Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:13:43.773Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Geneticists and the Eugenics Movement in Scandinavia1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Nils Roll-Hansen
Nils Roll-Hansen
Affiliation:
Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education, Norwegian Research Council for Science and Humanities, Munthes Gate 29, 0260 Oslo 2, Norway.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Two questions will receive special attention in this account, namely the political location of eugenics and the role of genetic science in its development. I will show that moderate eugenic policies had broad political support. For instance, the Scandinavian sterilization laws which were introduced in the 1930s were supported by the Social Democratic Parties, who were partly in position of government. I will argue that the effect of genetic research was to make eugenics more moderate, mainly because the fears and hopes were shown to be exaggerated. Degeneration was much slower than feared at first, if it took place at all, and the expectation of rapid and large effects of eugenic policies on the gene pool likewise proved to be quite unrealistic.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 335 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Searle, G.R., ‘Eugenics and Politics in Britain in the 1930s’, Annals of Science (1979), 36, pp. 159–169, p. 166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

3 Kevles, D., In the Name of Eugenics. Genetics and the uses of Human Heredity, New York, 1985.Google Scholar

4 Allen, G., ‘The Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor 1910–1940. An Essay in Institutional History’, Osiris, 2nd series, (1986) 2, pp. 225–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

5 Ludmerer, K., Genetics and American Society. A Historical Appraisal, Baltimore and London, 1972.Google Scholar

6 Searle, , op. cit. (2).Google Scholar

7 Uckerman, V.K., Les sourds-muets en Norvége, Christiania (now Oslo), 1901.Google Scholar

8 Lundborg, H., Medizinisch-biologische Familienforschung innerhalb eines 2232–köpfigen Bauerngeschlechts in Schweden, Jena, 1913.Google Scholar

9 Stortingsproposisjon nr. 1,1916, (Proposition for State budget), hovedpost V, pp. 61–64.Google ScholarIndstilling fit Stortinget XXXI, 1916, p. 12.Google ScholarForhandlinger i Stortinget, 3 04 1916, pp. 618–622.Google Scholar

10 For more details about eugenics in Norway see Roll-Hansen, N., ‘Eugenics before World War II. The case of Norway’, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, (1980), 2, pp. 269–298.Google ScholarPubMed

11 Hietala, M., ‘The eugenics movement in Finland’, manuscript 1987, 33 pp.Google Scholar

12 Philipchenko, Ju., ‘The Norwegian Eugenic Programme’, Eugenics Review, (01 1928), 19, pp. 294–298.Google Scholar

13 Roll-Hansen, , op. cit. (10), pp. 277–279.Google Scholar

14 Ludmerer, , op. cit. (5), pp. 82–83.Google Scholar

15 Broberg, G., ‘The Swedish debate about sterilization’, manuscript 1987, 34 pp.Google Scholar

16 Hansen, B.S., ‘Eugenics in Denmark’, manuscript 1988, 48 pp.Google Scholar

17 Johannsen, W., Elemente der exakten Erblichkeitslehre, 2nd edn, Jena 1913, pp. 681–682.Google Scholar

18 Johannsen, W., Arvelighed i Historisk og Eksperimentel Belysning, Copenhagen, 1917.Google Scholar

19 Hansen, , op. cit. (16).Google Scholar

20 See for instance: ‘En rasbiolog om befolkningsfrågan’ (‘A race biologist on the population question’), Ostgöta Correspondenten, 11, 01 1935.Google Scholar Reporting a public lecture by H. Nilsson-Ehle.

21 The Lapps in Norway and Sweden were small minorities with no influence in national politics.

22 See Hietala, , op. cit. (11).Google Scholar

23 Federley, H., ‘Sterilisering i rashygieniskt syfte’ (‘Sterilization with a eugenic aim’), Medicinska Föreningens Tidsskrift, (1929), No 9, pp. 225–237.Google Scholar

24 Mohr, O.L., ‘Menneskeavlen under Kultur’ (‘Human breeding under culture’), Samtiden, (1926), 37, pp. 22–48.Google Scholar

25 Mohr, O.L., Arvelærens Grundtrœk (Elements of genetics), Kristiania (now Oslo), 1923.Google Scholar

26 Broberg, , op. cit. (15).Google Scholar

27 Roll-Hansen, N., ‘Sterilization and Norwegian Eugenics’, manuscript 1987, 53 pp.Google Scholar

28 Tydén, M., ‘Från statligt till enskilt interesse’Google Scholar (‘From state to private concern’), Term paper, Department of political science, Uppsala University, spring term 1986.

29 Kemp, T., ‘Genetic-Hygiene Experiences in Denmark’, The Eugenics Review, (1957), 44, pp. 11–18.Google Scholar

30 See for instance Kemp, T., Arvehygiejne. Festskrift udgivet af Köbenhavns Universitet i anledning af Universitetets Årsfest November 1951 (Copenhagen, 1951)Google Scholar, and Nachtsheim, H., Für und wieder die Sterilisierung aus eugenischer Indikation, Stuttgart, 1952.Google Scholar In public debate about the proposal to introduce a eugenic sterilization law in West Germany in 1962–1963 H. Nachtsheim explicitly referred to Denmark as a model country. See Nachtsheim, H., ‘Schlusswort’, Ärztliche Mitteilungen, 60, 1 (No. 24/15.6.1963)Google Scholar

31 See Kevles, , op. cit. (2)Google Scholar

32 Roll, N.–Hansen, , ‘The Progress of Eugenics: Growth of Knowledge and Change in Ideology’, History of Science, (1988), 26, pp. 295–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 Paul, D., ‘Eugenics and the Left’, Journal of the History of Ideas, (1984), 45, pp. 567–590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

34 Barker, D., ‘The Biology of Stupidity: Genetics, Eugenics and Mental Deficiency in the Inter-War Years’, British Journal for the History of Science, (1989), 22, pp. 347–375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

35 Barker, , op. cit. 34 p. 351.Google Scholar

36 Barker, , op. cit. 34 p. 374.Google Scholar

37 Allen, G.E., ‘The role of experts in scientific controversy’, in Engelhardt, H.T. and Caplan, A.L. (eds) Scientific controversies. Case studies in the resolution and closure of disputes in science and technology, Cambridge Univerisity Press, 1987, pp. 169–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Allen, G.E., ‘The Eugenics record Office at Cold Spring Harbour, 1910–1940: An essay in institutional history’, Osiris, 2nd series, (1986), 2, pp. 225–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar