The Violation Of Reproductive Freedom

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

Women having been fighting for equal rights for many years. Because of our genitalia, we will be paid less, we will be judged more, and we will have to fight to protect our basic human rights. Most women are born with the amazing ability to carry life; this is a blessing and a curse. Because of this ability, some people believe that a woman’s body is not completely her own, but that the government has rights to that body as well. We have been fighting to control our own bodies for many years. All women must understand that fighting for our reproductive rights is not just a simple pro-life or pro-choice battle, but a complex fight to teach proper sex education, maintain women’s health facilities, and protect our essential human rights.

When one contemplates the concept of eugenics, few think of modern contraception and abortion when in reality they are one in the same. The American Eugenics Society, founded in 1923, proudly proclaimed that men with incurable “conditions” should be sterilized. However these conditions were often none that could be helped, such as, one’s intelligence, race, and social class (Schweikart and Allen 529-532). The purpose of the society was to create the perfect class of men; elite in all ways. Likewise, Margaret Sanger’s feminist, contraceptive movement was not originally founded with this purpose. It was marketed as a way to control the population and be merciful to those yet to be born, again determined also by race and

I support the guidelines outlined by Kitcher for the use of genetic information because of their responsible and ethical nature. I believe that future generations will benefit as a direct consequence of these guidelines. I shall begin by defining eugenics as the study of human genetics to improve inherited characteristics of the human race by the means of controlled selective breeding.

Contrary to Kitcher’s minimalist model that constrains eugenic decisions only to avoid neurological diseases, Gregory Stock’s position in the debate defends maximalist eugenics in which individuals have total free eugenic decision-making, including enhancement, without any state coercion. He wants readers to accept and adopt such a position by arguing that genetic engineering such as selecting and alternating embryos is an inevitable future and human destiny (7, Stock, CC p.279). For example, if redesigning humans became commonplace, Stock reasons that parents would give their children endowments they desire but could not otherwise obtain and thus further expand life’s possibilities to the next generation (8, Stock, CC p.276). In this society, people’s genes would become an embodiment of their parents’ values and preferences. People would arguably want such endowments since they would view modifications as beneficial in

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

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.

Like many I was aware of the eugenics movement in the United States in the 1920’s. However, after reading the story of Carrie Buck and learning more about the nature of the procedurals involved in these sterilizations I have a new found understanding of the roles Power and Othering played in the unlawful tests conducted on Carrie buck and many members of her family. The way in which those elite of the 1920’s mimics the party and the thought police in George Orwell’s 1984, is incredibly interesting to ponder. There are even instances of power and othering having the exact effects among nations today as well. The similarities between these major themes that we have continuously

Until 1969, when Bill C-150 was established which decriminalized contraception and made abortion legal, though only to those whose pregnancy threatened their life or health, information about anything regarding women’s reproductive rights was withheld except to married couples (lecture). This is a clear example of the heteronormative sex equation, where those who abided to it were granted access to information and services not given to those who were outside of that equation. An example where women had their reproductive rights violated is that of forced sterilizations, particularly that of Leilani Muir in Alberta in 1955 (lecture). Muir’s story is one of thousands of women who were forced to be sterilized through the Alberta Sexual Sterilization Act (1928-1972) due to the concept of eugenics, which believes that human characteristics are inherited, and in order to have the best human race, mental and developmental disabilities had to be eliminated through sterilization, even if it was forced (Carolyn Egan and Linda

The consecutive generations of families that displayed these undesired characteristics, like mental challenges, would be sterilized to halt the spreading of these traits and to segregate the members of this class of society apart from others. Most members of the upper class and scientists agreed with this viewpoint, but social reformers in the 1920’s thought “Carrie Buck was a sad example of the type of person that threatened to disrupt American societies” (Cynkar 1981). However, because of the power that the upper class had, Carrie Buck’s state-assigned guardian, R.G. Shelton, essentially had no way of protecting Carrie from the inevitable: sterilization. The legal process ended up making way to the Supreme Court where Carrie Buck was defeated (Cynkar

The eugenics movement in the United States beginning in the late 19th century and extending to the mid 20th century was a biosocial movement, which advocated procedures to improve the genetic composition of the American population. This essay will examine how eugenic ideologies influenced public and social policy in the United States between 1880 and 1950. The essay will first discuss the background of eugenics and how the eugenics movement gained momentum in the United States. Secondly, it will look at the various organisations associated with eugenics, that lobbied for legislations that aligned with their beliefs. Thirdly, it will consider how the advocating of the various eugenic organisations caused eugenic ideologies to become normalised in American society. Lastly, it will study the numerous policies established in different States that were formed based on eugenic principles.

The first eugenics movement was proposed by Francis Galton. He believed that artificial selection could be used to improve the genetic constitution of populations. In 1914 Harry Laughlin produced the model Sterilization Law that suggested sterilization of the ‘socially inadequate”. He thought that the lowest 5% of the population should be sterilized. Federally-funded sterilization programs

Eugenics was the, in this case, American, practice of controlling the breeding of certain human traits, either favorable or unfavorable, by limiting women of the opportunity of being fertile. The practice of eugenics was mainly prominent from the 1930s (when the act consenting it was passed) to the 1960s, particularly in African American women with mental illness, and sometimes others. As it may be understood, this was right around the prime time of slavery and into segregation in America. Many particular cases that will be discussed later show the immorality of the trend and its effects on the people impacted by it. The rationale of the trend was that many slaveholders or racists found that some of the female blacks who had mental illness

These "science"-based eugenic influences break through the lines of science in to the world of politics, promulgating anti-humanistic views of poor women of colour in the form of legislation fraught with bigotry and baseless generalizations. This political view flows through the judicial system, as courts apply eugenic philosophies in determining who should be sterilized and for what reasons.

By choosing genetic combinations expressing a mixture of overall better health, children of the future will grow up to be happy and healthy. Such blueprints can then be passed on to their children, who will continue the process. Parents can rest assured their child will come into the world without any surprises such as red hair in a brown haired family, or an extra pair of toes. For those who believe such a program is unattainable due to financial reasons should consider the program to be run by a government organization through the state or federal government. Such polarization of our biological makeup has no physical prrof that it could create a sect between the enhanced and non-enhanced (Fox, D. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 572). In fact, such a breakthrough in modern science would also be advocated alongside planned pregnancy, allowing doctors to recommend and support families seeking to improve their future children. These parents to be are left with “the genetic constitution of the offspring for themselves,” (Fox, D. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 569). With the benefits offered with such modification of DNA, our future children will pass on their desired genetic traits to their offspring, allowing for greater adult longevity.