"Eugenics - an enduring part of fallen human nature." This was the title of Fr John Fleming's talk today at the SPUC Clergy Information Day at Victoria. Fr Fleming's talks are always well-researched and highly informative and today's was no exception.
I had to rush off after my morning Mass to get there in time - nearly thwarted by a jam in the Blackwall Tunnel which kept me waiting for 15 minutes before I could turn off to park at North Greenwich. It was well worth it, though. One of my basic criteria for a good teaching session is that you know more when you leave than when you came in: not always achieved, especially if you have to waste most of the time in "Buzz Groups." There was none of that today, but there was a good opportunity to meet with friends - Fr Basden, Fr Southwell, Fr Young, and Fr Sherbrooke among many others. Since this is a general London event, it is good also to get together with priests from Westminster and other dioceses whom I would not normally meet.
Fr Fleming took us through the history of the eugenics movement with quotations from various "respectable" figures. I did like his quotation from G K Chesterton who responded to Herbert Spencer's expression "survival of the fittest" with "survival of the nastiest." Quite rightly, the distinction was drawn between the Nazi holocaust and the origin of euthanasia. Euthanasia was already well established before Hitler rose to power. A German pioneer of euthanasia, Karl Binding, even coined the phrase "death with dignity" to describe the killing of those whose life is deemed to be devoid of value. Hitler used an already existing moral decay as a basis for his even more evil programme. (See my posts from 2008: "The life thou gavest, Lord, we've ended" and What the nazis built on.)
We were also taken through the temporary lull in eugenic enthusiasm after the horror of the holocaust became known, and its revival after an indecently short interval. We have now reached the point where someone such as James Lachs will say that "The only way to treat hydrocephalic children "humanely" is to "mercifully" put them to death.
SPUC website has a copy of the slides from Fr Fleming's powerpoint presentation. Many thanks to SPUC for an educative and worthwhile day.
7 comments:
It would be interesting to do a detailed study of the language of eugenics. (Merciful, kindness, dignified, painless etc etc)
However, I heard a woman on the radio a couple of days ago, just an ordinary caller to a phone in show, saying that the costs of looking after disabled children were not justifiable because those children are not able to make a useful contribution to society. She was quite clear that they were nothing but a drain on the taxpayer and that she herself would have aborted a disabled baby, or abandoned a disabled newborn of her own. As she put it, 'I would reject the child'. She said these things to the mother of a severely disabled child (brain damaged at birth) whose family is struggling to care for the child and who was appealing for more respite care. She used plain English employing none of the usual language of eugenics. I have never before heard such a frankly stated pro-eugenics position.
As you say, it is crucial to remind ourselves that eugenics is much more than just a Nazi abberation in the history of western culture. It is now firmly embedded in our society and in the approach we take to health care in this country, but it comes directly from late 19th century/early 20th century ideas. The abortion industry is rooted in the pre-war eugenics movement.
Our Lady of Guadalupe Pray for Us.
I can personally confirm the utilitarian view of the child in the womb,prevalent in the NHS.
Having suffered from infertility in our marriage, we were delighted when our first child was (naturally) conceived.
On filling in the forms at our local health centre we did not request amniosentesis. My response to the query of the nurse, regarding this, was that since we would not wish to abort the child under any circumstances, there was no point in the amnio.Thus stating the objective of the amniosentesis.
The nurse clearly was not happy with our response and said she would leave us alone in the room to 'discuss' it.
Although I insisted there was nothing to discuss, she left us waiting and returned half an hour later.
Obviously the official opinion was that we had given the wrong answer and it's easy to see how women can be manipulated and coerced in this situation.
Although the child would be wanted and born to parents who considered their relationship to be permanent, at age 35 I was considered to have a higher 'risk' of producing a handicapped child.
A quick Question
Are eugenics and genetic engineering the same thing?
I ask becuase I suffer from Asperger syndrome and if my DNA could be resequenced to cure my condition it would be hard to resist such a treatment if it was sinful to do so.
Genetic engineering can be used for eugenic purposes - to "improve" the genetic stock of the human race.
However, genetic engineering can be used in non-human organisms, possibly with a good effect such as the production of insulin.
Minigee may be interested to recall htt it was just such Darwinian sentiments that led Lady Thatcher to torpedo the last effort (led by David Alton) to wind back Britain's abortion laws. She didn't do this overtly, of course - though the objectionable woman's views are pretty close to hers - but 'let it be known' that she didn't support he Alton bill.
I am not sure whether it is appropriate for Fr. Fleming to be talking in public while there is an active investigation into his unprofessional and immoral behaviour while he was an anglican priest.
see also
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SASC/2010/255.html
this supreme court judgment suggests that Fr. Fleming is not disputing all that was written about him in 2008.
Though this group is focussed on the unborn, the horror faced by the already-born, those who allege misconduct by Fr. Fleming should also be respected.
As I understand it, Fr Fleming has been exonerated and should no longer suffer from the allegations that have been made against him and subjected to a painful process of investigation in which he was found to be innocent.
Post a Comment