Skip to main content
Log in

Eugenics and the Criticism of Bioethics

Ann Kerr and Tom Shakespeare, Genetic Politics: from eugenics to genome, Cheltenham: New Clarion Press, 2002, ISBN (paperback) 1 873797 25 7, ISBN (hardback) 1 873 797 26 5

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article provides a critical assessment of some aspects of Ann Kerr and Tom Shakespeare's Genetic Politics: from eugenics to genome. In particular, I evaluate their claims: (a) that bioethics is too ‘top down’, involving normative prescriptions, whereas it should instead be ‘bottom up’ and grounded in social science; and (b) that contemporary bioethics has not dealt particularly well with people's moral concerns about eugenics. I conclude that several of Kerr and Shakespeare's criticisms are well-founded and serve as valuable reminders to the bioethics community. These include the claims: that bioethics ought not to consist entirely of applying moral theory to cases; that bioethics must take account of relevant empirical evidence; and that bioethicists should be on the look out for those subtle social forces which can undermine the voluntariness of people's choices and consents. However, we should reject some of Kerr and Shakespeare's other criticisms and I conclude (amongst other things) that even ‘mainstream’ bioethics is better able to deal with difficult issues like eugenics than Kerr and Shakespeare suggest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Caplan A, McGee, G, Magnus D (1999) What’s immoral about eugenics? Br Med J 319:1284–1285

    Google Scholar 

  • Donchin A (2001) Understanding autonomy relationally: toward a reconfiguration of bioethical principles. J Med Philos 26:365–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duster T (2003) Backdoor to eugenics. Routledge, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrard E, Wilkinson S (2003) Does bioethics need moral theory? In: Hayry M, Takala T (eds) Scratching the surface of bioethics. Rodopi, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 35–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrard E, Wilkinson S (2005a) Mind the gap: the use of empirical evidence in bioethics. In: Hayry M, Takala T, Herissone-Kelly P (eds) Bioethics and social reality. Rodopi, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrard E, Wilkinson, S (2005b) Passive euthanasia. J Med Ethics 31:64–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Haimes E (2002) What can the social sciences contribute to the study of ethics? Theoretical, empirical and substantive considerations? Bioethics 16:89–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holm S (1995) Not just autonomy – the principles of American bioethics. J Med Ethics 21:332–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr A, Shakespeare T (2002) Genetic politics: from eugenics to genome. New Clarion Press, Cheltenham, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt M (2003) Better together? Sociological and philosophical perspectives on bioethics. In: Hayry M, Takala T (eds) Scratching the surface of bioethics. Rodopi, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 19–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie C, Stoljar, N (eds) (2000) Relational autonomy: feminist essays on autonomy, agency, and social self. Oxford University Press, New York

  • O’Neill O (2002) Autonomy and trust in bioethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson S (2006) Eugenics, embryo selection and the equal value principle. Clin Ethics 1:46–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Wilkinson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilkinson, S. Eugenics and the Criticism of Bioethics. Ethic Theory Moral Prac 10, 409–418 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-006-9058-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-006-9058-y

Key words

Navigation