Ethics Topic: Forced Sterilization

Topic: Forced Sterilization
1st Response: Research Topic w/ website (150 word minimum) and your opinion
2nd Response: Research the opposite of your opinion w/website (150 word minimum)

About these ads

26 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Pat Edgar
    Sep 16, 2013 @ 16:52:32

    Definition of eugenics (n)
    Bing Dictionary
    eu·gen·ics
    [ yoo jénniks ]
    1.selective breeding as proposed human improvement: the proposed improvement of the human species by encouraging or permitting reproduction of only those people with genetic characteristics judged desirable. It has been regarded with disfavor since the Nazi period.

    Recently lawmakers in North Carolina have passed a budget of 10 million dollars to compensate victims who have been sterilized by the state. From 1929 to 1974 North Carolina forcibly sterilized thousands of men, women and children without their consent. It was done in the name of eugenics. It was believed that poverty, promiscuity, alcoholism and feeble-mindedness were inherited traits, and that by sterilizing people who fit these criteria, the gene pool would be improved.

    The same rational applied to the Nazi’s during WWII. The Germans believed that by cleansing the gene pool of undesirables that the white race would remain supreme and pure. Undesirable also came to mean those of other ethnic backgrounds, those who had physical and mental imperfections as well as homosexuals.

    As recently as 1970, the Nixon administration increased funding to sterilize low-income Americans and Americans of color. These sterilizations were as a matter of policy voluntary, yet it was later revealed that many of the victims were misinformed regarding the nature of the procedure being preformed.

    I don’t think that anything positive can be said about forced sterilization. We can joke about it and say things like “that person should not be allowed to reproduce” or “he or she shouldn’t be allowed to contribute to the gene pool”. When it comes right down to it, we cannot decide who gets the right to reproduce, or make decisions for others in regard to mandatory sterilization.

    Reply

    • mollyeth
      Sep 19, 2013 @ 20:25:37

      I like your view point! Forced sterilization is in my opinion very similar to playing ‘GOD’. Who are we to say who can and can not reproduce. Nature has its own way of sifting out what doesn’t work. Just an idea but I think alot of those people we joke about not being allowed to reproduce maybe shouldn’t be completely to blame-maybe their parents are to blame too. Messing with the gene pool can only lead to trouble. I can’t believe that people were actually sterilized unbenounced to them. It makes you wonder what more is our government up to without our knowledge and or consent!

      Reply

    • Diana Holtman-thompson
      Sep 20, 2013 @ 12:41:03

      I agree with you. I did not know about the North Carolina event. Nice to know that they saw the error of their ways and tried to help make up a bit for it. Hope that means that they also stopped the operations.

      Reply

    • Betty Kramer
      Sep 23, 2013 @ 02:24:27

      I totally agree Pat. It is amazing that forced sterilization was considered a viable solution for our country to somehow combat defects being introduced to our gene pool.

      Reply

  2. Felicia
    Sep 17, 2013 @ 19:16:49

    Advantages of female sterilization.

    A safe and highly effective approach to preventing pregnancy.
    Female sterilization lasts a lifetime, so no need to worry about birth control again.
    This type of birth control is controlled by the female and does not require the consent of her partner.

    Drawbacks of female sterilization

    Provides no protection against sexually transmitted infections (STIs)
    There is a risk of infection, pain, or bleeding
    Very rarely, the tubes can grow back together. When this happens there is a risk for pregnancy. In some cases, this leads to tubal or ectopic pregnancy, when the pregnancy happens in the fallopian tubes.
    Some women later change their mind and wish they could have a child or additional children.

    United States Health and Human Services – Office of Population Affairs http://www.hhs.gov

    I feel that it is wrong to force anyone to have a procedure that takes away the ability to procreate. This is more of a social issue that needs to be dealt with by governments with education of it’s people. I feel that contraception is a great alternative if the patients are well informed about the contraception that is available to them. There has to be a better solution to population control than sterilization. It seems inhuman. I don’t think that anyone should be forced into being sterilized.

    Reply

    • Pat Edgar
      Sep 17, 2013 @ 20:56:32

      As you pointed out, forced sterilization goes way beyond contraception. It does not give the victim (be it male or female) the right to choose. This is not a simple matter of contraception, but a moral and ethical problem that has been swept under the rug. It is an ugly part of history, one that is not brought out into the light of day. Let’s call it what it is. A violation of human rights, pure and simple.

      Reply

      • patty howard
        Sep 22, 2013 @ 12:59:35

        I was very surprised to hear this practice had been done in the US for many years. Everyone knows about Hitler and how he tried to make a perfect gene pool but I didn’t realize how many other countries did it and some are still practicing forced sterilization.

  3. patty howard
    Sep 17, 2013 @ 21:26:44

    I was amazed to learn how many countries have or have had forced sterilization programs. The US was the first country to undertake a sterilization program in 1897. The principal targets were the mentally ill, deaf, blind, people with epilepsy and the physically deformed. Also Native Americans and races other than Caucasian.
    Most sterilizations were done for 3 reasons
    1)eugenics(the science of improving the human race through controlled breeding)
    2) therapeutic ( medical theory that sterilization would lead to vitality)
    3) punitive ( punishment for a criminal)
    65,000 individuals were sterilized in 33 states under state compulsory sterilization programs.
    . Women are usually the victims. In earlier years men were allowed to be promiscuous but woman had to be chaste and many were sterilized without their knowledge. Some of the victims were younger than 14 years old. After WWII public opinion changed but these practices lasted until 1980 when Oregon performed the last legal forced sterilization procedure.
    Many countries still have forced sterilization. They use this practice as a form of population control. In poor places like Peru they give women food for the family if they will be sterilized.
    The world has already gone through a nut trying to use eugenics to ” improve the human race through breeding” Hitler and his thugs sterilized 400,000 men and women.
    One state, North Carolina, is making amends by paying out 10 millions dollars to the victims of forced sterilization in their state.
    Have there been times when I thought forced sterilization should happen? Yes!! Octomom is a good example. Also some criminals. But we are a free country and we don’t treat our citizens like many of the countries in the world are still doing.

    Reply

  4. Rafael Vargas
    Sep 18, 2013 @ 20:03:04

    i dont think that forced sterilization should be done without a womens conscent. there are other options such as birth control and other methods of contraceptives. I think that women woiuld feel degraded.

    I do see why sterilization would be effective for those women that have children and cant afford to raise them. The Tax payers are the ones paying to raise the kid while the mother doesnt care about what kind of conditions the children live in.

    Reply

    • mollyeth
      Sep 19, 2013 @ 20:47:53

      I was actually just wondering why a women’s consent is needed- especially if its the man being sterilized! If something is forced that means you don’t have a choice in the matter. I do believe either and both men and women would be victims to this. I am just guessing but I think the government might have something to do with this- just look at what happened with Hitler and his bright idea of trying to manhandle the gene pool. Bad things.

      Reply

  5. Michelle
    Sep 19, 2013 @ 09:11:03

    One of the first acts by Adolf Hitler after achieving total control over the German state was to pass the Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseased Offspring in July 1933. The law was signed in by Hitler himself, and over 200 eugenic courts were created specifically as a result of the law. Under the German law, all doctors in the Reich were required to report patients of theirs who were mentally retarded, mentally ill (including schizophrenia and manic depression), epileptic, blind, deaf, or physically deformed, and a steep monetary penalty was imposed for any patients who were not properly reported. Individuals suffering from alcoholism or Huntington’s Disease could also be sterilized. The individual’s case was then presented in front of a court of Nazi officials and public health officers who would review their medical records, take testimony from friends and colleagues, and eventually decide whether or not to order a sterilization operation performed on the individual, using force if necessary. Though not explicitly covered by the law, 400 mixed-race “Rhineland Bastards” were also sterilized beginning in 1937.

    By the end of World War II, over 400,000 individuals were sterilized under the German law and its revisions, most within its first four years of being enacted. When the issue of compulsory sterilization was brought up at the Nuremberg trials after the war, many Nazis defended their actions on the matter by indicating that it was the United States itself from whom they had taken inspiration. The Nazis had many other eugenics-inspired racial policies, including their “euthanasia” programmed in which around 70,000 people institutionalized or suffering from birth defects were killed. I feel that this is wrong and nobody should be forced

    Reply

    • Betty Kramer
      Sep 23, 2013 @ 02:32:46

      Hey Michelle, it has always seemed amazing to me that when the issue of forced sterilization is brought up, everyone thinks about Germany. But like you said, they claim to have been inspired by the United States policies on sterilization. Hitler wanted a perfect race, he was not the first in line on that grand idea. Sad really, hopefully now we the people have learned from past mistakes that forcing people to comply on issues of basic life choices on a governmental scale will be viewed dimly by history. . . then again. Maybe not. LOL

      Reply

  6. megan lantz
    Sep 19, 2013 @ 19:36:09

    forced sterilization laws adopted united states led to over 60,000 sterilizations. many were considered to have a disability, like the mentally disabled or ill, they belonged to a socially disadvantaged group, criminals, or even having a seizure could bring about sterilization. 685 people in washington state were forcfully sterilized under the 1921 law. 501 of those were women and children, the remaining 148 being men. the majority of these people were deemed mentally ill (256 women/kids and 147 men) and mentally deficient (243 women/kids and 33 men) a small number of rapists or habitual criminals were also sterilized.

    Reply

  7. megan lantz
    Sep 19, 2013 @ 19:39:51

    Washington had 2 different sterilization laws that were passed. the first being in 1909 and allowed for sterilization of any person who was “guilty of carnal abuse of a female under the age of 10 years, or of rape” and of habitual criminals. a much broader law was then passed in washington in 1921. with the final sterilization taking place in the year 1942.

    Reply

  8. Debbie
    Sep 20, 2013 @ 08:07:31

    Honestly, I think that this is one of worst things that I have read upon in a long time. It is really hard to write about the pros and cons since forced sterilization is so absurd. I do believe in sterilization however, this can be done in much more humane way.
    The serial rapist there is nothing that you can do about them, other than chop off the penis. The problem in china, what do you do? They have to learn how to accept little girls. Children are children, how do you choose one sex over the other.
    The people with aids, you do a hysterectomy and a vasectomy so that they do not produce more with that infection. I got to know this little girl about 20 years ago, she was adorable and was in my girl scout troop. She was the first child to be enrolled in the Spokane school system that had aids. Her father had aids passed it on to his wife, they already had 2 sons then they had a daughter. He passed away, then eventually the mom did and then the daughter. It was devastating for the whole community.
    The people that are mentally challenged is a hard one. This could go either way. I know this first hand, this couple both had disabilities. They had 5 children and 2 of them are on SSI disability, and one of them has out smarted the parents on every turn. This family has also lived off of the state for many years. Neither one of these parents should have had this many children.
    I believe that this conversation could go on and on about this subject. However the bottom line in my opinion is china shame on you. Except who is born and move on. If you want to set a cap on children make it be 2 no matter what the sex.

    Reply

  9. Diana Holtman-thompson
    Sep 20, 2013 @ 12:41:59

    This is taking the discussion on the limiting the number of children for welfare of a few weeks ago a bit further and I bet it was even among the dialogs of those blogs.
    I would be an against it as I do not think this is a way to handle situations (I can see where my previous blog might support this, but really I do not think this is a good thing.) A website that I took some of the points from says, “Nobody has the right to play God”, especially when they want to do so for their perverted reasons like, eugenics. Germany and now more recently in some other countries, there were people who wanted to get rid of undesired persons as they either were not of the right gene pool or for reasons of not breeding people disposed to genetic disabilies. It is my belief that everyone born has a purpose here on earth. God does not make mistakes.
    Pros.
    Helps with world population and sustaining life with food production, water living conditions ect. It is possible that there are too many people on the planet and are not able to sustain ourselves for very much longer so by practicing this with certain factions then the rest might be able to survive better.
    It could help with prevention on spreading disease. By sterilizing a say person affected with AIDS if they wanted to have sex and yet not have the possibility of a child who would have the disease then it might help curb the spread that way, but it only helps with spread of disease to offspring not to the general public.
    Use as a punishment to deter crimes like rape or incest. By punishing those who are repeat offenders this way then maybe they would think twice about the action.
    Used as a race building tool and also to by selecting those with superior genes to stamp out genetic disorders like blindness, deafness, epilepsy and to stop contamination of the gene pool.
    To help with poverty and crime which at one time were thought to be genetic traits. Idea was if the criminals and the poor were sterile, they could not produce more poor and criminals to feed.
    http://www.cbv.ns.ca/mchs/Issues/Sterilization/Pros%20&20%Cons.html

    Reply

  10. Stacey
    Sep 20, 2013 @ 13:09:24

    I remember having this discussion in our MOA class and having a torn mind on this subject. On one hand I say oh heck no why should anyone have a say in that and tell a woman she cannot have a child because someone thinks they should or shouldn’t there is only one person who should judge.
    BUT on the other hand there are the drug addicts who have child after child after child born with addictions and fetal alcohol syndrome and I catch myself saying Omg these people need to be shot or fixed. It’s actually sad that people do that and just keep having children that they don’t take care of.
    Then I suppose there could be the topic on overpopulation and women having children just so they can get on welfare of get bigger tax return etc… I think its maybe one of those topics best left unsaid and kept to ones self.

    Reply

  11. 123rebeccaICS456
    Sep 20, 2013 @ 14:09:26

    The best-known method of denying a woman her right to have children is sterilization abuse. Sterilization is a medical procedure that, like abortion, often is experienced differently in low-income communities of color and in middle-class white communities. Historically, doctors have made it difficult for white women, especially middle-class white women, to choose to be sterilized: insisting, for example, that they come back a second time after they have taken time to “think about it.” The attitude of the same medical professionals toward women of color and poor white women has been dramatically different. In these instances, many doctors have long encouraged the procedure, sometimes sterilizing these women without their consent through manipulation or actual deceit. By 1968, for example, a campaign by private agencies and the Puerto Rican government resulted in the sterilization of one-third of Puerto Rican women of childbearing age. A similar campaign in the 1970s resulted in the sterilization of 25 percent of Indian women living on reservations.

    Reply

  12. 123rebeccaICS456
    Sep 20, 2013 @ 14:13:18

    Washington State

    Number of Victims
    685 people were sterilized in the state of Washington under the 1921 law (Talkingsticktv, “Interview: Joanne Woiak”; Paul, p. 530). 501 of those sterilized were women and the remaining 148 were men. Therefore, almost 75% of the victims were women. The majority of the sterilizations were performed on people deemed mentally ill (256 women and 147 men) or mentally deficient (243 women and 33 men). A small number of rapists or habitual criminals also appear to have been sterilized. Recordkeeping for these sterilizations was not very reliable and it is likely that many more people were sterilized than can be dependably determined (Talkingsticktv, “Interview: Joanne Woiak”).

    Period During Which Sterilizations Occurred
    Washington had two different sterilization laws. The first was passed in 1909 and allowed for the sterilization of any person who was “guilty of carnal abuse of a female person under the age of ten years, or of rape” and of habitual criminals. Very few sterilization operations were performed under this law. A broader sterilization law was passed in Washington in 1921 and sterilizations occurred beginning with the passage of that law through the year 1942. The final sterilization took place by 1942 when the 1921 sterilization law was declared unconstitutional (Paul, pp. 525-528).

    Reply

  13. Carlyn Edgecomb
    Sep 21, 2013 @ 13:22:21

    Forced sterilization, also called compulsory sterilization, are government policies which attempt to force people to undergo surgical sterilization. In the first half of the 20th century, countries around the world were using it as part of eugenics programs intended to prevent the reproduction and multiplication of members of the population considered to be carriers of defective genetic traits.
    There is a really good article about this topic that explains how forced sterilization is used on women (and some men). Simply put it is the process of permanently ending someone’s ability to reproduce without his or her consent.
    http://www2.webster.edu/~woolflm/forcedsterilization.html
    Back in 1849 when the first bill that was proposed was aimed towards the mentally handicapped and others whose genes seemed “undesirable”. Luckily the bill was never brought to a vote.
    Now why would I agree with something so absurd?! Every person should have the choice to reproduce whether their child will have a defective genetic trait or not. They should not be forced to do anything, just so it makes it easier for someone else. And to think that this happens in countries all over the world and some people don’t even think twice about it. Plus you have to think about the health consequences that can happen, medical complications and even death.
    Countries say it is for population control, but there has to be less absurd ways to manage population control rather than forcing someone to do something that they do not want to do. And to see that the U.S is still not so clear on how they see this subject is insane. They should have put a stop to it a long time ago.
    I couldn’t find any articles that agree with forced sterilizations or any arguments for it. Forced sterilization is a means to end basically and some people just agree with that.

    Reply

  14. dlpayne
    Sep 22, 2013 @ 09:31:13

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
    The aim of the eugenics movement in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century was to prevent the degeneration of the white race. A central tactic of the movement was the involuntary sterilization of people labeled as feeble-minded. An analysis of the practice of eugenic sterilization provides insight into how the concepts of gender, race, class, and disability are fundamentally intertwined. I argue that in the early twentieth century, the concept of feeble-mindedness came to operate as an umbrella concept that linked off-white ethnicity, poverty, and gendered conceptions of lack of moral character together and that feeble-mindedness thus understood functioned as the signifier of tainted whiteness.
    I don’t believe in forced sterilization because for one it is wrong and everyone has the right to have children if they want them. It would be like just because you are poor you can’t have children and forcing a women to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one.

    Reply

  15. dlpayne
    Sep 22, 2013 @ 09:43:10

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
    Human population control is the practice of artificially altering the rate of growth of a human population. Historically, human population control has been implemented by limiting the population’s birth rate, usually by government mandate, and has been undertaken as a response to factors including high or increasing levels of poverty, environmental concerns, religious reasons, and overpopulation. While population control can involve measures that improve people’s lives by giving them greater control of their reproduction, some programs have exposed them to exploitation.
    Reproductive rights are legal rights and freedoms relating to reproduction and reproductive health.[1] The World Health Organization defines reproductive rights as follows:

    Reproductive rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. They also include the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence.[2]

    Reproductive rights may include some or all of the following: the right to legal or safe abortion, the right to birth control, the right to access good-quality reproductive healthcare, and the right to education and access in order to make free and informed reproductive choices.[3] Reproductive rights may also include the right to receive education about contraception and sexually transmitted infections, and freedom from coerced sterilization, abortion, and contraception, and protection from gender-based practices such as female genital mutilation

    Reply

  16. Joy
    Sep 22, 2013 @ 14:57:27

    Forced Sterilization

    Women around the world have many issues that they face and need to overcome. One of these issues is forced sterilization. Forced sterilization is the process of permanently ending someone’s ability to reproduce without his or her consent. This has occurred around the world, including here in the United States. The reasons for this atrocity also varies, as does the procedure. Along with the human rights violation that forced sterilization infringes upon comes some health risks.

    Forced sterilizations have occurred all over the world and in huge masses. For example, in Nazi Germany four 400,000 men and women were forcibly sterilized. In Sweden 63,000 people, mostly women, were sterilized. Over 800,000 men and women in Japan as well as 11,000 women from Finland were also sterilized without consent. These have all happened in the recent past. However, Australia’s figures are astounding because there have been over one thousand cases since 1992 (Yamaguchi, 1997).

    This occurrence is a part of our past. It will always be part of our history. Although in the United States we look at this as something that did not really happen. This is not the type of history that is taught to children in school. We do, however, teach about the inhumanities of the Nazis. The connection is not made though that some of the tactics that the Nazis used were taken from United States practice (Piotrowski, 2000).

    In the early 1900′s, the United States had a eugenics program (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000322_eugenics_feature.html). With that program, the U.S. was attempting to perfect the gene pool. The hopeful outcomes were that of a society without crime, mental illness, and homelessness. The idea was that if the degenerates of society were kept from having children that society’s problems would disappear.

    Outside the United States forced sterilization came out of other motives, often population control. Countries are faced with an increase in population without an increase of supplies or goods. Those working for the government has goals that they are supposed to meet each year for the number of sterilizations (http://cwfa.org/library/life/1998-12-29_life-peru.shtml). For example, Peru has had a target for the number of sterilizations to take place each year. In 1996, it was 100,000. It was not met that year, but the target for the next year was increased to 130,000. That year, the quota was met. Also, this mostly falls on the women. The women are the ones who are having the children, so they are the ones who are the victims of the sterilizations.

    Although this is what the U.S. was doing, what the Nazis did seemed new. Americans were horrified about what was being done, and yet not realizing at the same time that some of the same things had gone on in their own country. The Nazis did take steps beyond what was done in the U.S. But the fact remains that part of what the Nazis did was taken from what the U.S. had already put into practice.

    It was in 1907 that Indiana put the first law on the books broaching the subject of forced sterilization. Indiana was the first state to do so. Overall, thirty-five states had at one point had laws allowing forced sterilizations (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000322_eugenics_feature.html). The subject even made it to the Supreme Court. In 1927 the Supreme Court upheld the Virginia state’s sterilization laws (Piotrowski, 2000). The case was Buck v. Bell and the decision led to increased sterilizations nationwide. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, in reaction to the outcome of the case in relation to the ongoing eugenics program in the U.S., stated that “three generations of imbeciles are enough.” President Coolidge said that “America must remain American,” which is in relation to the fact that some of those targeted for sterilization were immigrants (Piotrowski, 2000).

    Most of the forced sterilizations and laws in the United States occurred in the 1930′s and 1940′s (Piotrowski, 2000). Virginia continued through the 1970′s though. For the most part, this is in the past in the United States. Around the world, the same cannot be said. Throughout the globe, forced sterilizations continue to be a threat to both women and men. For example, Japan’s last sterilization without consent was in 1992, and Peru started a population control program in 1996.

    For the most part there is a select crowd that is targeted for forced sterilizations. If the country is working under a eugenics program, the poor, minorities, epileptics, manic-depressives, prostitutes, alcoholics, homeless, and criminals are the targets (Piotrowski, 2000). Often when the country is supporting a population control program, the poor and illiterate are the targets (Sims, 1998).

    Often the way that these programs (eugenics and population control) followed through with the forced sterilizations were by indirect means. In the U.S. anyone who was considered feebleminded was a legal target for sterilization in thirty-five states. The country was also open to the eugenics program (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000322_eugenics_feature.html).

    There were magazines published discussing the benefits of such programs, such as Eugenics Quarterly. State fairs also held competitions determining the ‘best baby’ and the ‘fittest family.’ Movies such as “The Black Stork” were also made. This movie even went beyond the benefits of sterilization to include the idea of euthanasia. The country was in a state of mind that was accepting of these kind of actions.

    Different tactics were taken in the situations where population control was a determining factors to lead to forced sterilizations (Sims, 1998). Often these countries are struggling with a large number of people in poverty. In some of these cases food and clothing are used as bribes to sterilize women.

    Peru’s population control program, although it is not officially recognized by the government, uses some of these tactics (http://mcsnet.ab.ca/cad/FamilyLife/ForcedSteril.htm). Women are promised food and clothing for their children. When they show up to receive the food and clothes, they are told that in order to get the items they must be sterilized. If the refuse, sometimes they will get the items that month but are told that in the future they must be sterilized before getting the food and clothes. In these cases, the women feel as if they are being forced into making this decision in order to help care for the children she already has. In other cases, women are not even notified. Sometimes when women give birth, the doctors sterilize her without her consent and without her even knowing it. Another tactic that was used to trick the people was in Japan. There, some victims were told that they could have the procedure reversed at any time down the road (Yamaguchi, 1997).

    Forced sterilizations can have detrimental health consequences. There can be medical complications or even death from this procedure (http://mcsnet.ab.ca/cad/FamilyLife/ForcedSteril.htm). The likelihood is also increased in poorer areas where the procedure was not done in a sterile hospital setting. The cases where the sterilizations take place in poor sanitary conditions leads to more complications for the women. Even when the women are in a hospital to have the sterilization, there can still be complications. When the women are given the sterilization for free in exchange for the food and clothing bribe, it is because they do not have enough money to support themselves. Also, the government only covers the actual procedure. Any treatment or medication after that is up to each woman to get. These women are not covered then when complications arise. They can then die from the complications because they cannot afford the treatment.

    The past shows us what we are capable of doing now and in the future. The question is then, can it happen again here and abroad. For other countries throughout the world it is still occurring. A eugenics program just ended in Japan in 1996. Sweden and Finland both had forced sterilization up until the 1970′s, and Peru’s population control program started in 1995 (http://cwfa.org/library/life/1998-12-29_life-peru.shtml). For the United States, the question is not so clear. When this was occurring, the country’s mindset was positive toward this. Right now, the human rights component is such that we are not set to do this again in the near future. However, with the support of the public, anything is a possibility. Some of the state laws–those stated that anyone who was labeled feebleminded could be sterilized without consent–are still on the books. The Supreme Court case from 1927 still stands as well (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000322_eugenics_feature.html).

    In fact, in 1980 there was a class action suit that was rejected because of the precedent that the 1927 Supreme Court case established.

    Even with the health risks that are evident for the victims, countries still used forced sterilizations as a means to an end, whether it be a eugenics program or a population control program. Forced sterilizations are then just one more example of something that women must endure throughout the world.

    http://www2.webster.edu/~woolflm/forcedsterilization.html

    Reply

  17. Betty Kramer
    Sep 23, 2013 @ 01:38:34

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

    The United States was practicing sterilization before Hitler. Mandatory sterilization is generally instituted for the criminally insane, blind, and other “genetic defects” in the belief that many of the better genes were killed off during world war I and the gene pool needed protected.

    It has been a long held notion that war kills off the best and the brightest of a nation, and to reinforce that belief, Darwinism states that only the strongest propagate and the weakest in society are not considered “desirable” partners. War desecrates the “natural” law that supports Darwinism, in that strong young men and women get slaughtered on a grand scale. This opens up the gene pool “field” for the less desirable members of society to propagate out of simple necessity to stabilize society and the basic human instinct for survival. Even if the dating field is limited due to the desecration of strong young men and women, young men and women still want to get married. Many disabled people have an opportunity to fill that open societal position left by war. Hence the United States mandated forced sterilization on certain segments of society in the early 20s, Germany followed with similar laws in 1933. This is designed to protect the genetics of future generations from becoming irrevocably weakened by the introduction of defects.

    Reply

  18. Betty Kramer
    Sep 23, 2013 @ 01:53:55

    http://hnn.us/article/1796

    It has always seemed strange to me that everyone thinks about Germany when it comes to forced sterilization when it was actually the US that was the first on board with that grand idea. I noticed in the blogs introduced by students at Interface that there is no such predisposition. We are all in agreement that it was actually the United States that first mandated the forced sterilization.

    Doctors were required to register those in society who were defected genetically, and while one would assume this was the brainchild of the Nazis, they would be mistaken. This was happening in 20 of the United States, and the idea was indeed being propagated to the other states.

    Once the decision to sterilize had been made the doctor that had petitioned for the sterilization was required to inform the patient of the operation.The patient was told that there would be no ill physical consequences, and the operation was performed. Many times without the recipient even knowing they were being sterilized. Police force was often needed to bring the patient to the operating table. The operation itself consisted of ligation of the fallopian tubes in women and a vasectomy for men. Many people have testified to the lasting effects this mandate had on them and personal devastation it caused. Any society that gives too much power to the government and then expects that power to be used with reservation needs to take a good look at history. The government needs to fear its people, not the other way around. While the United States health care needs to be radically overhauled, we all need to be cognizant that “we the people” always need to keep control or we will suffer the consequences of allowing others to decide what is healthy and what is “good” for us.

    Reply

  19. caseyholmanics
    Sep 23, 2013 @ 07:35:58

    Pros:
    There is a continuing increase of population. Just in China there are 1.2 billion and rising every day.
    It could also be an effective way to prevent the spreading of STDs such as AIDs.
    Other people believe it will stop poverty and crime would be reduced.

    Cons:

    Nobody has the right to “Play God”
    In the many countries that this is being done, their children are the only joy in life.
    It’s a person’s basic human right to be able to have children.

    I believe this is an individual circumstance. Some cases people really want to have children, but know they should not because they are not financially prepared or some other reasons. Then there are others who know they cannot afford a child, but have one to take advantage of the state systems we have in place. I really believe the parents should be responsible to talk to their children about the major life decision of having their own children.
    http://www.cbv.ns.ca/mchs/Issues/Sterilization/Pros%20%26%20Cons.html

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: