Lessons from Eugenics and Buck v. Bell for Ethical CRISPR Development

Posted byUnlockedPhDPosted inUncategorizedTags:, , , ,

Disclaimer: These is an AI generated blog posts. I did not author the content but I did prompt the AI to create the post and the associated images so we can have more discussions about these topics. 🤖

Introduction

The advent of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) technology has ushered in a new era of genetic engineering, offering unprecedented precision and efficiency in modifying the genomes of living organisms.1 This revolutionary tool holds immense potential for treating genetic diseases and advancing our understanding of fundamental biological processes.1 However, the power to alter the building blocks of life also raises profound ethical questions, particularly when considering its potential applications in humans.3 To navigate this complex ethical landscape responsibly, it is crucial to reflect upon the lessons from the history of the eugenics movement and the infamous Buck v. Bell Supreme Court case.20 The ease with which CRISPR can modify the genome 2 presents a democratizing force in genetic manipulation, yet this very accessibility amplifies the potential for misuse if ethical considerations are not firmly established. The historical endorsement of eugenics by numerous intellectuals and political leaders 27 serves as a stark reminder of the danger inherent in powerful societal forces lending their support to flawed scientific ideologies, a phenomenon that could similarly shape the trajectory of CRISPR technology.

Understanding CRISPR Technology

CRISPR-Cas systems function as a sophisticated gene-editing tool derived from the bacterial immune system.1 At its core, the system typically employs a Cas enzyme, such as Cas9, guided by a short RNA molecule known as guide RNA (gRNA).1 The gRNA is designed to be complementary to a specific DNA sequence in the genome, allowing the Cas enzyme to precisely locate and bind to the target site.2 Once bound, the Cas enzyme acts as molecular scissors, creating a double-stranded break in the DNA at the targeted location.2 This break triggers the cell’s natural DNA repair mechanisms, which researchers can exploit to introduce desired genetic modifications, such as deleting, inserting, or replacing specific DNA sequences.2 Variations of the CRISPR-Cas system exist, including CRISPR-Cpf1 (also known as Cas12a), which offers alternative targeting specificities and cutting mechanisms, further expanding the versatility of this technology.1

The applications of CRISPR technology in human health are vast and rapidly evolving. One of the most promising areas is the correction of genetic mutations that underlie inherited disorders.1 Conditions such as sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease, hemophilia, and beta-thalassemia are all potential targets for CRISPR-based therapies.1 The first CRISPR-based therapy approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was Casgevy, a treatment for sickle cell disease.7 Beyond therapeutic applications, CRISPR also holds the potential for human enhancement, such as increasing muscle mass, intelligence, or other traits deemed desirable.20 However, it is important to acknowledge the complex nature of many human traits, which are often influenced by multiple genes and environmental factors, making precise enhancement a significant scientific challenge.100 CRISPR is also being utilized in other areas, including the creation of accurate disease models for research, the identification of novel drug targets, and improvements in agriculture.1 The dual-use potential of CRISPR for both therapeutic and enhancement purposes 20 mirrors the eugenicists’ aspiration to both eradicate “undesirable” traits and cultivate “desirable” ones, highlighting the critical need for ethical frameworks to distinguish between morally acceptable and unacceptable uses. While the simplistic hereditarian views of eugenics are scientifically outdated due to the understanding of multigenic traits 100, the allure of selecting even seemingly simple traits with CRISPR could still lead down a eugenic path if not guided by careful ethical considerations.

The Eugenics Movement: A Historical Analysis

The eugenics movement emerged in the late 19th century, largely inspired by the work of Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin.26 Galton defined eugenics as the science of improving the human race through selective breeding, advocating for policies that would encourage the “fit” to reproduce while discouraging the “unfit”.26 The core goals of the eugenics movement centered on the idea of “racial improvement,” the elimination of perceived “social ills” by reducing the reproduction of those deemed “unfit,” and the preservation of the dominance of certain racial or social groups.25 To achieve these goals, the eugenics movement employed various methods, including both “positive eugenics,” which encouraged the reproduction of the “fit,” and “negative eugenics,” which aimed to limit the reproduction of the “unfit”.34 Negative eugenics methods included forced sterilization, marriage restrictions, segregation in institutions, and discriminatory immigration policies. These practices disproportionately targeted marginalized groups, including people of color, the poor, and those with disabilities, who were often deemed “unfit” based on discriminatory and pseudoscientific criteria.25 The eugenics movement was underpinned by pseudoscientific beliefs, including a flawed understanding of Mendelian genetics and the erroneous notion that complex social behaviors and conditions were inherited in a simple, deterministic manner. The eugenics movement’s drive to eliminate “unfit” populations through coercive methods like forced sterilization presents a chilling historical parallel to the potential misuse of CRISPR for eliminating traits deemed “undesirable” by contemporary societal norms. Furthermore, the active role of prominent figures and institutions 29 in promoting eugenics underscores the critical importance of a thorough and unbiased evaluation of scientific claims and the potential for even well-intentioned individuals to inadvertently support ethically problematic agendas, a lesson that remains highly relevant to the ongoing discussions surrounding CRISPR.

Buck v. Bell: A Case Study in Eugenic Legality and Ethics

The Buck v. Bell case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927, stands as a stark legal endorsement of eugenic principles.20 The case centered on Carrie Buck, a young woman deemed “feebleminded” who was ordered to undergo compulsory sterilization under a Virginia law. The state argued that sterilization was necessary to protect public welfare by preventing the birth of more “socially inadequate” offspring, citing the alleged “feeblemindedness” of Carrie, her mother, and her daughter. The legal challenge contended that the sterilization law violated Carrie Buck’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the due process and equal protection clauses.

The Court’s decision was heavily influenced by the prevailing eugenic ideology and pseudoscientific testimony. Harry H. Laughlin, a prominent eugenicist, provided written testimony asserting the hereditary nature of “feeblemindedness” in the Buck family, despite never having met them. Laughlin had also drafted a “model law” for compulsory sterilization, which served as the basis for Virginia’s statute.33 In his majority opinion, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously declared, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough,” upholding the constitutionality of forced sterilization. The Buck v. Bell decision had a profound and devastating long-term impact, leading to the forced sterilization of tens of thousands of individuals in the United States and influencing eugenic policies in other countries, including Nazi Germany.29 Notably, the Supreme Court has never explicitly overturned Buck v. Bell.46 The Buck v. Bell case serves as a stark demonstration of how legal systems can be manipulated to legitimize discriminatory practices rooted in flawed science.42 This historical precedent offers a critical warning about the potential for CRISPR technology to be similarly misused if robust ethical and legal safeguards are not firmly established. While there was a dissenting opinion in Buck v. Bell 54 and the case has faced subsequent criticism 42, it highlights the enduring tension between individual liberties and state interests in the context of reproductive rights and genetic technologies, a conflict that is likely to resurface with the advancement of CRISPR applications.

Echoes of the Past: Parallels and Potential Risks

The eugenics movement’s fundamental desire for “racial improvement” 25 finds a concerning parallel in the potential use of CRISPR technology for non-therapeutic human enhancement.20 The risk of employing CRISPR to select for traits deemed “desirable” by prevailing societal norms carries the potential to diminish human diversity and further marginalize individuals possessing “undesirable” traits, echoing the core tenets of eugenic ideologies.20 Moreover, the accessibility of CRISPR enhancements could exacerbate existing social inequalities if limited to the affluent, potentially creating a “genetic upper class” with inherent advantages.20 The potential for unintended consequences and off-target effects in CRISPR editing 18 also raises concerns, echoing the unpredictable outcomes of eugenic interventions based on a limited understanding of genetics. The rhetoric employed by eugenicists, often centered on “improving the human race” 25 through selective breeding, bears a striking resemblance to contemporary discussions surrounding the optimization of human traits using CRISPR.20 This linguistic continuity suggests a potential alignment in underlying motivations, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny of modern justifications for genetic intervention. Moreover, the historical use of eugenics to rationalize discrimination against specific groups 25 serves as a potent warning that CRISPR technology could be similarly applied to reinforce societal biases and generate novel forms of genetic discrimination.20

Navigating the Present: Ethical Guidelines and Debates for CRISPR

The use of CRISPR technology in humans is currently the subject of intense ethical debate.3 Key areas of concern include the ethical permissibility of germline editing, the potential for off-target effects and other unintended consequences, and the complex distinction between therapeutic and enhancement applications.3 The current ethical guidelines and regulatory landscape for CRISPR research vary across different countries, with a notable absence of international consensus on contentious issues such as germline editing.9 Ensuring equitable access to CRISPR-based therapies and addressing the potential for these technologies to widen the gap in health disparities between wealthy and underserved populations remain critical ethical considerations.19 Furthermore, the ethical challenges surrounding the very definition of “desirable” and “undesirable” traits in the context of CRISPR necessitate careful consideration, drawing crucial lessons from the subjective and often discriminatory definitions employed by the eugenics movement.9 The current lack of global consensus on CRISPR ethics 9 presents a significant risk of regulatory arbitrage, potentially allowing ethically dubious applications to proceed in jurisdictions with less stringent oversight, mirroring the fragmented legal landscape that facilitated the eugenics movement. The ongoing debate surrounding germline editing 3 underscores the profound ethical implications of making heritable changes to the human genome, a concept that aligns with the long-term ambitions of eugenics to alter the genetic future of humanity.

The Cornerstones of Ethical Innovation: Informed Consent and Individual Autonomy

The history of the eugenics movement serves as a stark reminder of the systematic violation of individual autonomy through coercive practices, most notably forced sterilization. The Buck v. Bell case stands as a prime example of the state overriding individual reproductive autonomy based on eugenic justifications.40 This historical context underscores the paramount importance of obtaining truly informed consent for any application of CRISPR technology in humans, particularly given the potential for long-term and heritable effects.20 Transparency and clear communication of the risks and benefits associated with CRISPR interventions are essential components of informed consent.73 The ethical challenges of obtaining consent for germline editing, which would impact future generations who cannot provide their own consent, are particularly complex and require careful consideration.71 The history of eugenics, culminating in the egregious violation of individual rights in cases like Buck v. Bell 28, serves as a critical reminder of the dangers of disregarding individual autonomy in the pursuit of a perceived societal good. This historical lesson underscores the absolute necessity of prioritizing individual autonomy and ensuring truly informed consent in all applications of CRISPR technology. The case of Doris Buck 48, Carrie’s sister who was also subjected to sterilization without her knowledge or consent under the Virginia Sterilization Act, poignantly illustrates the insidious nature of eugenic practices and the profound violation of bodily autonomy that occurred. This historical injustice further emphasizes the critical need for stringent safeguards and transparent processes in the application of CRISPR to prevent any form of non-consensual genetic intervention.

A Cautionary Narrative: Discriminatory Rhetoric and the Boundaries of CRISPR

The eugenics movement relied heavily on discriminatory rhetoric to dehumanize and marginalize its targeted groups, often labeling individuals as “feebleminded,” “degenerate,” or “socially inadequate”. It is crucial to recognize how similar rhetoric could be employed to justify the elimination or selection against certain genetic traits using CRISPR technology.20 Defining what constitutes a “disease” or “disability” in the context of CRISPR requires careful consideration to avoid the discriminatory application of this technology for enhancement purposes based on subjective societal values.9 The eugenics movement frequently relied on fear-mongering about “racial degeneration” and the burden of the “unfit” on society. It is therefore essential to approach similar economic or societal burden arguments used to promote certain CRISPR applications with extreme caution. The dehumanizing language employed by eugenicists to justify the violation of fundamental human rights serves as a critical warning. Maintaining vigilance against similar language in discussions about CRISPR and genetic traits is paramount to prevent the erosion of ethical boundaries.

Shaping the Future: The Enduring Legacy of Eugenics on Genetic Technologies

The history of eugenics has profoundly shaped current perspectives on genetic technologies, leading to heightened scrutiny and ethical awareness surrounding their development and application, including CRISPR.1 Genomics communities are actively working to debunk eugenic myths and combat contemporary manifestations of eugenics and scientific racism.27 It is essential to involve individuals from marginalized groups in the development of ethical frameworks for CRISPR technology to ensure their perspectives are duly considered and the injustices of the past are not repeated.20 The ongoing need for robust ethical frameworks, comprehensive public education, and sustained international collaboration is paramount to guide the responsible use of CRISPR and prevent its misuse for eugenic purposes.3 The historical association of genetics with the eugenics movement necessitates a cautious and ethically informed approach to CRISPR technology to prevent the repetition of past abuses. The ongoing efforts to understand and condemn eugenics, coupled with the rapid advancements in CRISPR, underscore the urgency of establishing robust ethical frameworks to ensure that this powerful tool is used responsibly and equitably.

Conclusion

The history of the eugenics movement and the Buck v. Bell case offer profound lessons for the ethical development and responsible application of CRISPR technology. The dangers of flawed science, discriminatory ideologies, the violation of individual autonomy, and the abuse of state power, all evident in the history of eugenics, serve as critical warnings as we navigate the powerful capabilities of CRISPR. Moving forward, it is imperative to prioritize ongoing ethical reflection, establish robust regulatory frameworks that are globally harmonized, and ensure meaningful public engagement in guiding the trajectory of CRISPR technology. Equitable access, the unwavering principle of informed consent, and the protection of vulnerable populations must remain central tenets in the use of CRISPR to avoid replicating the injustices of the past. When guided by a strong ethical compass, informed by the enduring lessons of history, CRISPR technology holds immense potential to benefit humanity by treating and preventing diseases, but vigilance and a deep respect for human dignity are essential to ensure its responsible and ethical deployment.

Table 1: Timeline of Key Events in the Eugenics Movement and Buck v. Bell

YearEvent
1883Francis Galton coins the term “eugenics” 26
1907Indiana passes the first compulsory sterilization law in the US 139
1910Eugenics Record Office (ERO) is established 29
1914Harry H. Laughlin publishes his “Model Eugenical Sterilization Law” 68
1924Virginia passes the Eugenical Sterilization Act 40
1927Buck v. Bell Supreme Court decision upholds forced sterilization 40
1933Nazi Germany enacts sterilization laws modeled on US eugenics 27
1970sEugenics sterilization laws begin to be repealed in the US 65

Works cited

  1. Questions and Answers about CRISPR | Broad Institute, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.broadinstitute.org/what-broad/areas-focus/project-spotlight/questions-and-answers-about-crispr
  2. What is CRISPR: Your Ultimate Guide | Synthego, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.synthego.com/learn/crispr
  3. What is CRISPR? – Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), accessed April 11, 2025, https://innovativegenomics.org/what-is-crispr/
  4. CRISPR gene editing – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR_gene_editing
  5. Application of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology in various fields: A review – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10916045/
  6. CRISPR Gene Editing – Editas Medicine, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.editasmedicine.com/crispr-gene-editing/
  7. CRISPR-Cas9: The gene editing tool changing the world – Labiotech.eu, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.labiotech.eu/in-depth/crispr-cas9-review-gene-editing-tool/
  8. CRISPR Gene Therapy: Applications, Limitations, and Implications for the Future – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7427626/
  9. What are genome editing and CRISPR-Cas9?: MedlinePlus Genetics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/genomicresearch/genomeediting/
  10. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8444435/#:~:text=The%20CRISPR%2DCas%20tools%20are,degeneration)%2C39%E2%80%9341%20muscular
  11. CRISPR Advancements for Human Health – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11057861/
  12. Applications of CRISPR in Medicine | Biocompare.com, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.biocompare.com/Editorial-Articles/593658-Applications-of-CRISPR-in-Medicine/
  13. CRISPR & Health – Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), accessed April 11, 2025, https://innovativegenomics.org/crispr-made-simple/crispr-health/
  14. Applications and challenges of CRISPR-Cas gene-editing to disease treatment in clinics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8444435/
  15. CRISPR in Medicine – Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), accessed April 11, 2025, https://innovativegenomics.org/crisprpedia/crispr-in-medicine/
  16. What is Genome Editing: Techniques & Applications | Synthego, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.synthego.com/learn/genome-editing-engineering
  17. 5 ways CRISPR gene editing is shaping the future of food and health, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/04/crispr-gene-editing-better-world/
  18. Is CRISPR Worth the Risk? | Yale Insights, accessed April 11, 2025, https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/is-crispr-worth-the-risk
  19. CRISPR in Public Health: The Health Equity Implications and Role …, accessed April 11, 2025, https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307315
  20. CRISPR & Ethics – Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), accessed April 11, 2025, https://innovativegenomics.org/crisprpedia/crispr-ethics/
  21. The future of CRISPR is now | AAMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.aamc.org/news/future-crispr-now
  22. Harvard researchers share views on future, ethics of gene editing, accessed April 11, 2025, https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/01/perspectives-on-gene-editing/
  23. The Promise of CRISPR for Human Germline Editing and the Perils of “Playing God” – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7047104/
  24. CRISPR-Cas9: 10 pros and 7 cons – Integrated DNA Technologies, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.idtdna.com/pages/community/blog/post/crispr-cas9-what-are-the-10-pros-and-7-cons
  25. Confronting the Legacy of Eugenics and Ableism: Towards Anti-Ableist Bioscience Education | CBE—Life Sciences Education, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.lifescied.org/doi/10.1187/cbe.23-10-0195
  26. Eugenics and Scientific Racism – StoryMD, accessed April 11, 2025, https://storymd.com/journal/wlaxvexhem-eugenics-and-scientific-racism
  27. 10.3 Eugenics and Scientific Racism – Precision Healthcare: Genomics-Informed Nursing – eCampusOntario Pressbooks, accessed April 11, 2025, https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/personalizedhealthnursing/chapter/eugenics/
  28. Eugenics and Scientific Racism – National Human Genome Research Institute, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Eugenics-and-Scientific-Racism
  29. Eugenics: Its Origin and Development (1883 – Present), accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/educational-resources/timelines/eugenics
  30. Watch The Eugenics Crusade | American Experience | Official Site – PBS, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/eugenics-crusade/
  31. Eugenics: Definition, Movement & Meaning | HISTORY, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.history.com/articles/eugenics
  32. Eugenics in the United States – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States
  33. U.S. Scientists’ Role in the Eugenics Movement (1907–1939): A Contemporary Biologist’s Perspective, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2757926/
  34. Eugenics – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
  35. Eugenics Movement in the United States | DPLA, accessed April 11, 2025, https://dp.la/primary-source-sets/eugenics-movement-in-the-united-states
  36. Eugenics | Definition, History, & Facts – Britannica, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/eugenics-genetics
  37. Eugenics and Birth Control | American Experience | Official Site – PBS, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/pill-eugenics-and-birth-control/
  38. American Eugenics and the Forced Sterilization of Women of Color and Low-Income Women – How History Has Shaped Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities: A Timeline of Policies and Events | KFF, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.kff.org/how-history-has-shaped-racial-and-ethnic-health-disparities-a-timeline-of-policies-and-events/?entry=1900-to-1929-american-eugenics-and-the-forced-sterilization-of-women-of-color-and-low-income-women
  39. Eugenics – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed April 11, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eugenics/
  40. The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization – The Reading Room – Georgia State University, accessed April 11, 2025, https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1078&context=buckvbell
  41. Carrie Buck – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Buck
  42. Buck v. Bell, American Eugenics, and the Bad Man Test: Putting Limits on Newgenics in the 21st Century – University of Minnesota, accessed April 11, 2025, https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1622&context=lawineq
  43. “Three Generations of Imbeciles are Enough” — The Case of Buck v. Bell – Education Updates, accessed April 11, 2025, https://education.blogs.archives.gov/2017/05/02/buck-v-bell/
  44. Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell and Forced Sterilization | Eugenics …, accessed April 11, 2025, https://exhibits.hsl.virginia.edu/eugenics/index.html
  45. Why Buck v. Bell Still Matters – Petrie-Flom Center, accessed April 11, 2025, https://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2020/10/14/why-buck-v-bell-still-matters/
  46. Buck v. Bell – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
  47. Buck v. Bell (1927) – Encyclopedia Virginia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/buck-v-bell-1927/
  48. Buck v. Bell (1927) | Embryo Project Encyclopedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/buck-v-bell-1927
  49. Buck v. Bell, Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, Brief for Appellee, September 1925, accessed April 11, 2025, https://edu.lva.virginia.gov/dbva/items/show/227
  50. BUCK v. BELL, Superintendent of State Colony Epileptics and Feeble Minded. | Supreme Court | US Law – Legal Information Institute, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/274/200
  51. Buck v. Bell | 274 U.S. 200 (1927) – Justia Supreme Court Center, accessed April 11, 2025, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/274/200/
  52. Buck v. Bell | Oyez, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/274us200
  53. Buck v. Bell – Teaching American History, accessed April 11, 2025, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/buck-v-bell/
  54. The Right to Self-Determination: Freedom from Involuntary Sterilization – Disability Justice, accessed April 11, 2025, https://disabilityjustice.org/right-to-self-determination-freedom-from-involuntary-sterilization/
  55. Buck v. Bell: The Test Case for Virginia’s Eugenical Sterilization Act, accessed April 11, 2025, https://exhibits.hsl.virginia.edu/eugenics/3-buckvbell/index.html
  56. Whitewashing the Past: The Modern Legacy of the Theory Behind Buck v. Bell, accessed April 11, 2025, https://minnjil.org/2024/10/14/whitewashing-the-past-the-modern-legacy-of-the-theory-behind-buck-v-bell-2/
  57. The Dark Legacy of Forced Sterilization: Carrie Buck’s Story – Psychology Today, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-superhuman-mind/202409/the-dark-legacy-of-forced-sterilization-carrie-bucks-story
  58. The Ethics of Eugenics: Exploring Buck v. Bell – Texas Undergraduate Law Journal, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.texasulj.org/post/the-ethics-of-eugenics-exploring-buck-v-bell
  59. Thirteen Ways of Looking at Buck v. Bell: Thoughts Occasioned by Paul Lombardo’s Three Generations, No Imbeciles – Journal of Legal Education, accessed April 11, 2025, https://jle.aals.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1268&context=home
  60. CRISPR ethics: moral considerations for applications of a powerful tool – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6286228/
  61. Gene Editing – CRISPR Therapeutics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://crisprtx.com/gene-editing
  62. Unfit to Breed: America’s Dark Tale of Eugenics | NIH Intramural Research Program, accessed April 11, 2025, https://irp.nih.gov/catalyst/29/4/unfit-to-breed-americas-dark-tale-of-eugenics
  63. Eugenics | Holocaust Encyclopedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/eugenics
  64. Eugenics Goals and Education – EugenicsArchive, accessed April 11, 2025, http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/static/themes/22.html
  65. The legacy of eugenics – UC Berkeley School of Public Health, accessed April 11, 2025, https://publichealth.berkeley.edu/news-media/research-highlights/the-legacy-of-eugenics
  66. Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States – PBS, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states/
  67. Eugenics: Compulsory Sterilization in 50 American States – University of Vermont, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.uvm.edu/~lkaelber/eugenics/
  68. Advocacy in favor of sterilization was one of Harry Laughlin’s first major projects at the Eugenics Record Office. In 1914, he published a Model Eugenical Sterilization Law that proposed to authorize sterilization of the “socially inadequate” – people supported in institutions or “maintained wholly or in part by public expense. The law encompassed the “feebleminded, insane, criminalistic, epileptic, inebriate, diseased, blind, deaf; deformed; and dependent” – including “orphans, ne’er-do-wells, accessed April 11, 2025, http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay8text.html
  69. Eugenic sterilization: a discussion of certain legal, medical, and moral aspects of present practices in our public mental institutions – PubMed, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12332119/
  70. Bioethical issues in genome editing by CRISPR-Cas9 technology – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7129066/
  71. Balancing Innovation and Ethics: A CRISPR Approach to Patent Law, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.culawreview.org/journal/balancing-innovation-and-ethics-a-crispr-approach-to-patent-law
  72. What Are The Ethical Considerations In Using CRISPR Technology For Disease Prevention? – Consensus Academic Search Engine, accessed April 11, 2025, https://consensus.app/questions/what-ethical-considerations-using-crispr-technology/
  73. As genome-editing trials become more common, informed consent is changing, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.genome.gov/news/news-release/As-genome-editing-trials-become-more-common-informed-consent-is-changing
  74. CRISPR Parents and Informed Consent – SMU Scholar, accessed April 11, 2025, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1299&context=scitech
  75. As genome-editing trials become more common, informed consent is changing, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201012132021.htm
  76. Justice in CRISPR/Cas9 Research and Clinical Applications – AMA Journal of Ethics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/justice-crisprcas9-research-and-clinical-applications/2018-09
  77. CRISPR-Cas9 and Designer Babies: The Ethical Debate (Part 59- CRISPR in Gene Editing and Beyond) | by Roohi Bansal | Medium, accessed April 11, 2025, https://medium.com/@bansalroohi/crispr-cas9-and-designer-babies-the-ethical-debate-part-59-crispr-in-gene-editing-and-beyond-bf040eac674e
  78. The Safety And Ethical Implications Of CRISPR And Gene Editing In Humans. – Consensus, accessed April 11, 2025, https://consensus.app/questions/safety-ethical-implications-crispr-gene-editing-humans/
  79. CRISPR-Cas 9, Practical Wisdom, and Human Identity – Contending Modernities, accessed April 11, 2025, https://contendingmodernities.nd.edu/global-currents/crisprpracticalwisdom/
  80. CRISPR Ethics: Moral Considerations for Applications of a Powerful Tool, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.bu.edu/khc/files/2018/10/CRISPR-Ethics-reading.pdf
  81. GENETIC MODIFICATION: THE ETHICAL AND SOCIETAL IMPLICATIONS OF CRISPR TECHNOLOGY – NYU Langone Health, accessed April 11, 2025, https://med.nyu.edu/departments-institutes/population-health/divisions-sections-centers/medical-ethics/sites/default/files/medical-ethics-high-school-bioethics-crispr.pdf
  82. The Challenge of CRISPR-Cas Toward Bioethics – Frontiers, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.657981/full
  83. From Public Eugenics to Private Eugenics: What Does the Future Hold? – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9635610/
  84. Autonomy Revoked: The Forced Sterilization of Women of Color in 20th Century America – Texas Woman’s University, accessed April 11, 2025, https://twu.edu/media/documents/history-government/Autonomy-Revoked–The-Forced-Sterilization-of-Women-of-Color-in-20th-Century-America.pdf
  85. In the patient’s best interest? Revisiting sexual autonomy and sterilization of the developmentally disabled – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1071584/
  86. Federal Sterilization Policy: Unintended Consequences – AMA Journal of Ethics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/federal-sterilization-policy-unintended-consequences/2012-02
  87. Wrestling with the Legacy of Eugenics – Georgia State University News, accessed April 11, 2025, https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/wrestling-with-the-legacy-of-eugenics-paul-lombardo
  88. Exploring the ACLU News Archive: Battles to Protect Bodily Autonomy in California, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.aclunc.org/blog/exploring-aclu-news-archive-battles-protect-bodily-autonomy-california
  89. Reconsidering the history of eugenics and discrimination in migration control, accessed April 11, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/migration/article/13/1/mnaf002/8068989
  90. Racist Theories Aid Nazi Rise to Political Power | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/politics-and-government/racist-theories-aid-nazi-rise-political-power
  91. 1930s-1940s: American Eugenics Reform: “New Eugenics”, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.uvm.edu/~eugenics/whatis2.html
  92. Buck As (Anti) Canon: the Misuse of Eugenics Rhetoric in Selective-Abortion Jurisprudence and the Dangers for Tort Law, accessed April 11, 2025, https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2373&context=aulr
  93. Museum Statement on Eugenics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.amnh.org/about/eugenics-statement
  94. Abortion as an Instrument of Eugenics – Harvard Law Review, accessed April 11, 2025, https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-134/abortion-as-an-instrument-of-eugenics/
  95. The Current COVID-19 Surge, Eugenics, and Health-Based Discrimination, accessed April 11, 2025, https://petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2021/07/23/covid-eugenics-health-based-discrimination/
  96. Confronting Eugenics Means Finally Confronting Its Ableist Roots – W&M Law School Scholarship Repository, accessed April 11, 2025, https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1553&context=wmjowl
  97. Genetic Discrimination: Exploring the Echoes between Nazi and American Eugenic Histories – YouTube, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkuM8Fyh3jY
  98. Crispr ethics – (Ethics) – Vocab, Definition, Explanations | Fiveable, accessed April 11, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/ethics/crispr-ethics
  99. The ethics of CRISPR: a necessary debate – El·lipse, accessed April 11, 2025, https://ellipse.prbb.org/the-ethics-of-crispr-a-necessary-debate/
  100. The ethics of gene editing – Medical News Today, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319817
  101. Science & Tech Spotlight: CRISPR Gene Editing | U.S. GAO, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-478sp
  102. No time to waste—the ethical challenges created by CRISPR: CRISPR/Cas, being an efficient, simple, and cheap technology to edit the genome of any organism, raises many ethical and regulatory issues beyond the use to manipulate human germ line cells – EMBO Press, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.embopress.org/doi/10.15252/embr.201541337
  103. Designer Babies: Evaluating the Ethics of Human Gene Editing – Tulane University Journal Publishing, accessed April 11, 2025, https://journals.tulane.edu/ncs/article/view/3785/3553
  104. Investigating the Impact of the Modern Approach to Eugenics, Embryo Engineering, and Gene Therapy in Accordance with Human, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.acs.edu.lb/uploaded/2023-2024/LEBMUN’24/Topic_2_-_HRC_I,_Investigating_the_Impact_of_the_Modern_Approach_to_Eugenics,_Embryo_Engineering,_and_Gene_Therapy_in_Accordance_with_Human_Rights_-_Research_Packet_LEBMUN_24.pdf
  105. What is immoral about eugenics? – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1129063/
  106. The Complex History and Ethics of Eugenics: Lessons from the Past for Contemporary Society – International Research Journal, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.interesjournals.org/articles/the-complex-history-and-ethics-of-eugenics-lessons-from-the-past-for-contemporary-society-100911.html
  107. Ethical Piece: Eugenics and Where to Draw The Line – Front Line Genomics, accessed April 11, 2025, https://frontlinegenomics.com/__trashed/
  108. How the history of genetics charts the rise and fall of eugenics | The British Academy, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/blog/how-history-genetics-charts-rise-and-fall-eugenics/
  109. Eugenomics: Eugenics and Ethics in the 21 Century – IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks, accessed April 11, 2025, https://scholarworks.indianapolis.iu.edu/bitstream/handle/1805/727/Eugenomics%20-%20eugenics%20and%20ethics%20in%20the%2021st%20century%20-%202006.pdf?sequence=1
  110. Cutting Eugenics Out of CRISPR-Cas9 – Research Cluster on Science and Subjectivity, accessed April 11, 2025, https://rcss.scienceandsociety.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/Publications/2015%20BROKOWSKI%2C%20POLLACK%2C%20POLLACK%20CUTTING%20EUGENICS%20OUR%20OF%20CRISPR%20copy.pdf
  111. Looking into the shadow: the eugenics argument in debates on reproductive technologies and practices – PubMed Central, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6336759/
  112. Eugenics: Historical Practice to Present Day Technology – Disability & Philanthropy Forum, accessed April 11, 2025, https://disabilityphilanthropy.org/resource/eugenics-historical-practice-to-present-day-technology/
  113. Genetics, History and the American Eugenics Movement, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pged.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/LP_GeneticsHistoryEugenics.pdf
  114. (PDF) Cutting Eugenics Out of CRISPR-Cas9 – ResearchGate, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303483354_Cutting_Eugenics_Out_of_CRISPR-Cas9
  115. Crispr and the Spectre of Eugenics – Berkeley Political Review, accessed April 11, 2025, https://bpr.studentorg.berkeley.edu/2021/07/25/crispr-and-the-spectre-of-eugenics/
  116. Blog: Science Ideology and Policy: Eugenics in the South, accessed April 11, 2025, https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/2024/04/blog-science-ideology-policy-eugenics-in-the-south/
  117. Eugenics vs. Genetic Editing: Lessons from History, Hopes for the Future – Simply Put Psych, accessed April 11, 2025, https://simplyputpsych.co.uk/global-psych/eugenics-vs-genetic-editing-lessons-from-history-hopes-for-the-future
  118. Ethical Issues Regarding CRISPR-mediated Genome Editing, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.caister.com/cimb/vb/v26/103.pdf
  119. Ethical issues of CRISPR technology and gene editing through the lens of solidarity | British Medical Bulletin | Oxford Academic, accessed April 11, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/122/1/17/3045812
  120. Human genome editing with CRISPR: the rebirth of eugenics? – Mercator, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.mercatornet.com/human_genome_editing_with_crispr_the_rebirth_of_eugenics
  121. Genome Editing, Ethics, and Politics | Journal of Ethics | American Medical Association, accessed April 11, 2025, https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/genome-editing-ethics-and-politics/2019-12
  122. CRISPR Enhancement | Ask A Biologist, accessed April 11, 2025, https://askabiologist.asu.edu/can-crispr-make-me-taller-or-smarter
  123. Human Enhancement: Scientific and Ethical Dimensions of Genetic Engineering, Brain Chips and Synthetic Blood – Pew Research Center, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/07/26/human-enhancement-the-scientific-and-ethical-dimensions-of-striving-for-perfection/
  124. Human Enhancement Technologies and the Possible Dual Use in Cognitive Warfare, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/STO%20Meeting%20Proceedings/STO-MP-HFM-361/MP-HFM-361-P18.pdf
  125. Inheriting Shame: A Critical Analysis of “The Eugenics Review” – Governors State University, accessed April 11, 2025, https://opus.govst.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1149&context=theses
  126. UVA and the History of Race: Eugenics, the Racial Integrity Act, Health Disparities, accessed April 11, 2025, https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-and-history-race-eugenics-racial-integrity-act-health-disparities
  127. “The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization” by Harry H. Laughlin – The Reading Room, accessed April 11, 2025, https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/buckvbell/79/
  128. Harry Hamilton Laughlin (1880-1943) | Embryo Project Encyclopedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/harry-hamilton-laughlin-1880-1943
  129. The Birth Control Movement: The Part Played by Eugenics and Racism, accessed April 11, 2025, http://brownpedsresidency.org/the-birth-control-movement-the-part-played-by-eugenics-and-racism/
  130. Full article: Legacies of eugenics: confronting the past, forging a future – Taylor and Francis, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01419870.2022.2095222
  131. Eugenics and human rights – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1127045/
  132. Reflecting on the legacies of eugenics – The Wiener Holocaust Library, accessed April 11, 2025, https://wienerholocaustlibrary.org/2021/07/26/reflecting-on-the-legacies-of-eugenics/
  133. Eugenics Archive Theme, accessed April 11, 2025, http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/topics_fs.pl?theme=10&search=&matches=
  134. Engineering Mankind: The Sociopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America, accessed April 11, 2025, https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=vocesnovae
  135. eugenics, immigration restriction and birth control – IUScholarWorks, accessed April 11, 2025, https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstreams/0861d8f9-95b1-47db-a088-5fcbd8763b6e/download
  136. Anchors on the Ship of Progress and Weeds in the Human Garden: Objectivist Rhetoric in American Eugenic Writings, accessed April 11, 2025, https://dsq-sds.org/index.php/dsq/article/view/1668/1603
  137. Harry H. Laughlin – Wikipedia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_H._Laughlin
  138. Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (1922), by Harry H. Laughlin, accessed April 11, 2025, https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/eugenical-sterilization-united-states-1922-harry-h-laughlin
  139. Sterilization laws | EBSCO Research Starters, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/sterilization-laws
  140. The Eugenic Origins of Three Strikes Laws: How “Habitual Offender” Sentencing Laws Were Used as a Means of Sterilization, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.sentencingproject.org/reports/the-eugenic-origins-of-three-strikes-laws-how-habitual-offender-sentencing-laws-were-used-as-a-means-of-sterilization/
  141. ‘Three Generations, No Imbeciles’ | The American Law Institute, accessed April 11, 2025, https://www.ali.org/news/articles/three-generations-no-imbeciles
  142. Eugenics Laws Restricting Immigration, accessed April 11, 2025, http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay9text.html
  143. Pathologizing Politics: Eugenics and Political Discourse in the Modern United States, accessed April 11, 2025, https://nursingclio.org/2020/02/25/pathologizing-politics-eugenics-and-political-discourse-in-the-modern-united-states/
  144. Most Immediate Blood-kin of Carrie Buck – Encyclopedia Virginia, accessed April 11, 2025, https://encyclopediavirginia.org/1114hpr-551e18f14d5ae91/
  145. Confronting the Legacy of Eugenics and Ableism: Towards Anti-Ableist Bioscience Education – PMC, accessed April 11, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11440745/