Genetics and History

On Wednesday, we heard much more than the history of genetics – we heard about genetics and history. Since Mendel’s pea experiements were rediscovered around 1900, genetics has played a not insubstantial role in shaping historical movements and social agendas. Genetics and history are interwoven and interdependent.

Dr. Gerald Allen of Washington University provided a necessarily brief but complete overview of the history of genetics while Dr. Patricia Heberer of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Dr. Brent Waters of the Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary teased out some of the historical significance and modern implications.

For instance, the eugenics programs of the early 20th century were in many ways founded in the tradition of Mendelian heredity and Darwinian evolution. Eugenics roughly translates from Greek as “good birth” and these programs thought to improve the human species by selective breeding. The eugenics argument is as follows, if many traits are hereditary (genetic) and some of these traits are undesirable, by preventing people with undesirable hereditary (genetic) traits from breeding, these traits will eventually disappear. To accomplish these goals, the eugenics movement committed atrocities not only in Nazi Germany (the Holocaust) but much closer to home. In the United States, compulsory sterilization of “undesirables” on the grounds of removing genetic heredity traits was widely employed in the early 20th century – over 60,000 “undesirables” were sterilized.

Given this significant impact on historical events and the clear dangers of certain avenues of thought regarding genetic purity and perfection, modern science and the modern public community must come to grips with the possible implications of advancements in genetic science. Genetics has been used to justify terrible acts in the past and only a concerned and attentive public can prevent the use of genetics as a justification for terrible acts in the present or the future.

How can we balance the benefits of genetics with the hazards of social stigma and discrimination? If we screen for cystic fibrosis, does that imply that we label people living with cystic fibrosis as “undesirables”? If we discover how to “design” smarter babies, will that inevitably lead to widespread use of the technology? And would that be different from trying to make our children smarter by reading to them and tutoring them in arithmetic?

These questions are complex and difficult, but they must be answered. Together we can create the world we want, using our advanced technology for good and preventing exploitation and the horrors of the past. What do you say? What is the world you would like to see?

Eric

IHC Facilitator