA testing to find out ones fate (Selden). A... ... middle of paper ... ...ned Parenthood. Web. 30 Jan 2014. "Margaret Sanger: Family Planning ." Scholastic.com. scholastic, 23 Mar 1990. Web. 31 Jan 2014. Marks, John. "RacismEugenics, and the Burdens of History." personal.uncc,edu. Ix International Congress of Human Genetics, 20 Aug 1996. Web. 31 Jan 2014. "New York City." Blackdemographics.com. Black Demographics. Web. 30 Jan 2014. . "People & Events:The Pill and the Sexual Revolution." pbs.org. PBS. Web. 31 Jan 2014. Schweikart, Larry, and Michael Allen. A Patriots History of the United States. Sentinel: Penguin inc., 2007. 529-532. Print. Selden, Steve. "Eugenics Popularization." eugenicsarchive.org. University of Maryland. Web. 31 Jan 2014. Terzo, Sarag. "The Racist Underpinings of the Abortion Movement." Ligesitenews.com. Life Site News, 26 march 2013. Web. 31 Jan 2014.
Schweikart, Larry, and Michael Allen. A Patriot's History of the United States: from Columbus's Great Discovery to the War on Terror. New York, NY: Sentinel, 2007. Print.
Galton, David J., and Clare J. Galton. "Francis Galton: And Eugenics Today." Journal of Medical Ethics, 24.2 (1998): 99-101. JSTOR. Web. 8 Mar. 2010.
Additionally, compulsory sterilization efforts could be implemented. become glorified in eugenics programs. Davis asserts that the birth control proponents within the feminist movement from the very beginning determined that it was the moral. obligation of black and other minority women restrict the size of their inferrior families.
Margaret Sanger’s acclaimed speech is highly geared towards white aristocratic modernists of the 1920s, due to its intolerant view towards colored people and its emphasis of Social Darwinism. By artistically combining bigotry and science to convey to the audience that birth control is essentially looking out for the United States, she achieved her conception control stance. Had her speech been delivered in contemporary America, her shameful use of Eugenics would have made her the mockery of American society, as we are slowly progressing towards acceptance of knowledgeable topics through the use of equality and sensibility.
Until the mid 1800s, abortion was unrestricted and unregulated in the United States. The justifications for criminalizing it varied from state to state. One big reason was population control, which addressed fears that the population would be dominated by the children of newly ...
The history of harmful eugenic practices, spurring from the Nazi implementations of discrimination towards biologically inferior people has given eugenics a negative stigma (1,Kitcher, 190). Genetic testing, as Kitcher sees it through a minimalistic perspective, should be restrained to aiding future children with extremely low qualities of life (2,Kitcher, 190). He believes that genetic engineering should only be used to avoid disease and illness serving the role of creating a healthier human race. He promotes laissez-faire eugenics, a “hands off” concept that corresponds to three components of eugenic practice, discrimination, coercion and division of traits. It holds the underlying works of genetic testing, accurate information, open access, and freedom of choice. Laissez-faire eugenics promises to enhance reproductive freedom preventing early child death due to genetic disease (3,Kitcher, 198). However there are dangers in Laissez-faire that Kitcher wants to avoid. The first is the historical tendency of population control, eugenics can go from avoiding suffering, to catering to a set of social values that will cause the practice of genetics to become prejudiced, insensitive and superficial. The second is that prenatal testing will become limited to the upper class, leaving the lower class with fewer options, creating biologically driven social barriers. Furthermore the decay of disability support systems due to prenatal testing can lead to an increased pressure to eliminate those unfit for society (4,Kitcher, 214).
The Morality of Birth control originally surfaced as a pamphlet in 1918, which questioned the morality of denying knowledge surrounding a drug which could prevent pregnancy women. In 1913 Margaret Sanger worked as a nurse in a New York. There Sanger watched one woman fall ill from a household abortion. The doctor told this women to avoid pregnancy she should “have her husband sleep on the roof” (Richmond Edu, Par. 7). A few months later Sanger found the same women dead after a second self-inflicted abortion. This horrendous event pushed Sanger to advocate a right she believed all woman should have.
In the twentieth-century politics has played a vital role in the way disease is perceived by the average person. Every aspect of disease became a political concern with eugenics publically taking on a major role in public policy. Giving credit to eugenics, many Americans began to worry more about their personal genetic traits as well as the traits that they may pass on to their children. Later society became interested with eugenics on a more community-oriented basis. “The downfall of Eugenics came when reformers began to use it as a program of social control, promoting government intervention and coercion in human reproduction.”
However, I was unaware of birth control’s eugenic, racist, ableist, and classist history before this class. The article “Contested Terrain: The Historical Struggle for Fertility Control” by Susan Davis helped inform me of this history, specifically, that fertility control was imposed “on U.S. women, particularly those poor and Black, for whom they thought it as ‘socially appropriate’ to limit fertility” by feminists such as Margaret Sanger and other feminists (100). Davis’ comment that “the emphasis on birth control for Third World and poor North American women by the now-established population control organizations had an ironic double effect: While racist in intent and effect, it was also liberating to have birth control publicly accepted and available” was enlightening to my positionality on reproductive rights (100). This ironic double effect helped me change the way I think about my use of birth control, recognize the economic and racial privileges I have, and my understanding of birth control as a tool of empowerment. As a self-defined feminist, it is important to me to consider a more transnational approach to the origins of the use of birth control to understand the positionality of other females and their understanding of birth control in its application. I am now more aware of my positionality and experience with birth control and will work
The intent of my research paper is to demonstrate how the eugenics movement effected modern medicine and society in the 20th century. That will illustrate the aggressive medical approaches inflicted on individuals deemed to be mentally defective and considered to be a public health "threat". Furthermore, I will address the significant role the eugenics board, medical doctors and the government had. Which influenced and contributed to Alberta’s Sexual Sterilization Act from 1928-1972. Thus, raising awareness on Canada's history and arguing the importance of reducing prejudicial medical practices in the
First, the global history of the eugenics movement is contextually relevant to this study since eugenics policies provided the backbone which legitimized the prisoner medical experimentation program in Nazi Germany. In 1859, Charles Darwin published On the Origin of the Species, in which he elucidated his Theory of Evolution through natural selection. Darwin suggested that species arise and thrive through inherited variations that increase the species’ ability to compete, survive and reproduce in order to pass on favorable traits to offspring. Sociologist Herbert Spencer took Darwin’s Theory of Evolution one step further, by proposing that societies behave like organisms and also evolve through natural selection. Spencer believed that strong cultures containing individuals with genetically advantageous characteristics would eventually overpower weak cultures containing individuals with genetically disadvantageous characteristics. Spencer’s theory, later named Social Darwinism, expanded globally in the 1870’s providing the basis for a subsequent eugenics movement. As Richard Weikart of Johns Hopkins University, wrote “The eugenics movement emerged…forthrightly based on Darwinian presuppositions”2 [SHOULDN’T THIS FOOTNOTE ‘2’ BE AT END OF SENTENCE?]because it allowed for a scientific explanation to justify why the population should be controlled. Thus, scientists and nations sought to implement Spencer’s theory, and embraced eugenics as a means to create a better world. Eugenicists believed that in order to have a successful society with the more desired traits, individuals with “negative” characteristics should not be permitted to reproduce. One of the world’s first eugenics movements, the
Eugenics have been around in the United States as early as the nineteenth century. Sir Francis Galton, the cousin of Charles Darwin, believed the world would vastly improve with the use of selective breeding in individual with the most desirable traits. However, the people considered with unsatisfying traits, were sterilized without their permission. Numerous people found this method to be unethical and morally wrong. Many believed that creating the perfect human race was humorously impossible, considering everyone views ‘perfection’ in different ways. The attempt to perfect the human race by controlling reproduction with eugenics is not only unethical, but it is also stealing the unique traits that make a person who they truly are.
In contrast to my argument that eugenics requires further significant research, Galton argued that the provisions already conveyed regarding eugenics, such as that there is an obvious divide between the genetically well-endowed and the genetically undesirable that can be solved through selective breeding and forced sterilization, would be adequate to benefit, improve, and protect the human race from suffering which would otherwise be caused by Natural Selection (Scarfe, 2018a, 1). This would align with the Feminist Ethics of Care Paternalistic Model as well as the Instrumental Model of Care because Galton seeks to make the best decision possible for the majority of society rather than properly consider and communicate with society as a whole
In North America today, society continues to face a detrimental issue surrounding race; the stigma related to race has been slowly improving, yet there is still a somewhat collective mindset of human beings that insist on superiority. Modern racism, as compared to the past racism which is so heavily embedded in world history, is much subtler and in some cases a subconscious decision people find themselves coming to. Consequently, eugenics is a practice that can be traced all the way through history to the present. Eugenics, “the idea of manipulating human production to improve the species [that] has been traced back to Plato’s Republic,” (Barnett, 2004 p.1742) has been a deluded attempt in maintaining control over millions of people throughout