Eugenics Presentation

Europa Europa:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v9Uk0glSrQ

This clip shows how the Nazi’s used ‘science’ through measurements and facial structure to push the authority of the ‘Aryan race’ as superior to the Jewish ethnicity. Through the use of this pseudo science and the perpetuation of the claims that Aryan/Nordic people are the most-talented and beautiful was a way of getting the population on their side. This ideological structuring of the races, combined with the use of scientific looking tools seemed to give a biological rationalization for some of the Nazi claims.  It also demonstrates how these are false claims when Soloman/Josef Peters is pronounced to be of Aryan ancestry despite the fact that he is Jewish. This shows how Eugenics was used to garner support from the citizens of Germany to the expulsion and eventual mass-murder of millions of Jews. This is much the same way that we see America and Germany supporting the sterilization and euthanasia of African American and Afro-German children and adults.

Information on Graduate Mothers Scheme: http://furrybrowndog.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/dr-tony-tan-was-no-independent-minded-person-on-the-graduate-mothers-scheme

Other Population Control Methods:

http://books.google.com/books?id=AdgsYCXejgYC&pg=PA153&dq=graduate+mothers+scheme&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lvZcUbOeFOnD4AOw-4HwAg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=graduate%20mothers%20scheme&f=false

The graduate mothers scheme, as well as the other population control measures that Singapore used, tie in with both the “Branded with Infamy” article and the chapter “The Black Stork”. The Graduate Mothers Scheme shows the worries of the Singapore government to be the same as those expressed by supporters of Eugenics in America decades earlier. The ‘undesirable’ portion of the population had the highest birth rate, while educated people were discovered to be having less children. From this came what they thought would be good incentives for educated women to want to have children, in the form of admittance of their offspring into the school systems. Other programs included matchmaking services for educated singles and incentives for lower classes to undergo sterilization.

Questions:

1) Do we still hold certain Eugenic beliefs today in regards to birth control?

2) Are the policies that Singapore put into place any less “morally repugnant” than those methods used in America and Nazi Germany? (195)

3) What does the use of Eugenics and how easily it was accepted tell us about the way that authority is imposed upon society?

4) Did it surprise you to discover that Planned Parenthood was started by a supporter of Eugenics?

Is Race an Important Part of Literature?

At the end of today’s class, the question of race being a factor of how things are perceived in the book. I believe that the view of how race is a factor depends on the context that you are using. For most of the time when reading the book, I did not consciously remember Skloot was white even when Skloot talked about the interactions between her and her family. Race is an important part when talking about the Lacks family. I believe that it is important to include the race when describing the Lacks family in the sense of ethics and how much those ethics have or haven’t changed. When the family interacts with the medical researchers trying to get more information, Skloot describes the family as being unknowledgeable towards the topic of Henrietta’s cells and taken advantage of. When talking about races of writers in literature, I feel that authors have to express more of their race if they want to try and prove a point. For example, if I was writing about if I lived in a dominant African American residence, I would include apparent differences between me and my neighbors. Skloot does not do that and in my opinion does not have a large effect on the reader’s opinion of race. Do you agree or disagree?

Darren Pope

The Light at the End of the Tunnel

Upon reading the final section of the "immortal" life of Henrietta Lacks I found it to be both a happy ending, yet a slight let down for what was its ending messages. For one, Henrietta's oldest child Joe or Zackriyya as he wishes to be called finally shows some comforting kindness to of all people Skloot for her constant dedication get the right story to tell the world about his mother even going as far as thanking her for her work and the image of the illuminated cells he received from the cancer ward. But the real problem is with Deborah dying and Lacks town completely disappearing from existence which makes me sad for the ending of the book. It seems that in the smallest of ways the Lacks family finally found its closure about the issues of their mother's memory. But once all questions were finally answered and the smallest of payment was made for all the medical injustices it seems the memory faded away symbolizing that Henrietta can finally rest in peace knowing her legacy is secured and her family is whole again. To me this is not the ending I would want to spread to the world. The family never really got anything for all their pain and suffering for the memories they lost for not having a mother to care for them. However, it seems that closure is better then no ending at all I would assume. However, I still wish somethings could have been different about the ending of this book. What do you think? And if you were unsatisfied with the book's ending how might you end it, with a positive outlook or a note of future progress perhaps?

-William Webster

Would Compensation Legitimize Exploitation?

My question to the class is centered on the topic of Henrietta's exploitation.  Her HeLa cells were responsible for revolutionary medical advancement.  Now my issue comes with the doctors that not only used her for her cells, but simultaneously failed to maintain patient confidentiality.  Although she was truly considered a citizen being a poor tobacco farmer and not being caucasian, I'm curious to know if you all feel like any form of monetary compensation to her or her family would have legitimized her exploitation, and made it okay?  Is it okay to overlook a human being's rights when he/she is already doomed to perish?  Especially when the outcome was so extremely positive in this regard?  What form of compensation (if any) do you feel would make up for her sacrifice?  And in this circumstance, do you feel like it is okay to overlook some blunder medical confidentiality to appease the general public?

Question of Consent

In class, the question of what constitutes exploitation was raised; in particular in regards to the issue of exploiting psychological states of the downtrodden.  Even with medical studies, I do not feel that the poor or prisoners should be excluded from being able to consent because of their situation. To claim that a poor person is not consenting to an experiment because they need the money seems cruel. They need the money, and as long as they are aware of the risks they should be allowed to participate and earn that money.  In the case of prisoners, as was discussed in class, although they may be more willing to participate in studies because they feel as if they owe society a debt, the truth of the matter is they do owe society a debt. I do not feel that they should participate without being aware of the consequences, but as long as they know what they are signing up for, I feel that they are giving valid consent. In both these cases the participants can be said to be vulnerable or desperate, but as long as they are adults, I feel it is worse to deny them the ability to consent than to let them participate in studies. This consent/participation, however, rests on the assumption that they have full disclosure and without such disclosure, no matter who the participant is, there is not an instance of valid consent

A note on Jurkat Cells

After all this talk about the HeLa cells this week, I decided to look into the concept of immortalized cells. There are a different type of immortal cells known as Jurkat cells. They are lymphocyte cells and are used in leukemia testing and cell signaling. They are considered important because of the cells' ability to produce interleukin 2.

The cell line was established in the late 1970s (decades after Henrietta) and originate from a fourteen year old boy with leukemia.

When I found this out, the first thing that came to mid was the child's age. Obviously there had to have parental consent, and surely the kid's name would not be released because he/she was a minor.

I know we play around with the what ifs, but a lot of the Henrietta Lacks debate stems from the lack of consent and the moral issue of the success of the cell in medicine. The Jurkat cells seem to have been consented and are only really known in the medical. But I imagined a scenario where this 14 year old was in Henrietta Lacks time. Would "experimentation" with a child's blood cells been just as controversial? Obviously it is hard to imagine, but it is very thought provoking.

Deborah and Skloot

It has been interesting to find that as Skloot searches and discovers things about Henrietta and in engaging with her family, Deborah has been able to face some unanswered questions. Deborah experienced a harsh childhood, without her mother, and it has been hard for hear to deal with information regarding her mother and her cells. But along with Skloot she has been able to accomplish more in discovering who her mother was and what this means to her. I feel that the book not only lays out issues regarding this woman and her immortal cells, but also the life and family that she left behind due to the cancer that provided an ability to work with and research the immortal cells.