Long-awaited UCL Eugenics Inquiry results released
View of the Pearson Building, 1991
Pi Editors take an in-depth look at the background, results, and recommendations of the UCL Eugenics Inquiry.
Many of the images of UCL alongside this article follow the “Bricks + Mortals” podcast, which relays the history of eugenics through buildings and spaces on campus currently named after eugenicists.
On Friday 28th February, the results of an 18 month inquiry into UCL’s historical links with eugenics were released, in the form of a 38 page report. The independent inquiry was commissioned by Provost Michael Arthur following revelations in January 2018 that conferences discussing eugenics, the London Conference on Intelligence (LCI), were held in the Pearson Building on three occasions between 2014 and 2017, with another conference planned for 2018.
The LCI events were organised by Dr James Thompson, an honorary lecturer in psychology at UCL who has since been stripped of his title. Known attendees include journalist Toby Young and Andrew Sabisky. The latter recently resigned as an advisor to No 10 Downing Street, following reports of his alleged comments about pregnancy, race, and eugenics.
The Inquiry
Eugenics - the theory that some humans are genetically superior to others and action should be taken to “improve” the genetic makeup of the population - is a concept connected with racism, ableism, classism, and historical atrocities such as the Holocaust.
In addition to the LCI events, UCL is linked to the history of eugenics; the scientist who coined the term and advanced many of the theories, Francis Galton, awarded a sum to the university in his will to create “The Galton Professorship of Eugenics”, and this position was subsequently taken up by his protégé, Karl Pearson.
Led by Professor Iyiola Solanke of the University of Leeds, the Eugenics Inquiry were tasked with looking at this historical connection, the current status of the study and teaching of eugenics, and UCL’s current benefit from any financial instruments linked to eugenics.
Members of the Inquiry committee included UCL academics from a range of departments, equality representatives from UCL, and sabbatical officers from the Students’ Union. Across an 18 month period, the group undertook archival research, consulted a range of experts, and conducted a survey of attitudes towards eugenics inside and outside the UCL community.
Marie Stopes House
Source: Wikimedia Commons
The Results
Responses to the online survey (issued to both members of UCL and the general public) diverged on the question of whether UCL should apologise for its role in the history of eugenics. While a majority of the general public thought an apology from UCL was needed, opinion in the much larger internal UCL survey was divided, with many indicating that they thought UCL’s involvement in eugenics should instead be viewed in its historical context. However, most respondents agreed that the university should be honest, and that all UCL graduates be informed on this issue. Most also shared concern about UCL buildings being named after prominent eugenicists, agreeing that the names should be removed but that this alone would not constitute sufficient action.
The report accordingly recommends a full public apology from UCL, as well as the renaming of buildings and lecture theatres named after those associated with eugenics, such as Galton and Pearson. Regarding commemoration, the Provost comments that “the act of naming can be read as condoning (even indirectly) the work on eugenics that was carried out by or because of those individuals. This creates an unwelcoming environment in which students and staff at UCL who identify as BAME, disabled or come from a low-income background feel marginalised.
The report makes particular mention of stigma, describing it as “the commonest form of violence used in democratic societies and an effective form of social control”. Stigmatisation “perpetuates shaming and enables harassment”, all of which contributes to the higher drop-out rates and lower attainment of students from the groups targeted by eugenic ideology.
Other recommendations focus on ensuring all UCL graduates understand the institution’s history with eugenics; diversification of staff and student communities at all levels, including recruitment and retainment of BAME and disabled individuals and a symposium on the Race and Disability Gap Index; and an audit of the accessibility of teaching, estates, and pastoral support at UCL.
The Darwin Building
The MORE Report
10 members of the 15 on the Inquiry committee - including Professor Joe Cain, Subhadra Das, and Students’ Union Women’s Officer Nilisha Vashist - did not sign the report. This group produced a separate report titled ‘MORE’, in which they explained: “We want UCL to do more than is presented in the chair’s report.”
Key points of contention include the focus on Galton over other aspects of UCL’s historical ties with eugenics (several pages of the report are used to outline Galton’s background and beliefs), as well as the lack of investigation into the LCI within the chair’s report. Speaking to Pi News, Professor Cain commented: “I still think we should have asked larger questions around the LCI.”
Recommendations in the MORE report are divided into four sections: Responding to History; Commemorations; Financial Instruments; and Improve teaching and learning. Like the chair’s report, they recommend a public apology, renaming buildings, repurposing funds from Galton’s will, creating new opportunities at UCL for those in groups once targeted by eugenics policies, and for Estates to improve access to the institution.
The Petrie Museum
The LCI Investigation
A separate investigation in the LCI was also published on Friday. Due to be released in January 2018, the report was held back due to the “significant amount of personal information” it contains. The report is heavily redacted to remove the details of most of the individuals who attended the conference.
The report highlights the topics discussed at the LCI over the course of the three conferences. Titles include “Eugenics, a case for it as the lesser of evils”, “Differential immigrant performance: a matter of intelligence?”, and “Sex differences in intelligence”. The last was published as a paper in Mankind Quarterly, a “race realist” journal, and argued that over the age of 16 the average IQ of men becomes higher than that of women. “Eugenics, a case for it as the lesser of evils” appears to be linked to an article published in The American Journal of Public Health on “The Nazi Physicians as Leaders in Eugenics and ‘Euthanasia’: Lessons for Today”.
The report notes that the UCL logo was used on the front of each of the conference’s programs, which “clearly leaves the impression of [UCL’s] tacit approval” of the LCI. On the front page of the 2016 LCI program was an “unfortunate, and to many, unjustifiable and offensive” quotation from E.L. Thorndike: “Selective breeding can alter man’s capacity to learn, to keep sane, to cherish justice or to be happy. There is no more certain and economical way to improve man’s environment as to improve his nature.”
The UCL logo was also used on several of the talks on YouTube, which have now been taken down. One redacted source quoted in the report found that “they had no scientific or rational basis and they were edited in such a way that they could incite racial hatred”. The titles of the videos included ‘On Christian beliefs and physical attractiveness and intelligence”, and “On IQ and criminality in immigrants”.
The report includes abstracts of talks from the three conferences. One from 2015 argues that the level of male hormones accounts for the global distribution of Nobel prizes in the sciences. Another, from 2017, entitled “The Welfare Trait: how state benefits affect personality”, aims to “fix” the problem of the welfare state, which encourages each successive generation living under it to “have lower work motivation than the previous one”, and leads to the development of “employment-resistant personalities” characterised by “aggressive, antisocial, and rule-breaking tendencies”.
James Thompson organised the venue for the LCI using the standard room booking form. The form includes the question “Is speaker or topic likely to be controversial?”, which if ticked triggers a higher level of scrutiny from the university. In each of the three forms, Thompson had not ticked the box; this, the report finds, “deprived UCL of the opportunity of taking appropriate action to mitigate the risk of reputational damage”.
The Pearson Building, 1985
The Town Hall Meeting
Outcomes of the Inquiry were presented at a Town Hall meeting in the afternoon of Friday 28th. After a brief introduction from the Provost, Iyiola Solanke discussed the findings and recommendations.
When asked about the split in the members of the Inquiry, Solanke cited the strict time limit and her responsibility as chair to deliver a report. However, she said that “more time wouldn’t necessarily help. The report was finalised and then printed so we would be ready for this Town Hall which had already been delayed twice.” Solanke was also questioned on the decision to exclude the LCI investigation from the Inquiry report, to which she responded: “That was my decision as chair. It had already been dealt with. There had been an inquiry and the author sat on the commission.”
Solanke was keen to stress the success of the Inquiry, pointing out that this was the first report of its kind at a UK university. Nevertheless, there was some confusion and dissatisfaction among attendees, who felt that the publication of two separate reports was counter-productive. One student who attended the meeting remarked that it was strange to hear the 28th described as “a day of celebration for UCL”.
Professor Cain told Pi News he was “extremely disappointed in how the Town Hall was delivered,” citing the lack of opportunity for the MORE group to present their alternative report and the minimal time for the audience - many of whom were UCL staff and students - to pose questions.
UCL Main Quad
Moving forward
On the publication of the report, the Provost said: “I would personally like to thank all the members of our community who have campaigned around this issue, and in particular, our Students’ Union sabbatical officers. I am confident that we can now move forward to action on the basis of the Inquiry’s recommendations.” The Provost also encouraged people to listen to “Living with Eugenics”, a podcast presented by UCL Science Curator Subhadra Das.
The Students’ Union similarly stated that they welcome the outcome of the Inquiry and look forward to working with UCL to implement the recommendations. They write that we may celebrate UCL as “London’s Global University” when it “devotes resources to decolonise its institutional structures, teaching and curricula, improve its accessibility, and openly address where eugenic ideas have penetrated its learning environment.” BME Officer Sandy Ogundele further commented that the recommendations were “a significant first step in a long-term process for UCL to make amends for its deeply troubling ties to eugenics.”
Looking forward, the Provost has set up a working group to consider how UCL will respond to all the recommendations. The group will be co-chaired by Vice-Provost Professor Anthony Smith, and another co-chair is to be announced. A two-year research fellowship will also be established to continue to explore these issues.
Additional reporting by Joe Kenelm, Raphael Jucobin, and Mia Lui.