As Jewish Hungarians, Jeno and Rosalie Rasko were murdered in the name of "racial hygiene" during the World War II.

Today, their grandson, John Rasko AO, is a world-leading scientist with a personal and professional stake in the 'science' that led to their death — eugenics.

"My grandfather, Jeno, was forced into the gas chambers at Auschwitz in late 1944," says Professor Rasko, who was awarded an Order of Australia in 2012 for service to biomedical research in the field of gene and cell therapy.

"We assume that my grandmother, Rosalie, was murdered in the same way, but her death went unrecorded."

The Nazis took eugenics — the systematic effort to breed a superior race — to genocidal extremes, but they didn't invent the idea.

The origins date back to ancient Greece, when philosopher Plato argued that only the best men and women should procreate.

Fast-forward to the late 19th century, and English statistician Sir Francis Galton revived Plato's dream.

Drawing on evolutionary theory — devised by his cousin Charles Darwin — Galton proposed that regulations on marriage and procreation could artificially produce a better population.

Sir Francis Galton is credited as the "father" of societal eugenic theory. ( Wikimedia Commons )

By the early 20th century, eugenics societies could be found across the globe, and many governments were implementing eugenics-influenced policies.

In Australia, Indigenous communities faced racial segregation, while non-European migrants were barred from entering the country under the White Australia Policy.

Screening for 'genetic abnormalities'

After the massacre of more than 6 million Jews in World War II, eugenics disappeared from public discourse.

"[The Nazis] blackened the whole idea of eugenics," says Professor Rasko, who is presenting this year's ABC Boyer Lecture series on the ethical implications of genetic technologies.

"They poisoned it forever."

But some in the law and science communities are deeply concerned that eugenics is being resurrected.

They fear modern technologies — including gene and stem cell therapy, in vitro fertilisation, and even prenatal screenings for genetic abnormalities — promote a type of 'new eugenics' or 'newgenics'.

As a practitioner in these fields, Professor Rasko is acutely aware of the ethical and moral questions these technologies pose.

Professor John Rasko AO is this year's Boyer Lecturer. His four-part "Life Re-engineered" series will air on RN's Big Ideas. ( ABC RN: Siobhan Hegarty )

"There's great concern that eugenics has returned — by the backdoor," he says.

"When pregnant women and their partners take up the option of prenatal testing, there is an in-built expectation that they'll end the pregnancy if Down syndrome is diagnosed.

"The pressure is even greater on people who use IVF …some IVF clinics simply won't allow the implantation of an embryo with genetic abnormalities."

The flipside of prenatal screening

Prenatal screening may reduce disease and disability, but it also carries sinister implications.

As Professor Rasko points out, the idealisation of a disease-free future implies a negative attitude towards people living today with Down syndrome and other genetic conditions.

"Not all genetic disorders bring great suffering or hardship; some people even regard their genetic condition as an asset," he says.

"For instance, not all people born with deafness consider themselves disabled — they're proud to be part of a deaf community, with its own language, culture and identity."

Some IVF clinics will only implant embryos that "pass" genetic tests. ( Unsplash: freestocks.org )

It's for this reason, Professor Rasko says, that some members of the deaf community have demanded the right to use prenatal testing and IVF to select in favour of deafness.

"They want their children to be like them — part of the deaf community," he explains.

"They argue that, if those with hearing are allowed to discard 'deaf embryos', then they should be allowed to discard 'hearing embryos'.

"What strikes me is that these deaf activists aren't trying to shut the eugenics 'backdoor', so much as make it swing in the other direction."

'Embryos aren't humans'

But Professor Rasko says it's misleading — and deeply offensive — to suggest that IVF is a modern form of eugenics.

"The accusation galls me," he says.

"It's like telling me that I've dishonoured the memory of my grandparents."

For Professor Rasko, the distinction between a human and an embryo dictates what's ethical, and what's not.

"A person with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy [for example] deserves to be treated with respect," he says.

"But the earliest embryo with FSHD is a different matter.

"It's not a person — not in my books, and not according to Australian law."

While legal definitions offer some clarity, Professor Rasko acknowledges that reproductive and genetic therapies often pose more questions than they answer.

"Health and disease, normal and abnormal — these are terms we use all the time in the medical sciences, but they aren't entirely objective," he says.

"They're value-laden and contestable.

"The science behind IVF, genetic testing and gene therapy is understood by only a highly trained few, [but] the ethical issues they raise are vital for everyone to consider."

In the landmark 60th year of the Boyer Lectures, Professor Rasko's "Life Re-engineered" series examines how developments in cell science and genetics are transforming medicine and changing what it means to be human.

The lectures will be broadcast on ABC RN's Big Ideas from October 15-18 at 8:00pm.