EMPATHY
Empathy involves the capacity to put oneself into another's shoes, and to share and appreciate their state of mind and emotion. Empathy is also a hallmark of informed decisions about conflicting situations of social justice, where an appreciation and sensitivity towards diverse communities, individuals, or cultures is often required. Empathy is not the same thing as sympathy, pity, or mere identification with others. It involves the act of fellow feeling: experiencing the position of others willingly and without judgment. As John Steinbeck noted, "If you judge people, you have no time to love them." Empathy requires self-awareness, good listening skills, and self-confidence.
Are We Ready to Forgive People Who Commit Crimes?
Emily Wilks
America’s predisposition to respond to crime is through retribution, or punishment. A “one size fits all” approach is regularly applied to varying types of criminal activity, leaving no room to contextualize the wrongdoing or humanize the individual at fault. The United States has an extensive history of using punitive measures to combat crime through efforts such as the War on Drugs and policies enacted during the “tough on crime” era, and these measures have perpetuated mass incarceration and high rates of people reoffending (recidivism).
Retributive approaches to offending continue in the system today, and the knee-jerk response to crime is often incarceration. The privatization of prisons in the U.S. has been linked to higher rates of assault, deprivation of food and medical care, and higher rates of confiscated contraband (Office of the Inspector General, 2016). This retributive approach to crime, along with many others, has not decreased rates of recidivism; it has instead caused an inmate mental health epidemic and left victims unsatisfied with little to no closure. The US Department of Justice reports that 82% of people released from state prisons will reoffend within ten years, and 43% of people will reoffend within one year (Lahdon, 2023). It is clear that our country’s method of dealing with crime is insufficient for creating safe and healthy communities.
Restorative justice offers a unique remedy for the harm inflicted by America’s adherence to retributive justice. Restorative justice involves establishing a dialogue between the victim and the wrongdoer of an event with the hope of rehabilitating the wrongdoer, providing healing for the victim, and creating an environment that encourages forgiveness. It aims to repair, restore, reconcile, and reintegrate (Menkel-Meadow, 2007). For people like Sharletta Evans, whose three-year-old son was killed in a drive-by shooting, restorative justice provides her with healing and purpose that punishment could never achieve. She was able to forgive the boy who shot her son and even has regular conversations with him. She has also established a nonprofit that teaches a restorative justice program in correctional facilities (Evans, 2015). Though this practice doesn’t bring her son back, it allows for healing where possible. It also allows for the wrongdoer to take accountability for his actions and still be seen as more than what he has done.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance has found that restorative justice reduces recidivism, decreases psychological trauma during incarceration, and increases satisfaction with the justice process among victims (Lahdon, 2023). It is important to note that these findings are contingent on restorative justice being facilitated correctly and with the willing participation of all impacted parties. Restorative justice offers many benefits that the current approaches cannot. States across the nation have begun to enact practices that incorporate restorative justice into their sentencing processes. Yet, many people are still apprehensive about the concept and there are little to no restorative justice programs offered to people who are convicted of violent crimes, despite data showing that restorative processes are the most effective in these cases. Stigma and judgment still run rampant in society, with beliefs that people who commit crimes are beyond redemption. If our country desires to fix its problem of crime, we must engage in honest, sometimes painful, conversations about why we are unwilling to release the need for retribution and why we refuse forgiveness. Forgiveness, empathy, and accountability are our answer to harm, not punishment.
Therapy Dogs Supporting Hospitalized Children
Alenna Zhu
In 2020, in my hospital room amidst the Covid-19 pandemic and a cancer diagnosis, I was struggling with feelings of loneliness, confusion, anger, and depression. When a golden retriever named Company came to visit, those feelings were suspended for the brief time he was there. Company wasn’t in my room to check my vitals or give me medicine, he was only there to give and receive love. In the thirty days I spent in the hospital, that dog brought me greater comfort than anything else.
I was only one of over 15,000 children that are diagnosed with cancer each year in the U.S. Every year, 15,000 kids go through what I went through, or worse. Hospitals are notoriously scary, sterile, overwhelming environments, especially for children with limited understandings of what they might be going through. A scary hospital experience can lead to medical trauma, which can produce other issues such as disruption in youthful development and mental health issues later in life. Conversely, childhood bonding with companion animals has been shown to benefit emotional, cognitive, and social development, and possess benefits like reducing stress, anxiety, and depression. If a therapy dog provided me these benefits for the one day he visited me, how may my hospital experience have been different if he came several times a week, or every day?
Although therapy dogs are becoming increasingly common to find in hospital settings, they are not common enough. Children’s National, one of the top children’s hospitals in the country and where I stayed, only has two full-time facility dogs, yet they care for over 220,000 patients annually. Hundreds of thousands of children may be healing physically, but are hurting mentally and emotionally in the process. Of course one dog was able to visit once out of thirty days, there are so many other patients that need and deserve to spend time with a therapy dog too.
The first step to overcoming an illness or injury is getting the required physiological treatment, but following up with steps to heal psychologically is also extremely important. Hospitals have all the tools they need to complete the first step, but are far less equipped in helping patients facing the mental consequences of medical complications, which is especially important when it comes to children. Having therapy dogs visit patients and assist them in getting through the crisis they are in could greatly improve the quality of their time spent in the hospital, giving children a companion to help cope with or manage stress while making sure they feel comforted, loved, and not alone. If the trauma of going through a medical emergency can be offset in any way, then we should do everything we can to make sure all child patients are both healthy and happy. While doctors take care of the physical issues, therapy dogs can help take care of the consequential psychological issues.
How Human Traffickers Use Social Media to Find, Contact, and Connect with Victims
Tessa Bayer
It is undeniable that social media has revolutionized the possibilities of communication and connection. However, as many are aware, not everyone employs the ability to learn about and contact others for good. Unfortunately, the growth of social media has greatly influenced the escalation of human trafficking and traffickers’ abilities to find, research and reach their victims. When the world turned to their devices for communication needs amidst COVID-19 isolation measures, online trafficking rates rose exponentially, leading the White House to establish the Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse to mitigate the alarmingly high statistics.
In an age where it is acceptable and even expected to post personal information on social media sites, traffickers do not even have to leave their homes to find large pools of potential victims. Using various platforms such as dating apps, virtual games, public forums, or photo-sharing applications (e.g. Instagram or Facebook) traffickers are able to cast a wide net for potential victims that display similar characteristics. Traffickers aim to identify potential victims by searching for displays of vulnerability. Vulnerability comes in many forms, but is most commonly exhibited by a need not being met in someone’s life such as a lack of affirmation, financial security, love, or physical safety.
When a need is identified, traffickers will begin to craft a curated “grooming strategy,” the optimal manner to approach the victim, gain their trust, and begin manipulating the victim for their own gain. When individuals post content that shares their hobbies, interests, or preferences, traffickers are able to leverage this information to tailor their strategy and increase their chances of success. Traffickers are then able to create one or multiple fake online profiles or sites built around the victim’s interests, hobbies, or needs to entice their victim to interact.
Once a trafficker makes initial contact with a victim, the trafficker will then attempt to build a relationship with them based upon the victim’s initially identified need. This can manifest as a “catfish” romantic interest that will provide affirmation to the person who feels alone, or a job opportunity for the individual searching tirelessly for a job. This process is known as “grooming,” and its purpose is to establish direct communication and build rapport with the victim. Ultimately, the trafficker will turn on their victim and leverage information to control the individual during the time of trafficking.
Fortunately, there are ways to be vigilant and protect yourself from traffickers seeking to initiate this grooming process. First, be careful with what you post online. Keep your accounts private and do not allow people who you do not know to follow you. Do not share personal information online, and report suspicious behavior to the proper authorities. By doing so, you are not only protecting yourself, but others as well from this horrific scheme.
To Understand Another is to Be Human
Sarah Marie McCormick
Empathy is a concept many claim to understand. But can we truly put ourselves in the place of another person? The individual forgets that every other person has their own thoughts, inner worlds, problems, challenges, and fears. How can we be empathetic? “Empathy combines the cognitive and emotional abilities of human beings. It needs not only the ability to understand others’ thoughts and emotions, but also the ability to resonate with others’ emotions” (Ruolin & and Wang). Empathy requires human connection and seeing each person as an equal.
In a study done at the University of New Mexico, a group of honors students embarked on a service-learning centered course. The class worked to give students a wider perspective on the various life experiences of people in a variety of position in life. Professors brought in speakers from the area and also from far away to speak about their lives. The study noted that it is irresponsible to assume that all honors or university students come from affluent or privileged backgrounds. But it is irresponsible not to recognize the privilege of being an observer of other’s lives. The class researched incarceration, the criminal justice system, and the impact it has on a human life. The students completed several assignments ranging from essays on topics of interest to working with experienced photographers and interviewing juvenile prisoners. By connecting with people who are incarcerated on a human level, rather than just on paper, the class cultivated empathy (Jacobs & Walsh-Dilley).
Today, many of us are disconnected from the problems of others. We fear human experiences such as embarrassment, sadness, and anger. By introducing a service-learning requirement to majors at universities more students from diverse backgrounds could become empathetic enough to truly connect with others. So often, college students find the programs forced on them by universities to be constricting, boring, and a waste of time. By granting students ownership over their acts of service and interactions with empathy some of these negative emotions surrounding university-imposed service might dissipate. Having responsibility over a project which engages with communities, issues, and important hobbies can have a powerful impact on the rest of our lives. Adolescence is a confusing time: many of us feel powerless, but some feel on top of the world. Engaging all students in service universities can inspire confidence.
Cultivating empathy is imperative to our emotional development. To understand another is to be human. When we articulate our feelings, express ourselves, and share our anxieties and frustrations, we are helping each other cope with the stresses of life. Normalizing communication, sharing, and empathy is a stepping-stone to more authentic and equitable community.
Gender Affirming Care is Necessary Care
Marco Seaberg
Gender affirming care can refer to many different services. Some of these are taking hormones and undergoing surgery. Others involve haircuts. Some are legally changing their names. Others are experimenting with different types of clothing.
News sources such as FOX News have sensationalized gender affirming care with headlines such as “Doctors think gender affirming care for kids is ‘crazy,’ but are ‘too afraid’ to speak out…” and “Stop the mutilation of our girls with so-called ‘gender-affirming care.’” I highlight examples for FOX News, mainly because of their numerous articles sensationalizing trans lives, but they are not the only source that does this. Social media also elevates the voices of celebrities who claim a voice over trans lives. J.K. Rowling, famous for writing the Harry Potter series, has amplified fearmongering about gender affirming care. She even goes so far as to identify as a TERF (trans exclusionary radical feminist), meaning that she does not believe trans issues are important to feminism.
The FOX News articles, both from 2023, draw false parallels between gender affirming care and female genital mutilation. The key difference between these practices is informed consent. Female genital mutilation is a practice that is done to female infants to control their sexuality. These practices are widely shamed. Gender affirming care involves a wide range of practices done to help affirm people in the identity they claim (and yes, sometimes these people are minors).
Informed consent is the idea that individuals are aware of the benefits and risks of a particular treatment and are choosing it for themselves. Transgender individuals are able to give informed consent with the support of caregivers and medical practitioners. To equate medical gender affirming care with female genital mutilations is ignorant and malicious.
Gender affirming care is not limited to trans and gender non-conforming people. Cis people engage in gender affirming care. Cis people get haircuts that affirm their identity. Some cis people may seek the aid of hormones to enhance their gender presentation (hair growth supplements and Viagra). Some cis people seek surgery to affirm their gender (butt lifts, gynecomastia surgery, lip fillers).
Research shows that gender affirming care is doing good in the world. A study on “Mental Health Outcomes in Transgender and Nonbinary Youths Receiving Gender-Affirming Care” published by the National Library of Medicine found that “gender-affirming medical interventions were associated with lower odds of depression and suicidality over 12 months.”
Misconceptions about gender affirming care affect people’s access to it. I've witnessed local communities imposing restrictions in schools, limiting youths’ ability to explore in a safe setting. Some schools have standards that require teachers to “out” their students (disclose their student’s identity, to potentially non-affirming people) to parents and guardians.
I am someone who has transitioned socially, legally, and medically. I have cut my hair in all sorts of styles. I’ve experimented with clothes, makeup, and jewelry. I’ve taken hormones. I’ve had surgery. No, I don’t regret any of it. Gender affirming care greatly enhanced my quality of life. As you continue to encounter arguments around gender affirming care, please take the time to find the voices of trans individuals.
Tordoff, Diana M et al. (2022). “Mental Health Outcomes in Transgender and Nonbinary Youths Receiving Gender-Affirming Care.” JAMA Network Open vol. 5, no. 2: e220978. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0978.
K-Pop and Anti-Asian Hate
Shukrana Shukrullah
“K-Pop” was never intended to be local. Korean mega music companies along with the South Korean government made immense efforts to export Korean music and movies. However, the extent to which K-Pop, K-dramas (Korean TV shows), and even K-Beauty products became a global juggernaut was not anticipated by the Koreans or global consumers. This international phenomenon created a name for itself: “The Korean Wave.” Fans, viewers, and customers around the world began consuming Korean entertainment and products. This unexpected rise of South Korean influence across global industries was not great news to everybody, however. Not only did other Asian markets feel threatened, but locals—especially in Western countries—were unhappy with the South Korean “infiltration” into their pop culture.
For years, K-Pop and K-Drama fans enjoyed their music and movies in secret, afraid of being embarrassed or judged by others, and especially their peers. Then the rise of the South Korean idol group “BTS” introduced another wave of Korean pop music. Global fanbases erupted around the world, and K-Pop became more accepted as a popular international music genre. Although people were able to pursue their love for South Korean entertainment and products more openly, this also intensified reactions, specifically xenophobic and racist remarks.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, called the “Chinese Virus” or “Kung Flu” by U.S. president Donald Trump, this country has witnessed a great rise in anti-Asian hate. Besides the former president’s racist comments, numerous other public figures and populations around the world are criticizing and fueling discrimination of Asians, including K-Pop idol groups. In late February of 2021, two days after BTS performed on MTV Unplugged, the German radio host, Matthias Matuschik, compared the boy group to COVID, saying they should be rid of with a vaccine, like the dangerous virus. This caused an uproar among BTS fans, and Matuschik’s employer released an apathetic “apology” that understated his actions, claiming he was simply stating his dislike of BTS’ performance, and that he never meant to upset BTS fans. Matuschik along with many others make hateful comments and never own up to them. Racists regard Asia as a single identity rather than as a multitude of countries and cultures. They view all East Asians as the “same” without considering whether they were born in South Korea, China, or even the United States.
Regardless of artistic achievement or global recognition, South Koreans, along with other Asians, are discriminated against for their physical features and culture. There is a big emphasis on their looks, often being regarded by haters as “too feminine” or simply “Asian.” Recent events have shown a horrific increase in prejudice towards East Asians. Anti-Asian hate has expanded over the years, and is now at its peak. K-Pop is an artform that has been able to bring people from across the world together. It is now our responsibility as educated individuals to be aware of these issues and take action to inform others and promote inclusivity, kindness, and love towards all of humanity.
Hope for Children
Kathryn Dealey
The Power of Role Models
Shay Dauphinais
Understanding the profound impact of a role model requires a comprehensive examination of human development across the lifespan and the neurological factors that indicate whether a role model may deter an adolescent from crime.
The lifecycle consists of five stages, including infancy, toddlerhood, preadolescence, adolescence (teenagehood), and adulthood. In the pre-adolescent stage, children are particularly susceptible to developing malice values and behaviors as they tend to mimic the actions of those who they look up to. Because of this, positive role models are essential to preadolescents’ healthy development. The adolescent stage is commonly associated with crime-partaking behavior, as teenagers attempt to find their identity and fit in with their peers. Studies show that adolescents will focus on rewards rather than the consequences of their actions when making decisions, leading to further risk-taking behaviors. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is the area of the brain that dictates the body’s executive functions, such as considering long-term consequences and controlling impulses. This area of the brain is not thoroughly matured until 20 years old, with lingering signs of immaturity even after that.
This research is further corroborated by my own experience as a volunteer for Big Brothers Big Sisters. Big Brothers Big Sisters is a nonprofit organization that helps youth participants reach higher aspirations and greater confidence levels, foster better relationships, and avoid risky behaviors by pairing them with a “Big” who can become that positive role model. Throughout my time as a big, I have seen such a huge behavioral shift in my preadolescent “Little.” Observing her evolve from a quiet, introverted girl into a confident, goofy, positive young lady is a testament to the value of role models in this formative stage of development. She is finding out who she wants to be and needs a role model to help establish a path she can follow. Already, I have seen her emulate my actions, identifying what she values in her own life. Providing her with an example of a foundational path to follow is greatly beneficial for youth, emphasizing further the importance of a role model as a preadolescent and its influence on the adolescent stage of life.
Overall, given this stage in the research process, the evidence does not yet suggest whether or not a positive role model is an indicator of partaking in delinquent behavior because there are many other factors to consider for such predetermination (i.e., environment, intellect, language, and social development). Nevertheless, it’s clear that having a positive role model can significantly help juveniles in any of the pre-adulthood stages focus on setting responsible priorities, avoid risk-taking behaviors, and become confident in their abilities to live a flourishing life.
Today only 25% of young adults can identify a positive role model in their lives. Consequently, the responsibility of helping today’s youth become vessels of change and providing more opportunities for mentorship programs relies on everyday individuals and policymakers. Although the stagnant nature of the juvenile justice system differs from that of the rapidly changing youth population, the application of knowledge gained through neurobiology and lifespan human development makes change all but inevitable.
Healthcare Accessibility and Poverty
Kaitlyn Gentille
Should healthcare be in innate right or an earned privilege? This question has been debated and politicized for decades, and individuals across the political spectrum express varying opinions. It remains a fundamental human rights issue that affects a substantial number of American citizens. Despite the United States being a leading figure in global economics, universal access to healthcare is not a luxury for all Americans.
Many argue that it could be deemed as “unethical” to enable a society to maintain a “system that distributes healthcare unevenly,” and allow individuals to “suffer from a lack of medical care if it is in our power to prevent something harmful from happening,” (Maruthappu). Opponents say that universal health care access is a drain on medical staff and supplies. Eliminating a societal disparity such as this one would strain health professionals. In addition, a “fair system of distribution,” such as a “minimum level of healthcare provision,” would have to be established to ensure equality to all citizens. However, the fact that healthcare needs vary across different “communities and groups makes it difficult to establish a minimum level,” (Maruthappu).
A variety of socioeconomic factors effect individual healthcare access. Such barriers include gender, race, ethnicity, education, language, physician’s availability, and acculturation. Such factors “influence the likelihood of gaining entry into the healthcare system,” and can put immense pressure on individuals to find adequate healthcare who may live in specific inhibitory circumstances (Quinnipiac). People who live in poverty may feel stressed simply by the thought of needing to see a medical professional. Living at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum can change a regular and normal experience into a much larger ordeal. In a podcast for The Commonwealth Fund, economist Raj Chetty found that the “top one percent of Americans are expected to live ten to 15 years longer than the bottom one percent of Americans.” Despite this statistic, individuals who have a lower income are “more likely to have health problems,” as well as being “more likely to receive poor access and poor quality of care” (Seervai).
Not only is it more difficult for individuals living in poverty to have access to healthcare, those who do tend to feel judged and disrespected by physicians who are not able to understand their current circumstances. The Commonwealth Fund spoke to several low-income patients who felt as if they were being treated differently because “they were insured by Medicaid” or other forms of health coverage available to financially unstable populations (Seervai). Further, patients felt rushed and not taken as seriously due to a variety of factors, such as inability to access proper nutrition or exercise regularly due to living in less than ideal conditions. Intersectionality also plays a key role in access to healthcare. Individuals who experience discrimination in society are put at an even greater disadvantage when it comes to health care access.
Medical schools don’t teach future physicians how to communicate with their patients about treatment costs or other related subjects. This is a key component to consider when deciding whether to accept treatment or not. The ability to effectively talk about this aspect of medicine may be a critical skill that would benefit both the doctor-patient relationship and the comfort level of patients. It is important to teach physicians how to diagnose and prescribe. It is equally important to teach doctors how to hear and understand their patients. People living in poverty “want and need” better access to healthcare (Seervai). And while some policies reduce the societal pressures placed on healthcare access, there is much work left to be done.
Empathy is Not a Fluke
Kearney Quillen
A reader might be familiar with the claim that leftist economic systems don't work in practice because “humans are too inherently selfish.” But people rarely take that claim at anything other than face value. We’re so often confronted with so many bad things done at the hands of bad people that we’re ready to accept that we are just inherently bad. Because if we weren’t, then why would all this be happening?
What I intend to do here is challenge this claim. I argue that while we may have learned to be selfish or self interested because that's what is rewarded in our society, it is by no means a natural state of being. Empathy is not a fluke, or a conscience we can choose to ignore. It is innate, and has been for millennia.
We can see this in our archaeological record, in the case of the 50,000 year old Neanderthal known as Shanidar 1, who at a young age suffered from many injuries and a systematic degenerative condition. This trauma rendered him deaf in both ears, with an amputated forearm and a severe and painful limp. He suffered these injuries in youth, and could not have contributed in any meaningful way to his tribe’s well-being or survival. He could not have survived on his own. Assuming an innately self-serving nature, his tribe should have left him for dead. Instead, archeologists tell us that he lived to be 40 years old, what was considered “old age” for Neanderthals. His skeleton tells us that he was loved and cared for. Despite how little material value he could bring to his tribe, they valued him nevertheless. To them, he was worthy of value. Inherently.
Capitalist greed and apathy is not our natural state, it is learned. It isn’t even natural for rats. Researchers at the University of Chicago did an experiment to see how much value a rat would put on freeing another rat from an uncomfortable container. What they found was that the rats almost always freed their partner, even in cases where they didn’t get to play with them after they were freed. Even in cases where they had to give up food in order to free them. In fact, when given the choice between freeing the other rat and hoarding a snack all to themselves, the rats chose to give some of the treats to the other rat after having freed them. “That was very compelling," noted one researcher. "It said to us that essentially helping their cagemate is on a par with chocolate. He can hog the entire chocolate stash if he wanted to, and he does not. We were shocked.”
If selfishness isn’t even innate in rodents, why are we expected to believe that it would be innate in us? Why are we so accepting of the existence of homelessness when there are 59 times as many empty homes as there are homeless people? Why are we so accepting of hunger when we have the food supply to feed 10,000,000,000 people? Why are we so willing to bankrupt our citizens for the crime of falling sick or trying to learn? What made us stop listening to our empathy? When did we become so desensitized to suffering that we would tolerate these conditions?
Because we don’t have to accept any of this. This isn’t something out of our control, that we just have to learn to be okay with. There are real, tangible steps that we can take to alleviate this suffering. The Housing First model is being trial run internationally, and seeing phenomenal results. Organizations like Food Not Bombs have been working for decades to make food available to those who need it. The United States is the only one out of 33 developed countries to not have universal healthcare. At least seven countries have free college education and at least 35 have affordable education.
The researchers from the University of Chicago said of their experiment that “we feel distressed when another is suffering, and we want to stop it.” I’m telling you that we have the ability to stop so much suffering in this world, and the reason we haven’t isn’t because it’s not in our nature to help each other. It’s because we’ve been led to believe that we have no obligation to do so. It’s up to you to decide who you’re going to listen to.
Empathy and Gene Therapy
Simon Anderson
My research interests lie in genetics and alteration of DNA to treat and cure disease. However, it is well known that genetic alteration can lead to profound moral and social issues.
In gene therapy treatment, a disease-causing allele – a “defective” or “unfit” gene – is replaced or supplemented with the wild-type allele – the “ideal” or “proper” gene. For diseases such as sickle cell anemia and adrenoleukodystrophy, this is an effective and often life-saving method of treatment. Nevertheless, the concept behind gene therapy begs the question: What makes a gene “unfit?” There is evidence to suggest that people carrying one sickle cell allele and one wild-type allele are resistant to malaria. Furthermore, can only disease-causing genes be classified into fit and unfit alleles? What is to stop some sect, whose leaders are corrupted by personal biases, from declaring that genes producing high levels of melanin in the skin are defective over genes that produce little melanin? Who determines what is mutant and wild-type when the two alleles are incredibly common?
Following human genetic development, white skin is a mutation from the dark skin of our African primate and early human ancestors. Does that mean that there is a stronger justification for replacing white skin-causing alleles with dark skin ones rather than the other way around? It is clear here that simple scientific classifications of mutant, wild-type, normal, abnormal, etc. will not suffice for guiding what genes are in need of correcting.
One might think that, despite debate, the difference between what genes are “good” and which are “bad” is fairly straightforward. This is not so. Take a dominant allele with 100% penetrance: anyone with even a single copy of this form of the gene will develop the disease. Some alleles like this cause deleterious diseases; these are easily classified as defective, and so must be eliminated, or else the patient may die of a slow and terrible disease. However, what about a disease that is recessive – where the patient needs two copies of the disease gene, one from each parent – or a disease with less than 100% penetrance. Not everyone with the allele will develop the disease.
What if the gene is not a causative agent in the disease at all, but is merely a marker found in the same chromosomal region? Should parents carrying a diseased allele be barred or strongly discouraged from having children in case they pass it on? Can any government or organization require that these parents not have children if their child has a 100% chance of developing the disease? These are the questions not asked of students in genetics classes. We do our pedigree and Punnett square calculations, and make recommendations to the hypothetical patient that they shouldn’t have children. How does this translate to clinical settings? What interpersonal skills must a doctor develop to look an aspiring mother and father in the eyes, and tell them that they must either deny themselves a family or condemn their child to a short lifetime of suffering?
The biomedical aspects of my education and training furnish me with the genetic knowledge to present the facts and the numbers to a patient. But only the empathy-cultivating medical humanities can give me the skills to deliver bad news sensitively. Doctors Shalev and McCann in their January 2020 article “Can the Medical Humanities Make Trainees More Compassionate? A Neurobehavioral Perspective” describe how empathy is “a learnable, ‘neurobiologically based competency’” that can be taught through courses on “the neurobiology and physiology of emotion.” Because debates and social phenomena surrounding genetics and genetic alteration have raised ethical disasters in the past – particularly the eugenics campaigns in the United States and Nazi Germany in the middle of the last century – it is of the utmost importance to study history, psychology, and philosophy in addition to statistics, biology, and chemistry in order to provide sensitive, empathetic, and successful medical care to all patients.