Did Nobel laureate Robert Edwards get his gong for enabling eugenics?
By Michael Cook,
BioEdge
| 08. 02. 2020
If the “cancel culture” is gunning for eugenicists, there are more than enough candidates. One of the most prominent is Robert Edwards, who won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2010 for developing in vitro fertilisation.
As Gina Maranto, a writer for the Biopolitical Times, reminds readers, he was a dyed-in-the-wool eugenicist:
Edwards was a long-time member and trustee of the UK’s Eugenics Society and then, under its new name, the Galton Society, as Osagie Obasogie detailed in Scientific American in 2013. In a December 1970 article in the same publication, Edwards and [Ruth] Fowler [his wife] foresaw and embraced the possibility that IVF would enable the selection of embryos according to their genetic characteristics, including “choosing male or female blastocysts.”
They also envisioned other manipulations of embryos, writing that while such experiments would present “challenges to a number of established social and ethical concepts,” they would bring great rewards. Edwards implicitly acknowledged the eugenical implications of his work in 1999 when he said, “Soon it will be a sin of parents to have a child that carries the...
Related Articles
By Jessica Hamzelou, MIT Technology Review | 01.13.2025
Lisa Holligan already had two children when she decided to try for another baby. Her first two pregnancies had come easily. But for some unknown reason, the third didn’t. Holligan and her husband experienced miscarriage after miscarriage after miscarriage.
Like...
By Melissa Dahl, Slate | 01.13.2025
Mia used to say she’d never do in vitro fertilization. It’s a detail that feels significant now, looking back on the three long years that she and her husband, Chris, have spent trying to conceive. “When we first started trying...
By Tatiana Giovannucci, PET | 01.13.2025
Ten pregnant women and three others with their babies were repatriated to the Philippines after being pardoned by the Royal Government of Cambodia.
The women were recruited to act as surrogates in Cambodia, and were all pregnant at the time...
By Kristen V. Brown, The Atlantic | 01.15.2025
The first time Jamie Cassidy was pregnant, the fetus had a genetic mutation so devastating that she and her husband, Brennan, decided to terminate in the second trimester. The next time they tried for a baby, they weren’t taking chances...