Russell pointed out that a lot of well-meaning people espoused eugenics, and a lot of defenseless people were hurt as a result. The perspective of many scientists is narrow, he said, and there is no evidence that today they are any more aware of the side effects and malevolent uses of their work than were scientists in the past. Moreover, society's old beliefs about this subject have not been corrected either by public education or the media, he noted. But several participants argued that today in the United States, people face little danger of a government-imposed eugenics program. The greatest potential for bigotry and injustice lies elsewhere.
Reproductive consumerism is one potent force.
Important social questions about genetics, predicted Diane Paul, a political scientist at the University of Massachusetts, will arise from the desires and demands of individual families. Genetic discrimination is also likely to emerge from economic pressures. Insurance companies are likely to seek to exclude persons they deem genetically vulnerable in order to keep down their costs. One participant suggested calcium supplements and advice on breast-feeding and child rearing for pregnant teenagers. Not genetic, Asch pointed out.