eugenics

Eugenics – “the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding” – has a bad name. Perverted, first and last by “do-gooders” and racists in the United States, including, especially, in North Carolina, and, most atrociously, by the Nazi thugs of the 1930’s and 40’s, eugenics need not be the evil that it has been made to be. Geneticists speak of eugenics as being both “positive” and “negative.” Positive eugenics refers to the attempt to enhance desirable characteristics in offspring by judicious mate selection. We all do this to some degree in choosing those with whom we breed. Attributes like physical characteristics, intelligence, or others all influence our choice. There is nothing wrong in this so as it is voluntary. Negative eugenics refers to the attempt to eliminate undesirable characteristics through judicious mate selection or refraining from mating altogether. Negative eugenics has resulted in the near total elimination of Tay Sachs disease. Carriers of the Tay Sachs gene voluntarily refrained from breeding with other carriers. Thus, eugenics, like all science, is neither good nor bad. But, it was used sinfully, either by bad people who knew exactly what they were doing, or good people whose moral and ethical compass got lost. Today we are faced with the challenge of doing the right thing. Unfortunately, the work of the Governor's Eugenics Compensation Task Force was to "recommend possible methods or forms of compensation" to those forcibly sterilized. Its result, therefore, was preordained. While justice, compassion, and a plain sense of wanting to do what's right would seem to demand compensation, it is not clear that taxes and fees paid today by the populous, most of whom neither were responsible for nor beneficiaries of the Eugenics Program, ought to be used for this purpose, especially if such monies might be redirected from more broadly targeted social welfare initiatives. The Force concludes that compensation serves two purposes: (i) providing meaning assistance to survivors; and, (ii) sending a clear message that "we..pay for our mistakes and...do not tolerate bureaucracies that trample on basic human rights." It is not clear how the $50000 lump sum payment does either. A lump sum used to buy non-essentials in no way compensates. It is a windfall. This should be contrasted with the Force's additional recommendations of medical care and mental health services. More can and should be debated of providing a cash lump sum. Not much consideration has been given to the obligations of those who directly benefited both financially and in other ways from this horrific program. For example, doctors and medical institutions undoubtedly received money and other compensation. Locally, procedures were performed by the County Health Department; but, one private institution acknowledges that its participation constituted a "breach of ethics and moral principle." Available evidence indicates that, in 1943, as "few" as 30 sterilizations were performed locally with genetic work-ups and medical affidavits supplied by the institution and all expense borne by the County. A doctor claimed that he had performed as many as six sterilizations in one week. And, the County supplied funds for an institution to hire a Department head. In return, the doctor performed sterilizations. What is the responsibility of this and other like-situated institutions to cleanse themselves of the stench of what they did? This question challenges members of the legislature, academics and all members of the public. Most of all, it should challenge the Management of those institutions (and the individuals) who participated in ruining the lives. These institutions could, with very little incremental cost,unlimited medical and mental health services to victims. Limited numbers still are alive; other social welfare programs already pay. The incremental financial exposure would represent only a "rounding error." In North Carolina, there is no statute of limitations barring the prosecution of felonies, like the eugenic assaults and batteries. Why has some ambitious prosecutor not considered charges,with the resulting restitution going to victims.