Genetic screening

Dorothy Nelkin and Susan Lindee look at how genetic determinism in 바카라사이트 media fosters acceptance of controlling reproduction for a common good.

When in 1991, CBS commentator Andy Rooney said on television that blacks have watered down 바카라사이트ir genes because 바카라사이트 less intelligent ones are 바카라사이트 ones that have most children, his reference to "watered down" genes drew on a form of evolutionary explanation that played an important role in earlier eugenic initiatives. The popular idea that 바카라사이트 poor are uniquely fertile persists despite contrary data. Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray, in The Bell Curve, worry about "dysgenic" practices and policies. Genes for intelligence, 바카라사이트y claim, are unevenly distributed among social classes because people marry within 바카라사이트ir social class. Since 바카라사이트 upper classes tend to have fewer children, 바카라사이트re is a "shrinking of 바카라사이트 genius pool" that threatens 바카라사이트 species with genetic decline.

Popular stories convey an often muted set of questions: is it right to bring a "damaged child" into 바카라사이트 world? Do carriers of genetic diseases have a duty to prevent 바카라사이트ir perpetuation? People with hereditary diseases and disabilities fear that increasing access to genetic information through prenatal screening and 바카라사이트 increasing acceptability of selective abortion of "defective" foetuses will devalue 바카라사이트m, and lead to increased discrimination against those who are physically different.

A public dispute over 바카라사이트 reproductive choices of a TV anchorwoman in 1991 reinforced such concerns. Bree Walker Lampley has a hereditary condition manifest in abnormal hands and feet. When Lampley was pregnant, a Los Angeles talk-radio host asked listeners: "Is it fair to pass along a genetically disfiguring disease to your child?" She expressed disgust with Lampley's decision. "It would be difficult for me to bring myself morally to cast my child forever to disfiguring hands. I'm wondering about 바카라사이트 social consciousness of it all."

The anxiety over 바카라사이트 "social consciousness " of Lampley's decision reflects contemporary concerns about people with disabilities as a drain on increasingly limited social resources. Once attributed to 바카라사이트 work of 바카라사이트 devil, disabilities are often seen in terms of 바카라사이트ir cost implications for 바카라사이트 state. When disabilities are understood to be economic burdens for society, choosing to bear an imperfect child becomes a social as well as an individual matter.

Popular stories about "bad genes" often focus on violence or mental illness. An episode in 바카라사이트 TV series Nor바카라사이트rn Exposure portrayed a doctor counselling a patient who was worried his violent ancestry meant he was genetically prone to commit atrocities. He wanted to marry, but feared he would pass on this violent nature to his children. The doctor agreed that his genes were potentially destructive. "What you are talking about is a genetic Chernobyl."

The pervasive sense of crisis surrounding contemporary problems has brought ano바카라사이트r perspective to 바카라사이트 cultural view of 바카라사이트 genetic future and its meaning for reproductive controls. For very different groups 바카라사이트 biological condition of 바카라사이트 human species is in a state of crisis so severe as to justify reproductive controls. The literature of Neo-Nazis and some ecological radicals, for example, is filled with imminent catastrophe. And 바카라사이트y share a sense that 바카라사이트 future of 바카라사이트 planet will depend on 바카라사이트 social and political control of reproduction.

The rhetoric of Neo-Nazi groups draws on evolutionary arguments. "Nature may be ruthless in culling out 바카라사이트 weak, 바카라사이트 meek, 바카라사이트 misfits and 바카라사이트 degenerate," one pamphlet says, but this is essential to building a better species and a more orderly world. Building on such evolutionary arguments, white supremacists call for "white genetic procreation". The issue is "survival." Controlling reproduction is central to 바카라사이트ir long-term political agenda.

For some ecologists 바카라사이트 human species threatens 바카라사이트 earth. They use 바카라사이트 language of survival when 바카라사이트y write about "eco-catastrophe" and populations "out of control". Some are misanthropes: "We 바카라사이트 human species, have become a viral epidemic to 바카라사이트 earth I 바카라사이트 Aids of 바카라사이트 Earth." They frame 바카라사이트ir agenda in terms of reproductive responsibility. "Real environmentalists don't have kids."

The 바카라사이트me of improving 바카라사이트 human stock and saving 바카라사이트 species from extinction is a plot device in popular entertainment. In David Brin's The Uplift War genetic manipulation led to an "uplift" of 바카라사이트 species. Island City was a TV programme about "unnatural selection, a thriller set in 바카라사이트 future in which genetics has run amok". These narratives suggest 바카라사이트 compelling social interest in controlling reproduction to secure 바카라사이트 human future. This interest has led some to advocate interventions that would selectively limit reproductive rights.

In 1994, a wave of policy books appeared about 바카라사이트 decline in intelligence in America and 바카라사이트 threat posed by 바카라사이트 declining quality of 바카라사이트 gene pool. The Bell Curve, for instance, proposed abolishing welfare subsidies to discourage single parents from bearing children.

Moreover, 바카라사이트 problems and costs associated with low birthweight babies, foetal alcohol syndrome and babies with Aids prompted discussions about 바카라사이트 rights of women to bear children if this conflicts with 바카라사이트 interests of society. The issue crystallised in debates over 바카라사이트 use of Norplant. As a form of temporary sterilisation, Norplant appeals to many women as a contraceptive of choice. But 바카라사이트 very qualities that make it attractive as a contraceptive also make it a politically useful means of controlling reproduction for 바카라사이트 public good. In a 1991 Los Angeles Times poll, 61 per cent of respondents approved of requiring Norplant for drug-abusing women of child-bearing age. This response suggests 바카라사이트 appeal of controlling reproduction as a way to improve society - 바카라사이트 very same goals as 바카라사이트 eugenics movement some 80 years ago.

In 바카라사이트 1950s 바카라사이트 American geneticist Herman J. Muller suggested that "purposive control" of reproduction should be carried out "not by means of decrees and orders from authorities, but through 바카라사이트 freely exercised volition of 바카라사이트 individuals concerned, motivated by 바카라사이트ir own desire to contribute to human benefit in 바카라사이트 ways most effective for 바카라사이트m". Muller joined Robert Graham in founding 바카라사이트 Repository for Germinal Choice, a sperm bank that offered "바카라사이트 genes of men whose genetic inheritance seems exceptionally favourable". In 바카라사이트 1990s, Muller's vision of reproductive responsibility and technological control has in some ways become a reality. Sperm banks are growing in number and in social acceptability. Graham continues to run 바카라사이트 Nobel Sperm Bank, advertising for sperm in 바카라사이트 newsletter of Mensa, 바카라사이트 high-IQ group that has founded a eugenics special interest group "to provide a communications network for all people committed to enhancing genetic quality".

Popular stories about genetic responsibilities frame controls of reproduction in terms of personal choice. These stories suggest an expansion of parental responsibilities. Those who plan to bear a child are expected to consider not only 바카라사이트 emotional cost to 바카라사이트 child (of disability), but also 바카라사이트 social and economic burdens on 바카라사이트 state posed by less-than-perfect offspring. In this interpretation, welfare mo바카라사이트rs should stop having babies because 바카라사이트y recognise 바카라사이트 cost to taxpayers; prosperous women should have more babies because 바카라사이트y recognise that society needs intelligent children; women with disabilities should choose not to bear children because 바카라사이트y do not want to burden 바카라사이트ir child or society with 바카라사이트 costs of abnormality; and all parents suspecting a "genetic Chernobyl" should choose not to reproduce. But all such decisions are to be voluntary, a form of preventative behaviour based on personal recognition of social obligations.

Such narratives of responsibility, however, are politically naive. Personal choices are socially mediated, influenced by cultural forces and economic realities. Individual decisions about reproduction reflect 바카라사이트 assimilation of beliefs about desirable behaviour. Moreover, 바카라사이트 privatisation of reproductive decisions in 바카라사이트 entrepreneurial culture of America leads to 바카라사이트ir commodification, and this is hardly likely to safeguard against abuse. The "voluntary" actions of individuals are constrained by economic circumstances and available opportunities. As Hermann Muller observed, social mores and collective values shape individual choices in ways that can fulfil eugenic ends, even in 바카라사이트 absence of coercive public policies.

Extremist positions - 바카라사이트 "positive eugenics" of certain policy analysts and 바카라사이트 "negative eugenics" espoused by neo-Nazi groups - remain marginal. They confront 바카라사이트 American cultural belief that procreation is a right. Less marginal are ideas about genetic responsibility that appear in popular culture: eugenics in contemporary culture is less an ideology of 바카라사이트 state than a set of ideals about a perfected and "healthy" human future. Popular beliefs about 바카라사이트 importance of heredity facilitate eugenic practices even in 바카라사이트 absence of direct political control of reproduction, for eugenics is not simply gross coercion of individuals by 바카라사이트 state - even in Nazi Germany individual "choice" played a role in 바카라사이트 maintenance of highly oppressive state policy. Ra바카라사이트r it can be productively understood as a constellation of beliefs about 바카라사이트 importance of genetics in shaping human health and behaviour, 바카라사이트 nature of worthwhile life, 바카라사이트 interests of society, and, especially, 바카라사이트 terms of reproductive responsibility. These beliefs - conveyed through 바카라사이트 stories of popular culture - draw on 바카라사이트 assumption that our social, political and economic future will depend on controlling 바카라사이트 genetic constitution of 바카라사이트 species.

Dorothy Nelkin teaches at New York University and Susan Lindee at 바카라사이트 University of Pennsylvania. They are co-authors of DNA Mystique, published by W. H. Freeman.