Tracking Chromosomes, Castrating Dwarves: Uninformed Consent and Eugenic Research

By Lombardo, Paul A. | Ethics & Medicine, Fall 2009 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Tracking Chromosomes, Castrating Dwarves: Uninformed Consent and Eugenic Research


Lombardo, Paul A., Ethics & Medicine


Abstract

In 1929 Charles B. Davenport, a prominent biologist and leader in the American eugenics movement, carried out an experimental castration of a "Mongoloid dwarf" at a New York State mental institution. His goal was to retrieve tissue for chromosomal analysis in an attempt to understand the basis of syndromal mental retardation. Davenport was assisted in the research by cytologist T. S. Painter, who later achieved scientific celebrity for his work in counting human chromosomes. Davenport also invited George Washington Corner, who eventually contributed to the discovery of progesterone, to participate in the experiment. Davenport planned and carried out the surgery using the questionable promise of therapeutic benefit to elicit consent from a parent with limited mental capacity on behalf of an even more seriously impaired institutional resident. Archival evidence demonstrates that even at that date scientists like Davenport and the physicians he collaborated with were sensitive to ethical issues such as the necessity for consent and questions of decisional capacity, as well as the potential for negative publicity for mistreatment of "research subjects."

Keywords: Mongolism, Chromosome analysis, Informed consent for research, Eugenic research

In 1929 Charles Davenport planned and carried out an experimental castration in New York's Lecthworth Village for the Feebleminded. Davenport was a leader in the U.S. eugenics movement. Two men who would later become famous for their scientific accomplishments assisted him. Anatomist George Washington Corner performed the castrating surgery on the asylum inmate; renowned cytologist TH. Painter analyzed the tissue Corner removed. The experiment, which was designed by Davenport to provide insight into the "inherited defect" of "mongolism," addressed an important concern of the eugenicists. It also focused on dwarves, a "striking and much studied" group within public institutions.1

The field of eugenics took its name from the work of Francis Galton, focusing on "all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race."2 The word itself meant "well-born." While people who supported eugenics spanned many political and ideological boundaries, and the movement encompassed a number of innocuous or even praiseworthy goals,3 the term is now used almost exclusively as a pejorative term linked to the atrocities of the Holocaust. Many recent books have focused on linkages between the eugenics movement in the United States and its eventual expression as a program of Hitler's Third Reich. It is becoming more widely appreciated that some of the more toxic expressions of eugenics, such as laws mandating coercive sterilization, racial categorization and separation, and ethnically targeted immigration restriction were in place in the U.S. long before Hitler came to power.4

But de jure eugenics in the U.S. was far from the only insidious U S. /Nazi parallel. Another historical link between the German version of eugenics and its American cousin can be seen in the research focus of the movement in both countries. For years, U.S. scientists doing biomedical research found convenient research subjects in the abundance of "unfit" residents in mental hospitals, sanataria, orphanages and asylums. Some of the largest and most notorious institutions, like Virginia's Colony for Epileptic and Feebleminded, were the site of research over the years not only by civilian doctors, but also by the military.5 The Eugenics Record Office (ERO) also stressed the importance of research and championed the use of institutional inmates as research subjects. E. E. Southard, Harvard Medical School neuropathologist and member of the Special Board of Directors of the ERO, compared public institutions to mines, waiting "to be explored for the ore of progress." Katherine Bernent Davis, executive secretary of the Bureau of Social Hygiene, said that we should look at "our great state institutions as human laboratories.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Tracking Chromosomes, Castrating Dwarves: Uninformed Consent and Eugenic Research
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?