title: Deafness, genetics and dysgenics.
abstract: It has been argued by some authors that our reaction to deaf parents who choose deafness for their children ought to be compassion, not condemnation. Although I agree with the reasoning proposed I suggest that this practice could be regarded as unethical. In this article, I shall use the term "dysgenic" as a culturally imposed genetic selection not to achieve any improvement of the human person but to select genetic traits that are commonly accepted as a disabling condition by the majority of the social matrix; in short as a handicap. As in eugenics, dysgenics can be achieved in a positive and a negative way. Positive dysgenics intends to increase the overall number of people with a particular genetic trait. Marriage between deaf people or conceiving deaf children through reproductive technology are examples of positive dysgenics. Negative dysgenics can be obtained through careful prenatal or pre-implantation selection and abortion (or discarding) of normal embryos and foetuses. Only deaf children would be allowed to live. If dysgenics is seen as a programmed genetic intervention that undesirably shapes the human condition--like deliberately creating deaf or dwarf people--the professionals involved in reproductive technologies should answer the question if this should be an accepted ethical practice because the basic human right to an open future is violated.
authors.affiliation: Department of Bioethics of the School of Medicine, University of Oporto, Estrada da Circunvalação 9925, Porto, EU, 4250-150, Portugal. ruinunes@med.up.pt
authors.forename: Rui
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Nunes
mesh_terms: D003638:Deafness / Q000235:genetics; D005053:Eugenics; D005820:Genetic Testing; D006801:Humans; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011640:Public Policy; D027724:Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / Q000941:ethics*