THE ETHICAL “COLLATERAL DAMAGE” OF QUASI-EUGENICS

Resnick Auditorium

Objective. My goal was to find a new terminology for such techniques (i.e., Prenatal diagnosis, Prenatal Screening Program, PGD - pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, PGS - pre-implantation genetic selection, Three Parent In Vitro Fertilization babies, designer babies), and to emphasize their flaws as “collateral damage”, including the extreme costs and the limited applicability for a few select people. Background. “Eugenics” is “a science dealing with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed.” This definition is not entirely suitable for the new advanced techniques in genetically engineering human beings, purposely amending the human race and its perspectives for the future. Methods. An electronic search was performed in PubMed; Medline; Ovid to identify English language articles from 1996 through 2012 containing the words eugenics, new-eugenics, genetically engineering humans, biomedical ethics, and the named techniques. 128 articles were identified, 58 were screened and excluded based on title and abstract, and 23 based on the content. Results. 36 articles making direct or indirect reference to the ethically challenged methodologies were included in the study. Attention was given to the articles including controversies and innovative terms. The author expresses his concerns and opinions over the ideas expressed on both sides of the aisle. Conclusion. The term “quasi-eugenics” is considered the most adequate by the author, when compared to previously coined terms for such technologies. Thus, it does not deny the shady legacy of “authentic” eugenics, as improvement of heredity, but it shows the use of different means. Grants. None