In the [New York] Sun, Christine Rosen of the Ethics & Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., challenges the premise of the new book by Ronald M. Green, an ethicist at Dartmouth College. Green maintains that genetic engineering will inevitably lead to directed human evolution, and he’s excited about the prospect.

Not so Ms. Rosen, who notes that Green seems too quick to brush off the obvious parallels to the eugenics movement of the early 20th century, as well as the likelihood that “parents who fail to prevent the birth of a disabled child will be viewed not merely as unlucky, but as actively irresponsible.”

Mr. Green’s argument … suffers from the technocrat’s wild optimism, most notably the oft-repeated reassurance that, unlike previous eras, “we” will smooth out the ethical and scientific wrinkles of genetic enhancement. But who is this “we”? Who are these mandarins who will decide our collective genetic fate? One can only assume that they are people such as Mr. Green himself — and yet Mr. Green’s relentless enthusiasm for genetic engineering, and his impatience with the concerns raised about its dangers, leave the reader feeling like he is less a sober guide than a pushy stage mother, urging us to get out there and improve our future children!

Note: Ms. Rosen’s concern about social opprobrium directed at parents of children with prenatally diagnosable disabilities is already being documented. See earlier post here. A study found that more than 40 percent of mothers whose children had a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome reported being confronted with accusations that their child could have been “avoided.”

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 12th, 2007 at 3:41 pm and is filed under NOT2BEMISSED, books, eugenics, genetics, public attitudes. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.  Email This Post