It is impossible to entirely escape the teachers of one's past - so my opinion is bound to be unpopular.
I think people with positive traits, such as high IQ, should be encouraged to procreate when they are ready financially and psychologically. This is a form of positive eugenics.
I also think people without the psychological wherewithal to raise children should abstain from having them. But that isn't my choice, and it never should be. I could get behind a scheme that pays men and women to take long acting birth control measures if they have unsteady lives but sterilization is permanent and shouldn't be practiced on human beings without their full and informed consent.
I am suspicious of any attempt to create a Utopia from human stock. We haven't evolved enough, obviously, for one group of humans to be making decisions over the lives of another group at such an intimate level.
Alberta, Canada had a sterilization program that ran into the 1970s and it was a clusterfuck of incompetence on the part of the board operating it (See: Leilani Muir for just one of dozens of examples).
ETA:
Eugenics fell out of favor with the general public as an overreaction to events in WW2.
The public did not overreact. In fact, considering how long it took for the Eugenics Boards to disappear around the world, the public showed remarkable tolerance considering Nazi Eugenics included "euthanasia" - in that situation, a polite term for murder.