Forced Sterilization On Women During The United States

Some will say that induced abortion, regardless of the circumstances, should be made illegal, but they do not know if abortion is made illegal, they would still be performed, by unauthorised, unqualified practitioners in an unsafe environment. Resource, financial incompetence, legal restrictions and gender discrimination, forced some young girls and young women around the world to seek out untrained doctors who use unsafe methods to end the pregnancy, some of the methods used may include, swallowing bleach, drugs or induce bleeding which often results in fatal infections. Unsafe abortion

Sterilization legislature was enacted on the state level with the goal of physically preventing the procreation of individuals deemed to be unfit, mainly handicapped persons or criminals. Though the nature of these laws did not outright target certain races or social classes, a disproportionate amount of the individuals sterilized were non-white or of immigrant background. Prominent eugenicists and eugenic organizations in the U.S. played a key role in lobbying for state sterilization laws. Harry H. Laughlin, superintendent of the Eugenics Record Office, drafted the American Model Eugenical Sterilization Law in 1922, which served as a model for many sterilizations laws in the states (Berenbaum, 1998). By 1926, 23 states had passed sterilization laws that were voluntary and/or involuntary in nature (Sofair, 2000). Laughlin and other eugenicists called for the sterilization of institutionalized individuals under the assertion that their “genetically inferior” traits would be passed to their progeny and be an economic drain on the state. Many states complied, and by 1935 over 30 states had some form of sterilization law with over 21,000 compulsory sterilizations performed (Allen 1997). Though the eugenic nature of these laws was stressed by eugenicists, it was acknowledged that the political support of such laws were greatly financially motivated. Another important legislation passed by the U.S. was the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924, which was the first immigration quota

Forced sterilization and Eugenics are terms you would associate with Hitler's heinous World War II crimes. Those terms were not isolated to war time Europe. From 1929 until 1977 Eugenics was a terrible part of North Carolina History that used selective breeding to extinguish lower class mentality and guarantee future generations. The State is trying to make amends to the victims of the past. For almost 50 years over 7,600 victims were evaluated harshly and then coerced or sterilized against their will. Eugenics scientists have used this method to target what they consider as the “undesirables,” mainly unwed, black females, and also the mentally disabled in North Carolina. This was done under the pretense to make future American generations stronger and smarter. Eugenics still negatively affects the people of North Carolina today.

The idea of eugenics made it possible for involuntary sterilization. In order to improve the human race, it meant regulating reproduction. 1907 Indiana passed to sterilize the mentally insane and inmates. Their plan was to eliminate “defective” genes. By 1960 63,000 people were involuntary

The Birth Control Movement of 1912 in the United States had a significant impact on Women’s Reproductive Rights. Women in the 1800s would frequently die or have complications during or after childbirth. Even if the woman would have died, they would still have a great amount of children. As the years progressed into the 1900s, the amount of children being born dropped. Because of this, birth control supplements were banned, forcing women to have a child that she was not prepared for or did not want to have in the first place.

Justice Holmes’ opinion creates a picture of negative eugenics which makes this case a pinnacle in coerced sterilization discourse. Written in 1927, this opinion is the only primary source on this list, with the exception of the opinion by Justice Douglas concerning Skinner v Oklahoma. It is also important to note that this opinion is the only source advocating for coerced sterilization.

The American eugenics movement is characterized by the implementation of sterilization laws in over 30 states that led to over 60,000 sterilizations of those deemed “disabled” by the regulating entities. This movement began in the early 1900’s and many argue that this movement was the base for eugenics programs all over the world, including the infamous eugenics movement in Germany. Proponents of this program believed that the

Prior to this case only a handful of states enforced such laws. However this kind of legislation remained controversial enough to maintain the nation’s rates of compulsory sterilization nearly nonexistent. However this Supreme Court ruling legitimized eugenic sterilization laws throughout the country as more and more states began to enact laws which closely resembled the Virginia statute. This resulted in over 62,000 intellectually disabled or mentally ill Americans being forced into the operation room. While the main target of such programs were the feeble minded, however some states legislation also targeted the blind, deaf, epileptic, and

In England, which gave birth to the eugenics movement, it is interesting to note that sterilization laws never took hold. Bertrand Russel, a British philosopher at the time published Marriage and Morals (1929) in which he wrote “I say only that our scientific knowledge at present is not adequate for this purpose, and that it is very dangerous when a community allows its moral reprobations to masquerade in the guise of science, as is undoubtedly happening

In California, the state with a eugenic programs so intense that it even inspired the sterilization programs in Nazi Germany, the racist controlling image of the reckless breeder was even more pronounced. The Eugenics program of California is reported to have been responsible for 20,000 eugenic sterilizations taking place in state institutions, a staggering number in comparison to the total recorded eugenic sterilizations in the United states which is reported to be 60,000 including California. Mexican American women were possibly one of the greatest targets of California’s Eugenics program which described Mexican Americans as “the states foremost racial problem” (Lira and Stern 15). A 1930 California population census found Mexican Americans

Some things are hard to achieve and sometimes they are somewhat wrong, which takes time to get to the main point. In past decades there have been many controversial issues on equal rights and freedoms etc. Abortion rights are one of the issue that has been around since 1800’s. It came to public’s eye after many deaths among women occurred caused by complication and illegal abortion. Decline in birth rates in late 1800’s was also the reason to ban abortion. By the end of 19th century in 1967 abortion was illegal in all U.S. States. It was considered a crime. Still many people were and are against abortion because thinking that abortion is taking away life of baby and is equal to committing murder. Some people are with abortion because

Industrialization resulted in the creation of urban centers, which resulted in higher rates of poverty, crime, alcoholism, and other forms of what eugenicists referred to as degenerative behavior (Bachrach 46). In response to a greater amount of defectives in the population, eugenicists advocated sterilization. Laughlin’s “Model Sterilization Law” represents a measure for negative eugenics. It is a generic law for sterilization of the institutionalized that was sent to state legislatures to get them to implement eugenic measures (Allen). The assumption was that if the degenerate were allowed to reproduce, their children would inherit their parents’ degenerate traits, resulting in costs for the state to care for the children that would come from citizens. Sterilization addressed the root of the problem by stopping degenerate individuals from reproducing at all. By portraying the eugenic measure in a socio-economic light, eugenicists garnered enough support for sterilization for it to be successfully implemented in over 30

Sterilization "on eugenic grounds" (Lombardo 1) was not legalized until 1907 in Indiana, but doctors across the nation practiced the procedure illegally before even then. Generally, the patient didn't know about the sterilization until after the act was done, at which point they were informed of their "feeblemindedness" or other social disorder. Within 17 years of the law being instated, a recorded 3000 people were sterilized, and thousands more suspected off the record. The range of reasons for being sterilized was infinite, ranging from genuine mental disorders such as schizophrenia, to things as pointless as "excessive masturbation" (Selden

Under this law, no recorded sterilizations occurred. In 1929, a modified eugenics law was adopted. Under this law, 49 people were sterilized under the authority of the administration of the institutions. The supreme court ruled this law unconstitutional in 1933 citing the absence of a public hearing notice or standards for appeal. The law was modified and also called for the creation of a North Carolina Eugenics Board. It consisted of three state officials, one representative of a mental health institution and one representative of the State Hospital in Raleigh. The board’s duties were to “review all cases involving the sterilization of mentally diseased, feeble-minded, or epileptic patients, inmates, or non-institutionalized individuals” (North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources). Over the next forty-one years, more than 7,500 sterilizations were carried out under this law. The state ceased this process in 1974 and the Eugenics Commission was subsequently abolished in 1977 ("Eugenics Board of North Carolina", 2017).

To deny a woman the right to terminate her pregnancy is akin to robbing her of any ability to make decisions about her body, her self, and her future. The woman is effectively forced, against her will, to assume an identity and a future that she normally would have avoided. This type of coersion can permanently damage a persons emotional and psychological health. The one thing that makes each of us an individual is our decision making freedom and powers regarding our own future and actions. But when we are robbed of our ability to make our own decisions about our future, our self, and our identity, then we are robbed of our most essential and valuable treasure…our self. If a woman wishes to obtain an early term abortion…to terminate a pregnancy…then she must be allowed to choose this option. If she id denied an abortion, then both her and the future child will suffer tremendously. Please stop viewing abortion as something that you should have sole control over. A person’s body is their own, not yours. It is threatening and invasive when others attempt to direct the lives of their peers. Rather supporting the tyrannical idea of forced childbirth, perhaps you ought to consider the more moderate concept that all people should be able to choose the future of their bodies and reproductive functions. I advocate neither abortion nor