Eugenics Laws: A Dark Chapter In History

The history of eugenics is a dark and complex chapter in the history of science. The term 'eugenics' was coined by Francis Galton in 1883, and it refers to the set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of the human population.

The contemporary history of eugenics began in the late 19th century when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and most European countries. In the United States, the American Breeders Association was the first organisation to study and promote eugenics. The movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of Galton, who believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics.

By the 1920s, eugenics had become a global movement, with support from statisticians, economists, anthropologists, sociologists, social reformers, geneticists, public health officials, and members of the general public. The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various corporate foundations, and by 1910, there was a large and dynamic network of scientists, reformers, and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects and actively promoting eugenic legislation.

The first International Eugenics Congress took place in London in 1912, and the first International Eugenics Conference was held in New York City in 1921. The American eugenics movement focused on sterilising the feebleminded while also promoting the racial ideology that white Anglo-Saxons were the superior race. Indiana passed the first eugenics-based compulsory sterilisation law in the world in 1907, and by the 1930s, over 30 states had sterilisation laws.

The most well-known application of eugenics occurred in Nazi Germany in the lead-up to World War II and the Holocaust, where the Nazi regime used its resources to cleanse German society of those deemed unworthy of life. The eugenics movement in Germany was influenced by the United States, and California eugenicists sent literature promoting eugenics and sterilisation overseas to German scientists and medical professionals.

The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s when it was used to justify the racial policies of Nazi Germany, and many eugenics laws were abandoned by the end of World War II. However, the practice of eugenics continued in some countries, and the emergence of new genetic and genomic technologies in the 21st century has raised concerns about a resurgence of eugenics.

Eugenics in Nazi Germany

The term "eugenics" was coined in 1883 by English naturalist Sir Francis Galton to refer to the set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. The contemporary history of eugenics began in the late 19th century in the UK, before spreading to countries including the US, Canada, Australia, and most European countries.

In Nazi Germany, the ideology of eugenics, or "racial hygiene", was used to justify the persecution and murder of those deemed "undesirable" by the state. The Nazi regime's policies were shaped by these theories, which were prevalent in the international scientific community at the time.

Nazi Eugenics Policies

The social policies of eugenics in Nazi Germany were composed of various ideas about genetics and the biological improvement of the German people. The racial ideology of Nazism placed the improvement of the German people through selective breeding of "Nordic" or "Aryan" traits at its center.

The Nazi regime's eugenics policies targeted people living in private and state-operated institutions, identified as "life unworthy of life" (Lebensunwertes Leben). These included prisoners, dissidents, and people with congenital cognitive and physical disabilities. Being diagnosed with "feeblemindedness" was the main label approved for forced sterilization, and included people who were diagnosed with or seemed to be manic-depressive, suffering from cerebral palsy or muscular dystrophy, homosexual, or considered idle, insane, or weak.

Nazi Sterilization and Euthanasia Programs

The Nazi regime introduced the Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases (“Hereditary Health Law”) in 1933, which mandated forcible sterilization for nine disabilities and disorders, including schizophrenia and “hereditary feeblemindedness”. This led to the sterilization of 400,000 Germans and shaped Germany's 1935 Marital Hygiene Law, which prohibited the marriage of "healthy" German "Aryans" to people with "diseased, inferior, or dangerous genetic material".

The eugenics theory also provided the basis for the “euthanasia” (T4) program, which targeted disabled patients living in institutions throughout the German Reich for killing. An estimated 250,000 patients, the majority of whom were German "Aryans", were victims of this clandestine killing operation.

Nazi Abortion Policies

The Nazi regime's policies on abortions were also influenced by eugenics. Upon coming to power, the Nazis restricted advertisements on the sale of contraceptives and abortion procedures. Abortions for eugenic reasons were prohibited during this period, although there were some exemptions in hereditary health courts.

In conclusion, the eugenics movement in Nazi Germany was a central aspect of the regime's ideology and policies. The eugenics theory of "racial hygiene" was used to justify the persecution, sterilization, and murder of those deemed "undesirable" by the state, including people with disabilities and those from marginalized communities.

Eugenics in the United States

Origins and Development

The term "eugenics" was coined by Francis Galton in 1883 to describe the improvement of genes in human races and the concept of being "well-born". It was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of Galton, which originated in the 1880s. Eugenics played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century.

The American eugenics movement was largely supported after the discovery of Mendel's law led to a widespread interest in the idea of breeding for specific traits. It received extensive funding from corporate foundations such as the Carnegie Institution and the Rockefeller Foundation.

The American Breeder's Association, the first eugenic body in the U.S., was formed to investigate heredity in the human race and emphasize the value of superior blood. The American Association for the Study and Prevention of Infant Mortality was one of the first organisations to investigate infant mortality rates in terms of eugenics.

Implementation and Impact

By 1910, there was a large network of scientists, reformers, and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects. Many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone deemed "epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded" from marrying. The first state to introduce a compulsory sterilisation bill was Michigan in 1897, although it failed to be adopted. Indiana became the first state to enact sterilisation legislation in 1907, followed by Washington, California, and Connecticut in 1909.

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the idea of preserving the position of dominant groups in the population. It targeted those seen as unfit for society, including the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, and specific communities of colour. A disproportionate number of those who fell victim to eugenicists' sterilisation initiatives were women of colour.

Opposition and Decline

The scientific reputation of eugenics began to decline in the 1930s due to its association with Nazi Germany. Many eugenics laws were abandoned after World War II, and eugenics became associated with Nazi Germany.

Opposition to eugenics grew in the 1960s, particularly within the African-American community. In the 1970s, Native American women and activists mobilised across the United States to combat the coerced sterilisation of Native American women.

Legacy and Modern-Day Concerns

Despite its decline and association with Nazi Germany, concerns about a resurgence of eugenics persist. With advances in genome editing, there are concerns about the potential for a new era of eugenics. Some geneticists view genomic screening and genetic counselling as an extension of eugenics.

The Buck v. Bell case

The Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, upheld the sterilisation order and the Virginia law that allowed it. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the majority, stated:

> We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.

Holmes' opinion also included the now-infamous phrase, "three generations of imbeciles are enough," referring to Buck, her mother, and her daughter, who were all erroneously diagnosed with mental disabilities.

The Buck v. Bell decision was never overturned, and Virginia did not repeal its sterilisation law until 1974. The case remains relevant today, not only because it legalised involuntary sterilisation but also because it used the power of the nation's highest court to broadcast a lasting message that devalued the lives of people of colour, the disabled, and other marginalised groups.

The Skinner v. Oklahoma case

The case centred around Jack T. Skinner, who had been convicted once for stealing chickens and twice for armed robbery. In October 1936, he was convicted a fourth time and sentenced to sterilization under the Oklahoma Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act. This Act allowed the state to impose a sentence of compulsory sterilization on individuals with three or more convictions for crimes "amounting to felonies involving moral turpitude". However, the Act excluded white-collar crimes, such as embezzlement, from carrying sterilization penalties.

Skinner's lawyers, Heba Irwin Aston and Guy Andrews, appealed the sentence, arguing that it jeopardized Skinner's rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma ruled against the appeal, maintaining the sentence of sterilization.

Skinner's lawyers then brought the case to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the Oklahoma law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that the Act did indeed violate the Equal Protection Clause as it arbitrarily distinguished between different types of theft. The Court also stressed that compulsory sterilization laws should be held to strict scrutiny due to their irreversible nature and far-reaching implications for individuals and society.

In a separate concurring opinion, Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone stated that, in his view, the Act violated the Due Process Clause more than the Fourteenth Amendment. He argued that there was no proof that criminal behaviour could be inherited genetically, which was necessary for such a conviction and sentence.

The legacy of eugenics

In the United States, the eugenics movement was promoted by intellectuals and had support from various corporate foundations. It targeted those deemed unfit for society, including the poor, the disabled, and people of color. The movement resulted in forced sterilization, segregation, and immigration restrictions, with a disproportionate number of victims being women of color. The legacy of eugenics in the US is still felt today, with ongoing debates around reproductive justice and racial equality.

The impact of eugenics extended beyond the US, with many countries adopting eugenic policies. In Nazi Germany, eugenic ideas were used to justify sterilization and extermination programs. Even after World War II, when eugenics fell into disrepute, elements of the movement persisted, such as forced sterilization in prisons and immigration detention centers.

Today, the term eugenics is closely associated with scientific racism. However, some argue that modern genetic engineering and reproductive technologies are a form of "new eugenics," raising ethical concerns about the potential for coercion and the impact on equality. The legacy of eugenics continues to shape discussions around science, medicine, and social justice, highlighting the importance of scrutinizing new technologies to avoid repeating the tragic mistakes of the past.

Frequently asked questions