Children of Night -- Lycanthropy and Lycanthropes in Terms of Reproduction

Children of Night -- Lycanthropy and Lycanthropes in Terms of Reproduction

An Advanced Defence Against Dark Arts Essay

Hermione Granger, 7th Year

Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry

Spring 1998

Lycanthropy, being one of the most vicious and feared curses known to the Wizardingkind, has also always been the subject of the interest of many Wizarding scientists. Not only have they tried to find out what exactly causes this curse, and whether it can be cured, but also what exactly are its origins and the mechanisms behind its spreading. The most important question to many scientists, however, is whether Lycanthropy is hereditary, and how probable it is for the child to be infected by their parent's curse. This, on the other hand, leads us to a matter of a more legal -- or, on the other hand, ethical -- nature; should lycanthropes be allowed to have biological children?

The question of Lycanthropy being hereditary cannot be satisfyingly answered, as to this date the scientists have been unable to determine the exact nature of the curse. The three most popular theories are an incurable virus infection[1], a gene mutation[2], and a magical-natured curse forcing the body to transform[3]. (Previously some favoured the possibility of Lycanthropy being a magical curse affecting the curse's bearer's magic, where the lycanthrope's own natural magic forces them to transform[4]. This theory, however, was abandoned as first cases of Muggle lycanthropes were confirmed[5].)

Depending on which theory is correct, there are different possibilities to the amount of cases where the curse is indeed spread to the offspring. Therefore, the actual statistics of lycanthropic and non-lycanthropic children born to lycanthropic parent(s) can be used to give hints as of which of the current theories is correct, or at least closest to correct. It has to be noted, however, that no cases of children with one or two lycanthropic parents have been registered after 1987, thanks to the rather questionable Ministry restriction against werewolf reproduction [6], which will be handled later on.

In the first theory, where the virus-like curse spreads in connection to blood or other bodily fluids (the feared bite = werewolf saliva mixing with human blood), the baby being infected is almost impossible if the lycanthropic parent is the father. If, however, the werewolf is the mother, the danger of infection is very high. Almost always the curse is spread to the child, especially if a caesarian section is performed. In some rare cases, however, the child may be spared from the curse.

If Lycanthropy is a genealogical mutation, like the second theory suggests, the baby will in any case inherit a Lycanthropy-positive chromosome from the lycanthropic parent. For the child to have the curse, he needs to inherit the cursed chromosome from the other parent as well. As the Lycanthropy gene is a recessive one, and could have been transmitted down in the family line for even centuries, it's impossible to say whether or not the child can inherit the curse. (According to this theory, two non-lycanthropic people even distantly being a lycanthrope's descendants might reproduce a lycanthropic child. As no confirmed cases of this are known of, it's needless to say that this theory is often put aside in favour of other, more probable possibilities, though whether or not it is correct remains unproven.)

Another and much more popular version of this theory, however, is one where an "active" chromosome is needed. Should this be the true nature of the curse, no child of two non-lycanthropic people can inherit the curse even if the child had inherited a Lycanthropy-positive chromosome from each of the parents. For the curse to become active in the child, one of these chromosomes would have to be active; in other words, one of the child's parents has to be a werewolf. This theory is yet to be proven false. If it is true, however, statistically the number of lycanthropic children should be notably less than half of the babies born to one lycanthropic parent, whereas two werewolves would always have a lycanthropic child. Two werewolves indeed do have children bearing their curse almost without exception, but the number of lycanthropic children in cases with only one werewolf parent is more or less half of the total. Therefore, this theory does not seem to be the true one.

The simplest and most popular theory (probably as it is easiest for the usual wizard or witch to understand and accept), being the one where the Lycanthropy is a magic-natured curse, is also the one where the inheriting mechanism is very simple. This kind of curses and other magical-physical traits are either inherited or avoided with only the infected parent's magical inheritance, which can be either a tainted, cursed bit of magic, or the original untainted one. Therefore, the possibility of the child being infected is about half, although the possibility does grow notably if both parents are lycanthropic. This follows well the statistics of past werewolf-born babies in terms of parent-child infection, but in cases where both parents are lycanthropic, this theory does not fully explain the almost certain infection.

In the nowadays knowledge, even with the aid of the statistics of born children, it's impossible to tell for certain which of the current theories, if any, is correct. However, it is known for sure that some of werewolves' children are burdened with the curse, but some are not -- and that there is a clear pattern.

Although the magical theory is the most popular among common wizards, the Wizarding specialists think that the virus-based one is the most probable. This is because there is a huge difference between the cases where the werewolf parent is the father and those where the mother is infected. Although the average number of babies infected is indeed about 50% of all pregnancies resulting with a living offspring, it has to be noted that almost all cases where a werewolf is the mother result with a lycanthropic child, while almost none of those where the father is lycanthropic do[7]. Should the magical curse theory be correct, there should be no difference. Not only does this fact give more support to the virus-based theory, with it can also be stated that a male werewolf can safely have children without having to fear them inheriting his curse.

Since 1987 the restriction made by the Ministry of Magic[8] has prohibited werewolves from having children. This law, as well as its implications, have not received much acceptance in the Wizarding World, and neither should they have. Not only does this restrictions serve as a way to make lycanthropes, who by no way are at fault for their condition, even more unequal with other Wizarding folk than before, but it is also clearly unfounded. Ms Dolores Umbridge, however, chooses to defend this restriction, as well as several others, in her book about the reproduction of Dark creatures[9]. It should be noted that Ms Umbridge has been the driving force behind most of these restrictions and regulations. In her book Umbridge, who both describes the laws and regulations and explains the reasons for them, claims (page 237, 2nd paragraph),

"As most of the children of werewolves become infected at birth, it is clearly inconvenient to the Wizarding society to allow werewolves to have children at all. Even one Dark Creature is a clear threat to the safety of pure humans, and those already existing should be treated with suspicion, as the fact that they once were humans prevents their execution. On these grounds it is essential that their reproduction isn't allowed."

Another reasoning for this law seems to be that (page 239, 4th paragraph),

"Even though not all children of werewolves are lycanthropic themselves, those remaining human cannot possibly have a full and happy childhood. Vicious and bloodthirsty creatures by nature, werewolves should never be given the responsibility of any other living creature, much less a child or an infant. The child can hardly live a fulfilling, purposeful life if they are murdered by their own parents at an early age. Many tragedies are prevented by prohibiting the reproduction of werewolves."

These two quotes show Ms Umbridge's two main reasons for prohibiting werewolves from having children. However, as several independent, unbiased scientific studies prove, they are incorrect, even false.

At first, Ms Umbridge claims that all werewolves are a threat to people not infected by the curse of Lycanthropy, with absolutely no exceptions existing. This is definitely not true. Ever since the Wolfsbane Potion was invented in 1992 by Damocles Belby[10], the uncontrollable blood thirst of the werewolf during the full moon night has been proven to be possible to overcome. With this potion the werewolf loses all its murderous urges and is in behaviour exactly like the unfortunate cursed wizard or witch, as they are in full control of themselves and their deeds. Thus they should not be considered a threat any more than a person without this particular curse, and should be treated as a normal human being.

Also, unlike Ms Umbridge suggests, werewolves are still humans. Only during the full moon night are they classified as beasts; otherwise, they are classified as beings, and should be treated as such[11]. The current inequality between different races and species is against the official Ministry policy, yet it is based on the same laws that should make it impossible. (This, of course, shows that not everything the Ministry says or does should be trusted blindly. Matters of inequality between different species contain most errors and downright crimes of all Ministry matters, like lowering the house-elves, feeling and sentient beings, to the state of a mere slave. Therefore, any laws concerning such matters should be studied with special care.)

Furthermore, even if werewolves were not counted as humans -- although they still should be classified as beings -- this still wouldn't give wizards any right to restrict their possible reproduction. All beings should be considered equals, as has been stated by the Ministry of Magic itself -- but the Ministry clearly fails to follow this rule. Wizards are not above the other races and species, and thus they have no right to interfere with the lives of other beings. Every being is born equal -- and every being is equal before they are born. Nobody has the right to decide whether or not a child may come to life based only on their race or species, especially when it cannot even be said beforehand what the said race or species will be.

(The reader should note that house-elves, although enslaved in all of the Wizarding World, have never had any restrictions placed on them in terms of reproduction. This suggests that the equality of beings depends on their usefulness to the Wizarding population. Even the lowliest of low are allowed to have children on their own terms, whereas werewolves, even with the official status of a human, are prohibited from that.)

Ms Umbridge's second main point is that werewolves would kill their offsprings. Again, this has absolutely no basis in the reality. Like several scientists have noted in their own independent studies, a werewolf will never harm its cub, or its mate for that matter, not even in a transformed form without the aid of the Wolfsbane Potion[12]. Thus to claim that a werewolf might harm its offspring is purely foolish.

Ms Umbridge's other reasons for these restrictions (not unlike, as the reader might note, those for most of her other restrictions and regulations) are few and futile, hardly worthy of the name of reasons. Unless she can come up with facts that the modern science and the public views both approve of and that clearly suggest that it would be best for werewolves not to have children, the restrictions are hardly valid. They should thus be considered to be based on prejudices and actually crimes against equality -- and humanity. After all, werewolves are all humans, part of our own race and species.

On a final note to the matter of these restrictions should be mentioned that the public opinion has recently declared Ms Umbridge as "a vengeful bitch, forgive my language, with a grudge against anybody who's different"[13]. As her opinion on any Dark creatures seems to be negative as a rule, her opinions should be studied with great care and with the knowledge that her information on the subject is biased.

The question of whether or not a human parent would indeed love a lycanthropic child as much as they would love a (fully) human one is also one of much debate. Some scholars claim that, should interracial reproduction be allowed, the cases of a parent abandoning their child would increase dramatically. This, however, is about as unfounded as Ms Umbridge's main reasons (if such a thing is even possible). Before the restriction was first presented to the Wizarding World, human-werewolf couples had the smallest amount of child abandoning of all Wizarding people. Such things practically never happened in interracial families, regardless of whether the child was lycanthropic as well. This can be taken as a sign of the human mate's basic tolerance of Lycanthropy. If a human is willing to have a werewolf as a partner, they are not bothered with the concept of a lycanthropic child, either. The following quotation proves this.

"Would I have Remus's kid? Sure I would. I'd like nothing more. That's not possible, though, as you know -- that bitch Umbridge has made sure I can't. We'll be lucky if we manage to get married, never mind having a kid. I mean, what's it to them? It's not like the kid would be a werewolf just because Remus is. And even if it was, so what? I love him; I'd love our kid just as much even if it was a werewolf. Sure, it'd be harder to the poor kid, but I'd love them anyways -- it's not like it's the werewolfs' fault that they are what they are; they've been cursed. Not that it matters anyway -- there's no way I could have his kid, thanks to that evil bitch." [14]

Based on the generally approved facts and scientific studies, it can be assumed that a case where a werewolf becomes a father to the child of a human mother should be regarded as a normal pregnancy. Also, although the cases where the mother is a werewolf usually lead to a lycanthropic offspring, these should not be restricted, either. Considering that werewolf children are beings and humans just like any other children, no proper reasons suggest that female werewolves should not be allowed to bear children. It is not only unfounded and unusual among all beings -- vampires, for example, are allowed to reproduce freely, though they are notably more dangerous than werewolves -- but it is also cruel in more than one way. The burden of the curse is certainly enough; why does the society add more difficulties into lycanthropes' lives? Of course, it is possible that a female werewolf, knowing that her child would most probably share her curse, would choose not to have biological children to spare them for her own difficult life. However, this should be her decision, with no pressure or regulations pushing her to either direction.

Why does the Ministry go against its own principles of equality of all beings, human and nonhuman alike? Who in the end is allowed to judge who is allowed to live or even be born? Will this lead to the idea of "perfect race", like the Arian ideal of the Muggle Nazis -- and a similar disaster? And who can even tell that the child would be lycanthropic, as some rare cases have been known to be spared from the curse?

These are the questions we should think about when considering whether the current restrictions on lycanthropes are reasonable and justified, or just plain wrong.

I, personally, support the latter opinion.

Sources:

[1]Megric, John: The Blood of the Cursed: A Study on the Mechanics of Lycanthropy. Scrollroll, 1979.

[2]Smithson, Mic: Werewolves, the Mutants Among Us: Muggle Myths Meet Wizarding Science. Whizz Hard Books, 1990.

[3]Merlisson, Alicia: From Heart to Core: The Nature of Lycanthropy. Obscurus Books, 1984.

[4]Harwil, Meticule: Silver Highlights: How Lycanthropy Works. Alternative Bookscrolls, 1924.

[5]Gardick, Jonathan: Cursed Without Magic: The Tragedy of Muggle Werewolves. Whizz Hard Books, 1947.

[6]Werewolf Registry Unit Annual Meeting 4.8. 1987, Matter #27. Official Ministry verdict: "No reproduction of a werewolf with another werewolf or a human shall be allowed as of date. Should a conception of such nature occur, Ministry officials shall be permitted to perform an abortion charm on the expecting mother (either a werewolf or human with a werewolf mate)." The original document is in the possession of the Ministry Archives; a copy can be found in the Hogwarts library.

[7]A scientific study by James Whithermoore and Thomas Comb in 1932. The birth statistics are from Withermoore's book[7b] based on this study.

[7b]Whithermoore, James: The Burden of a Mother. Alternative Bookscrolls, 1937.

[8]See [6].

[9]Umbridge, Dolores: The Laws of Reproduction of Dark Creatures. Ministry Publishings, 1994.

[10]Glitwick, Alysse: The Greatest Potions Masters of the 20th Century. Scrollroll, 1995.

[11]Scamander, Newt: Fantastic Beasts & Where to Find Them. Obscurus Books, 1918.

[12a]Adolf, Cain: Trust or Threat? The Family Life of Werewolves. Dust & Mildew, 1983.

[12b]Skotland, Scott: Lone Wolf and the Cub. Whizz Hard Books, 1987.

[12c]Vienne, Millicent: The Heart of Night. Scrollroll, 1991.

[13]Interview of Hogwarts Professor Minerva McGonagall in regards to the former High Inquisitor Umbridge. The Quibbler, 15.7. 1997.

[14]Interview of Miss Nymphadora Tonks in regards to her relationship with Remus Lupin, a werewolf. Interview done by Hermione Granger over the Floo Network 6.4.1998. (All statements about Ms Umbridge are authentic.)