Private eugenics

Practice of eugenics by private entities

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for neologisms. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted.
Find sources: "Private eugenics" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

|

This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

|

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (March 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

|

This page is currently being merged.
After a discussion, consensus to merge this page with New eugenics was found. You can help implement the merge by following the instructions at Help:Merging and the resolution on the discussion. Process started in July 2025.

|

(Learn how and when to remove this message)

Private eugenics is the practice of eugenics conducted by individuals, typically parents, using reproductive techniques, genetic testing, and potentially genetic engineering. Unlike traditional public eugenics, which was often state-mandated and aimed at improving the overall genetic quality of a population, private eugenics focuses on individual choices and aspirations. This shift reflects a move away from coercive state programs towards a model that relies on parental choice and reproductive rights.

## History

[edit]

Following the atrocities committed by the Nazis, eugenics advocates became more cautious. However, eugenic sterilizations continued in the USA and Scandinavia. The discovery of DNA in 1953 and the development of genetic codes in the 1960s gave genetics scientific legitimacy. Genetic counseling and prenatal diagnostics, including amniocentesis, became widespread in the 1970s, enabling parents to assess the genetic risks to their child. In cases of severe risk, abortion was offered, leading to the practice of negative eugenics. Meanwhile, proponents of positive eugenics, like businessman Robert Graham, pushed for the genetic enhancement of intelligence, founding the "Herman J. Muller Repository for Germinal Choice" in 1971, which sought sperm donations from notable men, including Nobel laureates.[1]

## Public vs private

[edit]

Public eugenics, historically state-imposed, aimed to eliminate the weak (negative eugenics) and cultivate strength (positive eugenics), often linked to racial purity. In contrast, private eugenics, or neoeugenics, is based on parental choice, allowing genetic selection to enhance offspring health. Techniques like preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and gene therapy enable parents to select embryos free from genetic diseases. While some view private eugenics as discriminatory if used for selecting race or gender, others defend it as a reproductive right. Unlike public eugenics, which restricted reproduction through laws and sterilization, private eugenics thrives in a commercialized fertility market. The ethical debate continues on whether state intervention should regulate parental choices in genetic selection.[2]

## Modalities

[edit]

Private eugenics encompasses three main modalities. First, parents may select health-related traits to ensure offspring are free from diseases. This justification underlies abortion laws and reproductive technologies, including PGD and gamete donation. European regulations generally permit these practices when aimed at preventing hereditary conditions. Second, parents may select traits that could be objectively harmful, such as painful diseases or disabilities. Laws tend to restrict such choices, as they can cause harm to the child. Third, parents may select non-health-related traits, like intelligence, eye color, or gender. These choices, often controversial, range from enhancement to cultural preferences. While legal and ethical debates continue, health-related selections remain the most widely accepted under European laws.[2]

## Reproductive rights

[edit]

Reproductive rights traditionally allow parents to choose whether to have children and how many, but the debate has expanded to whether these rights should include selecting specific traits in offspring. Some scholars argue that decisions on genetic interventions for personal preferences should fall under reproductive rights, as they influence the decision to procreate. Advocates like John Robertson contend that reproductive rights should include the right to select offspring characteristics. However, others argue that reproductive rights only cover the right to have any child, not a specific one, asserting that bans on trait selection do not violate these rights. In the U.S., the debate remains polarized, while in Europe, reproductive rights primarily focus on health-related aspects.[2]

## Further contemporary debates

[edit]

The debate over "private eugenics" questions whether individual reproductive choices—such as aborting embryos with severe genetic conditions—constitute eugenics. Unlike early 20th-century eugenics, which aimed at shaping nations or races, modern decisions reflect personal preferences, though collectively they may express societal values. The historical link between eugenics and Nazism often oversimplifies the discussion. Eugenics was not just a biological theory but also a moral and social framework influencing public health policies. It evolved through British elite culture, American progressivism, and marital counseling, demonstrating its complex legacy beyond mere socio-biological theories.[3]

## References

[edit]

1. ^ Missa, Jean-Noel (1999). "From state eugenics to private eugenics". Baillière's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 13 (4). Translated by Kohane-Shenfield, Francoise. Elsevier: 533–541\. doi:10.1053/beog.1999.0047. PMID 10718708.
2. ^ a b c Vera Lúcia Raposo (Oct–Dec 2022). "From Public Eugenics to Private Eugenics: What Does the Future Hold?". JBRA Assist Reprod. 26 (4): 666–674\. doi:10.5935/1518-0557.20220032. PMC 9635610. PMID 36098455.
3. ^ "Paul-André Rosental". Institut National d'Études Démographiques (INED). Retrieved March 22, 2025.