there will always be exceptions. iq alone will not determine someones place in lif ebut it is a good place to start draining the gene pool, for discussions sake i left out race physical build and a few other factors but i do believe i did mention criminal history and the history of previous generations.

Marcus Pembrey and colleagues observed that the paternal (but not maternal) grandsons of Swedish boys who were exposed to famine in the 19th century were less likely to die of cardiovascular disease; if food was plentiful then diabetes mortality in the grandchildren increased, suggesting that this was a transgenerational epigenetic inheritance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics#Transgenerational_epigenetic_observations

good discussion anyway. i've got to go to work now.

but you still have not answered my question from page two where you noted how this process used to be used in the united states


why were this practices discontinued????

there will always be exceptions. iq alone will not determine someones place in lif ebut it is a good place to start draining the gene pool, for discussions sake i left out race physical build and a few other factors but i do believe i did mention criminal history and the history of previous generations.

but you still have not answered my question from page two where you noted how this process used to be used in the united states
why were this practices discontinued????

In the USA, eugenic supporters included Theodore Roosevelt, pre-1960's Democratic Party, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association and the National Research Council. Research was funded by distinguished philanthropies and carried out at prestigious universities.[citation needed] It was taught in college and high school classrooms. Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood of America to urge the legalization of contraception for the lower classes. In its time eugenics was touted by some as scientific and progressive, the natural application of knowledge about breeding to the arena of human life. Before the realization of death camps in World War II, the idea that eugenics would lead to genocide was not taken seriously by the average American.

Eugenics was supported by Woodrow Wilson, and, in 1907, helped to make Indiana the first of more than thirty states to adopt legislation aimed at compulsory sterilization of certain individuals. Although the law was overturned by the Indiana Supreme Court in 1921, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Virginia law allowing for the compulsory sterilization of patients of state mental institutions in 1927.

Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone who was "epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded" from marrying. In 1898 Charles B. Davenport, a prominent American biologist, began as director of a biological research station based in Cold Spring Harbor where he experimented with evolution in plants and animals. In 1904 Davenport received funds from the Carnegie Institution to found the Station for Experimental Evolution. The Eugenics Record Office opened in 1910 while Davenport and Harry H. Laughlin began to promote eugenics.

During the 20th century, researchers became interested in the idea that mental illness could run in families and conducted a number of studies to document the heritability of such illnesses as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. Their findings were used by the eugenics movement as proof for its cause. State laws were written in the late 1800s and early 1900s to prohibit marriage and force sterilization of the mentally ill in order to prevent the "passing on" of mental illness to the next generation. These laws were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927 and were not abolished until the mid-20th century. All in all, 60,000 Americans were sterilized.

In years to come, the ERO collected a mass of family pedigrees and concluded that those who were unfit came from economically and socially poor backgrounds. Eugenicists such as Davenport, the psychologist Henry H. Goddard and the conservationist Madison Grant (all well respected in their time) began to lobby for various solutions to the problem of the "unfit". (Davenport favored immigration restriction and sterilization as primary methods; Goddard favored segregation in his The Kallikak Family; Grant favored all of the above and more, even entertaining the idea of extermination.)

Some states sterilized "imbeciles" for much of the 20th century. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case that the state of Virginia could sterilize those it thought unfit. The most significant era of eugenic sterilization was between 1907 and 1963, when over 64,000 individuals were forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in the United States. A favorable report on the results of sterilization in California, the state with the most sterilizations by far, was published in book form by the biologist Paul Popenoe and was widely cited by the Nazi government as evidence that wide-reaching sterilization programs were feasible and humane. When Nazi administrators went on trial for war crimes in Nuremberg after World War II, they justified the mass sterilizations (over 450,000 in less than a decade) by citing the United States as their inspiration. American eugenicists inspired and supported Hitler's racial purification laws, and failed to understand the connection between those policies and the eventual genocide of the Holocaust.

With the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, eugenicists for the first time played an important role in the Congressional debate as expert advisers on the threat of "inferior stock" from eastern and southern Europe. This reduced the number of immigrants from abroad to 15 percent from previous years, to control the number of "unfit" individuals entering the country. While eugenicists did support the act, the most important backers were union leaders like Samuel Gompers. The new act, inspired by the eugenic belief in the racial superiority of "old stock" white Americans as members of the "Nordic race" (a form of white supremacy), strengthened the position of existing laws prohibiting race- mixing. Eugenic considerations also lay behind the adoption of incest laws in much of the U.S. and were used to justify many anti-miscegenation laws.

After the experience of Nazi Germany, many ideas about "racial hygiene" and "unfit" members of society were publicly renounced by politicians and members of the scientific community. The Nuremberg Trials against former Nazi leaders revealed to the world many of the regime's genocidal practices and resulted in formalized policies of medical ethics and the 1950 UNESCO statement on race. Many scientific societies released their own similar "race statements" over the years, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, developed in response to abuses during the Second World War, was adopted by the United Nations in 1948 and affirmed, "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family." In continuation, the 1978 UNESCO declaration on race and racial prejudice states that the fundamental equality of all human beings is the ideal toward which ethics and science should converge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#United_States

What can or should be done to halt this trend toward unwed births? Take our poll. The poll has several options, so you can take it more than once.

1 - Nothing, it's the new normal.
2 - Improve sex ed in schools.
3 - Prosecute men who have sex with girls.
4 - Explain to young women the important role of fathers.
5 - Improve access to abortion.
6 - Restrict the number of children for which unwed mothers can get public assistance.
7 - Other (option)

United Nations in 1948 and affirmed, "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family."

I found something intersting on why eugenics failed.

Research Flaws: There were many reasons why eugenics failed. Much can be attributed to the fact that information was skewed and the research flawed. There were five main flaws in eugenics research, as listed below.

1. Difficulty of defining traits - Eugenics researchers were trying to identify traits that were difficult to define, such as epilepsy, intelligence, and alcoholism, for example. Some of these traits were not clearly definable in reality.

2. Reification - meaning when complex behaviors were treated as thought they stemmed from a single cause, such as intelligence. It is impossible to narrow down these complex behaviors to just one single cause.

3. Poor survey and statistical methods - Often, information could not be gathered from many generations back, the proper way to invest a subject like eugenics, and information from previous generations often came only from word of mouth, and unreliable source of information.

4. False quantification - This is the belief that is numerical values can be produced in investigation, experimentation, and research, that this information is valid. An example of this is the IQ test, which is believed to tell the true intelligence of a person on how well they score on a single test.

5. Social and environmental influences - Researchers in the eugenics field forgot to take into account the differences that social influences would have on a person, such as different customs, life styles, and health practices of various cultural groups. This skewed the information they recorded. Also, an interesting note on the quotas (http://occ.awlonline.com/bookbind/pubbooks/nash5e_awl/medialib/timeline/doc s/sources/theme_primarysources_Immigration_11.html) - if you look at the number of immigrants admitted from Spain, a western country of Europe and one of the original early settling countries of the US, it is only allowed 131 immigrants, while Poland, and eastern country of "bad blood", is allowed 5,982 immigrants, and southern country also of "bad blood", Italy, is allowed 3,845 immigrants. Perhaps there was another reason for the small amount of immigrants being allowed in from Spain, but I do not know what that is.

adj...I posted about why it doesn't work....

that was not the question rose

the question was why did the u s stop doing it???

still does not answer thequestion of why the united states stopped the practice

this is not the answer as it continuesd well beyond the issue of this:



I think it just fell out of favor with the majority of people. I haven't seen any explicit mention of a set point where it was decided to officially stop across the country. Oregon didn't officially stop til '83.
It seems to still hold water for some people though and has had a slight resurgence with the Human Genome Project.