Forced sterilization program in NC...bring it back, I say!

(I did a quick search and didn't see this posted already, so my apologies if it has been.)

http://posttrib.suntimes.com/6057401-537/nc-grapples-with-legacy-of-sterilization-programs.html

Overt rationalization for the programs ranged from protecting the potential offspring of mentally disabled parents to improving the overall health and intellectual competence of the human race. Before the atrocities of World War II, it was seen by many as a legitimate effort to improve society.

“Sterilization was always a cost-cutting measure,’’ said Paul Lombardo, a professor at Georgia State University’s College of Law. “The argument was, anybody who generates social costs shouldn’t be allowed to have children.’’

...

A league brochure from 1950 states: “You wouldn’t give a responsible position to a person of little intelligence. Yet each day the feebleminded and the mentally defective are entrusted with the most important and far reaching job of all — the job of parenthood.”



Absofuckinglutely!!

My god, we should be bringing back this kind of program, not denigrating it and considering compensation for the "victims." We talk on this board all the time about we feel that retards/autards and people who have genetic diseases should be sterilized. Why is that such a "horrific" thing??

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shauna's like a gluten-free Jim Jones for dumb, lifeless middle-aged women. I swear, this bitch could set fire to a orphanage and they would applaud her for bringing them light. ~ Miss Hannigan

I don't ask to happen to anyone else what I wouldn't do to myself.

I used to take care of MR adults in a group home setting. Trust me, you do not ant these people reproducing more burdens. It's not uncommon for them to be inappropriatley sexual and screw left,right and center given half a chance in mixed gender living situations. There was an incident at the house where I worked that I thank my lucky stars I was not there to witness. With females theres is also chance of abuse or rape. Good places run background checks tho.

It's funny how kids rights only matter until the kid EXISTS. Then it doesn't matter if it is raised in poverty or has an inherited disability, because it's a baybeeeeeee that needs to liveeeeee, even if it is in an insitutition or having its arse wiped every day for its entire life.

Of course one of the problems about these programs was that, at the time they were implemented, they were frequently quite racist and sexist (for instance, a woman would be sterilized for showing signs of 'sexual deviancy' and certain ethnic groups were sterilized more frequently). There would need to be some way to ensure that the process looked at actual factors like mental incapacity and inheritable disease.

I think it would be less error-prone if we halted fertility treatment, established a 1-child per couple rule, and didn't allow criminals presently serving time the opportunity to reproduce while in prison. I see the problem of the wrong sort of people having children as minor, compared to the problem of there being too many of us in the first place.

This is not to say that I don't support the non-murdering kind of eugenics. I think that a good many people do, but won't admit it. Whenever you receive the bingo: "People like you should be having more children"--regardless of whether by 'like you' they mean highly educated, blonde, intelligent, middle-class, or whatever--you're hearing someone who accepts the basic premise that some people's genes are more suitable than others'. Since the average person reacts with horror at the thought of eugenics, it would make an interesting response to that bingo to directly address their apparent support of this "discredited idea." I always like to grill them as to what characteristic in particular they want passed on, and then highlight my genetic unsuitability in terms of hereditary disease.

Interesting to note that some of those cases involved the parents of the tard actually requesting that the procedure be performed.

$20K is being requested in compensation for the "victims". Originally, the funds were to come from the national tobacco settlement money (the tobacco companies had to fork over millions to the state in compensation for health problems caused by smoking. since the decision on how to spend the money was left in the hands of the legislators, it was never seen again. nor was there an accounting of where it went).

The Winston-Salem Journal did a multi-part series on this subject years ago. Forsyth County was one of the central points for the program. Several of the victims have complained of physical problems; obviously the procedure wasn't as sophisticated as today; but they also complain of mental anguish arising from the procedure.

That their rights were violated has been established. The Supreme Court has validated the right to breed, no matter how defective the parents are, but judging mental anguish seems pretty subjective, to me. It would have to be established that those women really wanted kids and that their quality of life has been diminished because they weren't allowed to have them. Reading some of the cases from that series, it's hard to feel a jot of sympathy for those women. They didn't ask to be born into illiteracy, poverty, and abuse, but felt that they had the right to perpetuate it into the next generation.

Nope, pretty much zero sympathy from me.

Since the issue was largely brought to the public's attention by a W-S Journal examination, I suppose it will be front news at the paper until a resolution is reached.


Oh puleeze

I've come across this story once before, some years ago. One forced sterilization case was a 15 year old who delivered a baby while high on drugs. I can't blame the doctor for not wanting her to have another child.

The commenters all agreed that the program was a great idea.

One has to wonder, but will never know...how many of these young girls would've gone on to have five or six more babies, all on assistance, had they not been sterilized? This state probably prevented millions in tax dollars being spent on feeding and caring for the poor.

I say just sterilize everyone at puberty and you have to prove your fitness via a rigorous screening process to be a parent of ONE child.

Quote
Dorisan
...Reading some of the cases from that series, it's hard to feel a jot of sympathy for those women. They didn't ask to be born into illiteracy, poverty, and abuse, but felt that they had the right to perpetuate it into the next generation.

Nope, pretty much zero sympathy from me.

On another website I frequent someone very aptly compared it to the recent movement of deaf people wanting to have deaf children so as to continue that yoonique human experience. Poor women create poor children to be their slaves (especially the girls) and to keep them company in their misery. Also, while children aren't as economically useful as they were in past agrarian economies the total amount of public assistance offered to poor women for sprogging often exceeds what they could earn on their own through merely wages. My bleeding heart liberal friends scream bloody murder at the mere suggestion that assistance to single moos incentivizes breeding but deep down in their hearts they know it's true.

Many of them probably weren't feeble-minded, but they were naive, living in dangerous situations where they were easy prey to older men, and on welfare. Sterilization, for some of them, helped them to lead less desperate, depraved lives.

Quote
nomooingzone
I say just sterilize everyone at puberty and you have to prove your fitness via a rigorous screening process to be a parent of ONE child.

I think it should be MANDATORY for all preteens to be reversibly sterilized and for it to be a law it can't be medically reversed until they can establish a residence, get an education, have a job for a certain length of time, have proof of health insurance, and a sizable savings account. The minimum age should be 25 and they should also have to be legally married for a minimum of 5 years unless they are gay and are living in a no marriage state. In that case they should be in a legal union for the same length of time. There wouldn't be any of this intentional single moo-ism to sponge off the government or a different baby daddy for a litter of illegitimate little bastards. In my perfect world ALL FORMS of fertility treatment would be abolished too.

This isn't any type of moral judgment, but rather it's purely economic and a reliable method of population control since over half can't seem to do these few basic things before they embark on a lifetime loaf shitting campaign.

------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
If YOU are the "exception" to what I am saying, then why does my commentary bother you so much?
I don't hate your kids, I HATE YOU!

It's all about money. The relatives of these very elderly, or deceased women want to be compensated for what the state of NC "put our relative through." So...since she couldn't overpopulate the state with welfare recipients 40 years ago, they want their money now? Even in the articles that are clearly slanted toward the women who were sterilized, I can see all the good that came from it.

Quote
gymrat
It's all about money. The relatives of these very elderly, or deceased women want to be compensated for what the state of NC "put our relative through." So...since she couldn't overpopulate the state with welfare recipients 40 years ago, they want their money now? Even in the articles that are clearly slanted toward the women who were sterilized, I can see all the good that came from it.

Yeah, that precedent setting case that keeps cropping up was about a 14 y/o girl who was allegedly raped and sterilized after shitting the loaf. She was from a famblee with 9 kids who were living in abject poverty. I fail to see why her sterilization was a bad thing, given her circumstances at the time.

------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
If YOU are the "exception" to what I am saying, then why does my commentary bother you so much?
I don't hate your kids, I HATE YOU!

More bombasting

Quote

The true victims of this tragic national disgrace are not only the survivors now telling their stories, but millions more never born. How do you compensate people and families who do not even exist because of pernicious eugenic laws that criminalized or negated interracial marriage and sterilized unwanted segments of entire generations?

The suggested reparation would be delivered via state (ie - taxpayer) funds. When these violating procedures were being enacted, they were largely funded from supposed philanthropic entities, supported by university intelligentsia

Quote
http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-11-09/opinion/17517477_1_eugenics-ethnic-cleansing-master-race
Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America's most respected scientists from such prestigious universities as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics' racist aims.

Both the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations still exist. I think that true reparation should be paid by those organizations rather than from the pockets of people not born when the sterilizations were taking place. It would be a more meaningful reparation if it came from the people who originally financed the abuse.

So...tax payers who weren't born yet have to pay reparations for welfare recipients who were never born, because their potential mothers were sterilized? Makes sense!eyes2

Quote
gymrat
So...tax payers who weren't born yet have to pay reparations for welfare recipients who were never born, because their potential mothers were sterilized? Makes sense!eyes2

Let's just pass the bill on to our own never-to-be-born children.

I kind of wish sterilization could be a 'rite of passage' from childhood into adulthood like wisdom teeth removal seems to be. Stick an IUD into every female starting at age, say, 14. I know it would be sexist since there is no way to temporarily sterilize the guys, but that's all we got. And hey, this might work nicely in some cases - idiot girls who slut around might end up with PID and become permanently sterile.

And permanently sterilize ANYONE who shows signs of mental illness (including awwwwtizzums), is a drug user, is sexually abusive, or who has some major crimes under their belt (not like "stole some 49 cent gum"). I personally think forced sterilization is a great idea because not every single person in the damn world deserves to have children. A retard cannot properly care for an infant, so everyone else will pick up the slack. What is wrong with the cream of the biological crop being the only ones allowed to breed? I bet it'd reduce the number of tards, addicts, and sociopaths that are born and who spend their lives on the dole or in prison.

And also do away with IVF and sperm/egg donation. If people want to fix their fertility, they can do it with herbs or accept the fact they were not meant to breed. And offer the tax credit to the childless and childfree rather than the breeders. There are a lot of people in this country who need to be sterilized and waiting for their permission to do so will only allow a load more unnecessary ids to be born.

IF we do not control our population, nature will do it for us by means of Famine, disease, environmental disasters.

To the religous right, a sperm and an egg is not a person, and certainly not equal to the living.

To the academic left, a single woman on govt aid does not have the inherent right to have as many babies as she wants and to collect a govt paychack for each and every one of them all on the backs of working people.

to everyone; drug addicts do not have the right to have as many crackbabies as they want and have society pay for it.

If we as a society do not change our ways, we are doomed, and praying, or singing Cum by ya, won't change things.

Frankly, I think forced sterilization is a good idea for certain people. But anyone who dares to mention the idea is labeled a "nazi" or discriminating. The bigger crime should be allowing innocent humans being forced into existence that they didn't ask for just to satisify someone elses personal satisfaction. Most people have kids for totally selfish reasons such as having someone to share their miserable life or mental illness with. Why does someone with god talking in their head and 9 personalities need to breed? So the child can have a miserably abusive existence that screws it up forever leaving it dependent on mental health services?

Honestly, I think a lot of people secretly know that this would be a good idea but are afraid to admit it. Teens should definitely get reversible sterilization.

If someone has such poor mental or physical health that they need to be institutionalized then they should be sterilised - they can't look after themselves so clearly would be unable to care for a child.

I think governments should offer voluntary paid sterilization, not only would that suit people like us, it would probably attract many of the junkie/crack whore set and fix many of those problem breeders.

Teenagers - compulsory implanon from the onset of menses. This WAS being done in some remote Australian communities, essentially for the protection of young women who are often abused and are in a situation where sex from a young age is the norm. The doo-gooders in the southern states found out about the practise and screamed that it was encouraging and enabling abuse and underage sex. The program was discontinued. That is a massively complicated issue, but if the practise was rolled out across the board, in all high schools, would it be a bad thing? The drawback I can see is then less motivation for condom use and thus rampant STD spread.

I agree with mandatory sterilization. Hell, throw in some eugenics. I don't care if the breeders call me a Nazi for it. Months ago, I mentioned my mother's friend's crack-whore sister, who abandoned her eighth infant at the hospital. It was the third or fourth to test positive for drugs. She has always been a junkie - she should have been sterilized eight children ago. But noooo - she has a "right" to have baybeez! :headbrick

----------
michaela

"A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends, and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt, will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter." -Jonathan Swift, A Modest Proposal

These are the following people who i think should be forced to undergo sterilzation:

-violent felony offenders (repeats)...if you're assaulting people all the time, you shouldn't have kids. My boyfriend's crackwhore mom was in jail for assault for a while. She shouldn't be allowed to reproduce: she abused my boyfriend severely!

-mentally retarded/developmentally challenged people who are DEPENDENT and INCOMPETENT. No brainer here. (excuse the pun)

-rapists or child molesters

-those who commit child or elder or animal abuse

Those on food stamps or govt programs (the women that is) should show up to get the BC shot every 2-3 months (or whatever is needed) in order to continue to receive benefits. If they stay on the programs for life, they get the shots until they are menopausal. If they want to have kids, they need to learn to be fucking self-sufficient.

I believe very, very, very strongly in the last point. Deprovera for everyone on welfare.