Is eugenics really all that bad? (On an individual level)

[dowie]

Not as in anything forced or mandated by some authoritarian state but simply an individual parent/mother selecting for or against certain traits. Is that bad? Examples:

• A woman has IVF out of choice, she's had one boy and would now like a girl (no general gender preference or imbalance in her country) - is that bad? If so why?

• A woman has blue eyes but her partner has brown eyes, she'd like her IVF kid to have blue eyes if that possibly exists among her embryos - is that bad?

• A woman is pregnant, after a few weeks she is screened and told the baby very likely has Down's syndrome, she chooses to abort it - is that bad?

• As per the previous one but, it's a rare genetic disease - kid will have no quality of life, round-the-clock care and die in a few years. She chooses to abort - Is that bad?

• A woman goes to a sperm bank, she wants a sperm donor who is the same race as her + has at least an undergrad degree - is that eugenics? Is it bad?

• A woman on tinder, wants husband/family but only wants to date 6ft+ guys with good hair who earn over 100k - is that eugenics? Is that bad?

I saw two things on social media recently that made me question this stuff, firstly some people with autism or autistic people (there is a whole bun fight about that too) were kicking off about a genetic study, worried, in part, about a cure but also "eugenics" etc..

Then secondly, there was this silly Texas abortion limit prompting the parents of Down's syndrome kids to post about how much love their kid brings etc... and how cruel it is that other people might want to abort them etc..

It strikes me that some of these campaigners are using "eugenics" in the same way religious anti-abortion types use "murder"... just as a deliberately emotive phrase. Surely abortion should be "my body my choice" from the perspective of the woman who is pregnant? These other campaigners imposing their preferences re: autism, or Down's syndrome etc.. seemingly aren't, in that respect, too different to Religious people imposing their preferences of say, only allowing it in medical emergencies or cases of rape etc...

 

[Dalandius]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAhjPd4uNFY

Once that door is open it is going to be hard to close.

 

[Rroff]

There are a lot of points there. Personally I kind of lean in favour of people having the choice not to bring someone into this world who has something likes Downs syndrome which would seriously impact their quality of life but totally against filtering for conditions which may simply be undesirable or require the parents to put some effort in :s

One of the big problems with this topic though is when it comes down to the old "what does it matter if little old me does this" when the reality is there are 100s or 1000s of "little old me" doing it which results in a problem such as narrowing the genetic pool to a troubling level or something.

 

[danlightbulb]

Its one of those things that seems ok in moderation but when you take it to extremes it could have serious repercussions down the line I guess.

Undertones of selecting for perfect traits etc, aka Hitler.

Personally Im not against exploring it in the name of science. It would be good to be able to eliminate genetic disability.

 

[Cooler running]

I believe it will be inevitable.

The real issues are applied Eugenics, as it can be extremely dangerous, especially at the moment.
As soon as bio-engineering gets good enough, it will become like cars, dangerous but a necessary part of society.

All that said, I personally would not advocate for Eugenics based policy until a high level of technology is obtained, doing this sort of thing carelessly is not a good idea.
To answer your questions:

• A woman has IVF out of choice, she's had one boy and would now like a girl (no general gender preference or imbalance in her country) - is that bad? If so why?

That's not Eugenics, IVF is a fertility treatment.
For the most part it's a good thing.

• A woman has blue eyes but her partner has brown eyes, she'd like her IVF kid to have blue eyes if that possibly exists among her embryos - is that bad?

Yes, that's Eugenics - the woman has selected a trait.
It's a little bad, but I wouldn't make it strictly illegal.
Ideally designer genetics as the choice of those affected - the child's choice. I don't approve of anyone making a life changing decision for me.

• A woman is pregnant, after a few weeks she is screened and told the baby very likely has Down's syndrome, she chooses to abort it - is that bad?

Yes, that's Eugenics.
Whether it's bad is a complicated utilitarian issue.
It's a question of wills in my book, aborting it is evil, but the parent's also shouldn't be encumbered with the care to a point where they are miserable (and the parent's will not endeavor to provide a good life). I'd probably say that if the state can't afford to care for the child, then aborting it should be considered. In rich countries I'd encourage the mother to carry it to birth, then have the child adopted. In a perfect world you would use technology to cure the child after it is born.

• As per the previous one but, it's a rare genetic disease - kid will have no quality of life, round-the-clock care and die in a few years. She chooses to abort - Is that bad?

Yes, that's Eugenics.
Whether it's bad is a complicated utilitarian issue.
Same answer as above but more extreme, if there is a cure then the state should take it upon itself to cure that child after it is born. If there is little hope, then I can see why this could be considered mercy.

• A woman goes to a sperm bank, she wants a sperm donor who is the same race as her + has at least an undergrad degree - is that eugenics? Is it bad?

Yes, that's Eugenics.
No it's not bad in any way.
Choosing who we reproduce with is one of the most fundamental rights. I wouldn't expect any woman to agree to get given "random" sperm. Whether it's a preference based on race, height, hair colour, face shape, career, achievements, IQ, whatever; it shouldn't matter.

• A woman on tinder, wants husband/family but only wants to date 6ft+ guys with good hair who earn over 100k - is that eugenics? Is that bad?

Yes, that's Eugenics.
It's not bad ethically, but it is stupid.
The woman has her freedoms, including the freedoms to post a shallow tinder profile. Doesn't mean she's going to get it. People who are more flexible will have a larger choice of men who may bring her greater happiness, more wealth or more beautiful children. The fussier you are, the more likely a good one is to pass you by. It's a risk reward calculation we all have to play while dating.

It strikes me that some of these campaigners are using "eugenics" in the same way religious anti-abortion types use "murder"

Well, it was an ethos associated with the Nazi party, it historically did result in murder. It's a dangerous thought, not to be taken lightly.
I class it in a similar group of legal issues such as AI - a high risk high reward situation, that needs a strong legal framework.

 

[Rroff]

A woman goes to a sperm bank, she wants a sperm donor who is the same race as her + has at least an undergrad degree - is that eugenics? Is it bad?

As an aside how does that even work heh - I know people with an undergrad degree or better or the likes whose children are - well I have nothing positive to say about them conversely some of the more gifted people I know have very ordinary parents - it largely seems to be a mix of "fluke" of genetics and the environment they are brought up in.

 

[Angilion]

[..]
To answer your questions:

That's not Eugenics, IVF is a fertility treatment.

In the scenario the OP gave, IVF was being used as a means of selecting a trait. Which you gave as the defining feature of eugenics in your next answer:

Yes, that's Eugenics - the woman has selected a trait.

Assuming you meant 'inevitable', I agree with all of these things you said:

I believe it will be enviable.

The real issues are applied Eugenics, as it can be extremely dangerous, especially at the moment.
As soon as bio-engineering gets good enough, it will become like cars, dangerous but a necessary part of society.

All that said, I personally would not advocate for Eugenics based policy until a high level of technology is obtained, doing this sort of thing carelessly is not a good idea.
[..]
I class it in a similar group of legal issues such as AI - a high risk high reward situation, that needs a strong legal framework.

 

[RoboCod]

I'm all for being able to eradicate disease and ensuring your child isn't born with a disability. However, the biggest issue is that at first these developments will drive a further divide in society between those who can afford it and those who cannot. If we can get past that and make eugenics available to all then the world I imagine would be a better place. I think it would even get to a point where authorities will state that you're well entitled to go procreate the "traditional" way, but if you choose to do that then that child won't be entitled to free health care if it is born with any afflictions due to your "unethical" choice in rolling the dice on their health.

This is a great podcast by Jamie Metzl, who wrote a book called Hacking Darwin. Well worth a listen because he talks a bit about the ethics of it all, which will probably be the biggest challenge for society regarding all this. You think masks and vaccines were hot debates, imagine the social media rants to come, you ain't seen nothing yet

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1M...mEG7TMNCjMlg&utm_source=copy-link&dl_branch=1

 

[Tefal]

On the autism topic they do have a point 90% of mothers choose to abort after a positive downs test.


The company is attempting to produce genetic testing it's quite likely we would see similar numbers.

 

[Em3bbs]

Are arranged marriages eugenics by the parents?

 

[montymint]

The bottom two of @dowie’s examples imo are not eugenics, they’re natural selection. You’re not actively using science to pick traits - it’s still random to a degree.

Same with arranged marriages.

 

[Terminal_Boy]

If Eugenics can remove all traces of Sky Pixie belief in humans, we should embrace it immediately.

 

[EdwardTeach]

Are arranged marriages eugenics by the parents?

Often, it is more like the opposite. It is common for arranged marriages to include an element of inbreeding, which makes the accumulation of genetic defects more likely.

Genetic defects are much more common in Britains Pakistani community, where cousin marriage is prevalent.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

is that bad?

There is no good or bad, right or wrong. Unless this is a religious thread?

I would suggest the repetitive question should have been, "is this acceptable?"

 

[Dis86]

Eugenics is brilliant. What some people would do with it is horrible.

 

[Richard - London]

eugenics and transhumanism is the future, we should embrace it before being left behind.

 

[tom_e]

eugenics and transhumanism is the future, we should embrace it before being left behind.

Who are we racing against, the aliens?

 

[Richard - London]

Who are we racing against, the aliens?

Chine? Russia? All the other counties in the world?

 

[413x]

It's inevitable.
Imagine being the only non optimised kid in a sea of optimised kids.
Or disabled when no one else is.
Or you get a genetic condition when no one else has.

I'd love to be optimised. I expect most individuals would be.

It will happen. Guaranteed

 

[413x]

Eugenics is brilliant. What some people would do with it is horrible.

This! Absolutely this

You could wipe out genetic disease and more.
But some really weird stuff could come out of it. Think of designer dogs. Now think of what some people like. And would love thier kids to be.

Webbed hands and feet, multiple limbs, vulcan ears, strongest person ever, .. The potential is vast... But the effects? I'm sure many we can't even imagine!