Forsyth County's Eugenics Case Study

In Pages 11 and 12 in Laura Hildebrand's book Unbroken she talks about eugenics in the way that America was infatuated with eugenics. Eugenics promised strengthening of the human race by taking out people that were unfit. One of the tools of eugenics was sterilization which were procedures that rendered people unable to reproduce . when Louie the main character of Laura's book, was around his teenage years the state in which he lived California, Was overwhelmed with eugenics and ended up sterilizing around 20,000 people. As you can see why Louie, a troubled teenager, who never really was the type to make the honor roll, had a minority background, and was a notorious troublemaker may have had a reason to fear his life. Once he realized what he was risking he

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

Well, the families of Woburn Wells wanted no part of the money. They just wanted the problem fixed and an apology from the ones who caused this tragedy.

Once the Eugenics Board of North Carolina was eliminated, the sterilizations stopped. For many though, the damage had already been done. One victim said “I think my rights have been revoked in a way, it’s just like if you go to prison for something that you ain’t done”(Gannon para. 3). This theme of regret and injustice carries on for most victims still alive today. In recent efforts to right the wrongs of the past the state has started the process to compensate the victims of sterilization. Once a legitimate case has been established and approved, victims could potentially receive up to $50,000 from the State of North Carolina. This in no way reverses the tragedy that they dealt with but it is a start to apologize and attempt to make

Shirley Wilder was rejected from foster care because she was black. The system failed to place children of color into these homes because they weren’t white, Catholic, or Jewish. I cannot even believe that this went on years ago. Just because you are of a different race meant that you could not

These appendectomies were racist and cruel. More than half of the women in Mississippi were sterilized. These treatments lasted for about 33 years between 1930s and 1963.

In the state of Kansas between 1913 and 1961, Kansas practiced forced sterilization on mentally unstable women.” In addition to laws regarding sterilization, several marriage restriction bills were proposed in Kansas as part of the eugenics movement. Although they were never enacted as state law, marriage bills were proposed in 1915, 1917, and 1927, demonstrating the popularity of eugenic ideals.” (University of Vermont…Kansas). Dr. F. Hoyt Pilcher performed 150 sterilization in the Kansas State Home of the Feebleminded. Between the years 1913 and 1916 there were 1,274 women sterilized in Kansas. In the year 1921, sterilization in Kansas was at its all-time lowest. Between the years 1950 and 1963, sterilization in Kansas was at its peak. It is

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

On May 2, 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 8 to 1, decided the case of Buck v. Bell. This decision gave affirmation to the constitutionality of Virginia’s law which allowed state-enforced sterilization and determined that compulsory sterilization laws did not violate due process given by the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This decision established the legal authority for sterilizing a toll of U.S. citizens that would grow to more than 60,000 in over thirty states until as late as the 1970’s.

By the time sterilization for both the poor and minorities became an official sanction in 1970, and reservation populations became main targets of this policy, the IHS was ready to initiate its campaign against Indian women. Policy turned into perpetration, and people turned into victims.

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

Mr. Newdow did filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California with the concerning the same issue. This time it was on behalf three parents and their children. This court, after hearing all the evidence, threw out the suit. Again, the Court said that Newdow did not have the legal right to file suit for the parents and their children. That was one of the reasons that the Court declared along with several others.

Future eugenicists can extort their knowledge and use it to their advantage. Eugenics is an interesting subject that is co-dependent on society; the future holds great possibilities for acknowledgment in this field of science.

Due to the popularity of the Eugenics movement among the social hierarchy there was ample opportunity for those employed the legal system to get involved such as lawyers and judges. This was such the case in Albemarle County, Virginia with Judge Oliver Wendell Holmes and Dr. John Hendren Bell working very closely together to protect the true intentions of the movement and to keep anyone the deemed “feeble-minded”, to be sterilized. Their relationship also allowed for the legal cover up and of these events and they also produced falsified documents to further protect the sterilizing program “ Holmes agreed, telling Pollock the discussion make him inclined to believe “it would be possible to breed a race.” In the five years since his Illinois Law Review article, his phrasing had become more biological: he had gone from wanting to “build” a race to wanting to “breed” one” (Cohen, 2016:241-42). Once again, we can see the exploitation of power by those who possess it can lead to severely negative effects for the lesser classes. There is another great parallel example of such the abuse of power by the Party in 1984, with they have the ability to strip a person’s name from every record that exists which mean the Party has the power to remove a person’s entire existence. If that is not a clear and blazon example of absolute power over people than what else is? We also see examples this ability to use corrupt political

most interesting is seeing the differences in discrimination from back in the 50’s and today.