Archive for the Eugenics in California Category

California Eugenics Sterilization Program went on for years !

Posted in Eugenics in California with tags , , , , on November 11, 2013 by saynsumthn

THE YEAR WAS 1979 AND THE place was the state capitol in Sacramento, Calif. Assemblyman Art Torres, chairman of the Health Committee, introduced a bill to the legislature to repeal the state’s sterilization law. First passed in the same chambers 70 years earlier and modified several times over the decades, this statute had sanctioned over 20000 nonconsensual sterilizations on patients in state-run homes and hospitals, or one third of the more than 60000 such procedures in the United States in the 20th century.

California was propitious terrain for the emergence of a far-reaching sterilization regimen. Eugenic ideas were espoused by influential professionals, such as Stanford University Chancellor David Starr Jordan, the Santa Rosa “plant wizard” Luther Burbank, and the Los Angeles politician Dr John R. Haynes. In 1924, Charles M. Goethe, a Sacramento businessman, collaborated with University of California zoologist Samuel J. Holmes to found the Eugenics Section of the San Francisco–based Commonwealth Club of California. (Read Sterilized in the Name of Public Health)

women-prisonersDoctors under contract with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 female inmates from 2006 to 2010 without required state approvals, the Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

At least 148 women received tubal ligations in violation of prison rules during those five years – and there are perhaps 100 more dating back to the late 1990s, according to state documents and interviews.

The Report states that from 1997 to 2010, the state paid doctors $147,460 to perform the procedure, according to a database of contracted medical services for state prisoners.

The women were signed up for the surgery while they were pregnant and housed at either the California Institution for Women in Corona or Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla, which is now a men’s prison.

Former inmates and prisoner advocates maintain that prison medical staff coerced the women, targeting those deemed likely to return to prison in the future.

CrystalNguyen
Crystal Nguyen, a former Valley State Prison inmate who worked in the prison’s infirmary during 2007, said she often overheard medical staff asking inmates who had served multiple prison terms to agree to be sterilized.

“I was like, ‘Oh my God, that’s not right,’ ” said Nguyen, 28. “Do they think they’re animals, and they don’t want them to breed anymore?”

One former Valley State inmate who gave birth to a son in October 2006 said the institution’s OB-GYN, Dr. James Heinrich, repeatedly pressured her to agree to a tubal ligation.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/07/5549696/female-inmates-sterilized-in-california.html#storylink=cpy

Sanger Farms and Open Spaces

In 1932, Margaret Sanger called for the U.S. government to set aside farms and what she called “open spaces” where certain groups of people would be segregated from the rest of society. She proposed that, among others, the illiterate, the unemployed and the poor should be forcibly kept in these areas until they developed “better moral conduct.”

Sanger Dysgenic types

In 1950, Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger was quoted again advocating sterilization when she said, “ I consider that the world and almost our civilization for the next twenty-five years, is going to depend upon a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people. Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately; there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.”

During its founding, Planned Parenthood was surrounded by supporters of eugenics. In fact, one of Sanger’s financial backers, Proctor and Gamble heir, Clarence Gamble, provided funding for eugenics projects and gave money directly to the North Carolina Eugenics Board which sterilized many women including, Elaine Riddick. Riddick has been outspoken of her experience leading to a recent apology from the state.

Gamble-picture

In 1947, Gamble also called for the expansion of that state’s sterilization program saying that for every feebleminded person sterilized, 40 more were polluting and degrading the bloodlines of future generations with their defective genes.

Gamble Sterilization EU

Back to the story: One former Valley State inmate who gave birth to a son in October 2006 said the institution’s OB-GYN, Dr. James Heinrich, repeatedly pressured her to agree to a tubal ligation.

“As soon as he found out that I had five kids, he suggested that I look into getting it done. The closer I got to my due date, the more he talked about it,” said Christina Cordero, 34, who spent two years in prison for auto theft. “He made me feel like a bad mother if I didn’t do it.”

Cordero, released in 2008, and now living in Upland, agreed to the procedure. “Today,” she said, “I wish I would have never had it done.”

The producers of Maafa21 a documentary on Eugenics had responded to this here:

The 69-year-old Bay Area physician denied pressuring anyone and expressed surprise that local contract doctors had charged for the surgeries. He described the $147,460 total as minimal.

Daun Martin, a licensed psychologist, also claimed that some pregnant women, particularly those on drugs or who were homeless, would commit crimes so they could return to prison for better health care.

“Do I criticize those women for manipulating the system because they’re pregnant? Absolutely not,” Martin, 73, said. “But I don’t think it should happen. And I’d like to find ways to decrease that.”

Martin denied approving the surgeries, but at least 60 tubal ligations were done at Valley State while Martin was in charge, according to the state contracts database.

Martin’s counterpart at the California Institution for Women, Dr. Jacqueline Long, declined to discuss why inmates received unauthorized tubal ligations under her watch. But the Corona prison’s former compliance officer, William Kelsey, said there was disagreement among staff members over the procedure.

During one meeting in late 2005, a few correctional officers differed with Long’s medical team over adding tubal ligations to a local hospital’s contract, Kelsey, 57, said. The officers viewed the surgeries as nonessential medical care and questioned whether the state should pay.

“They were just fed up,” Kelsey said. “They didn’t think criminals and inmates had a right to the care we were providing them and they let their personal opinions be heard.”

The service was included, however, and Kelsey said the grumbling subsided.

Federal and state laws ban inmate sterilizations if federal funds are used, reflecting concerns that prisoners might feel pressured to comply. California used state funds instead, but since 1994, the procedure has required approval from top medical officials in Sacramento on a case-by-case basis.

Yet no tubal ligation requests have come before the health care committee responsible for approving such restricted surgeries, said Dr. Ricki Barnett, who tracks medical services and costs for the California Prison Health Care Receivership Corp. Barnett, 65, has led the Health Care Review Committee since joining the prison receiver’s office in 2008.

“When we heard about the tubal ligations, it made us all feel slightly queasy,” Barnett said. “It wasn’t so much that people were conspiratorial or coercive or sloppy. It concerns me that people never took a step back to project what they would feel if they were in the inmate’s shoes and what the inmate’s future might hold should they do this.”

kjeffrey01

Former Valley State Prison for Women inmate Kimberly Jeffrey spends time with her son Noel, 3, at their San Francisco home. During her imprisonment in 2010, Jeffrey says a doctor pressured her to agree to be sterilized while she was sedated and strapped to a surgical table for a C-section. She refused.
Credit: Noah Berger/For The Center for Investigative Reporting

Yet, Kimberly Jeffrey says she was pressured by a doctor while sedated and strapped to a surgical table for a C-section in 2010, during a stint at Valley State for a parole violation. Jeffrey, 43, was horrified, she said, and resisted.

“He said, ‘So we’re going to be doing this tubal ligation, right?’ ” Jeffrey said. “I’m like, ‘Tubal ligation? What are you talking about? I don’t want any procedure. I just want to have my baby.’ I went into a straight panic.”

Jeffrey provided copies of her official prison and hospital medical files to CIR. Those records show Jeffrey rejected a tubal ligation offer during a December 2009 prenatal checkup at Heinrich’s office. A medical report from Jeffrey’s C-section a month later noted that she again refused a tubal ligation request made after she arrived at Madera Community Hospital.

At no time did anyone explain to her any medical justifications for tubal ligation, Jeffrey said.

That experience still haunts Jeffrey, who lives in San Francisco with her 3-year-old son, Noel. She speaks to groups seeking to improve conditions for female prisoners and has lobbied legislators in Sacramento. Jeffrey recently completed her ACT college-entrance test and hopes to pursue a degree at San Francisco State University.

“Being treated like I was less than human produced in me a despair,” she said.

State prison officials “are the real repeat offenders,” Jeffrey added. “They repeatedly offended me by denying me my right to dignity and humanity.”

Heinrich considers the questions raised about his medical care unfair and said he is suspicious about the women’s motives. Heinrich insists he worked hard to give inmates high-quality medical treatment, adding that hundreds of appreciative prisoners could vouch for that.

“They all wanted it done,” he said of the sterilizations. “If they come a year or two later saying, ‘Somebody forced me to have this done,’ that’s a lie. That’s somebody looking for the state to give them a handout.

“My guess is that the only reason you do that is not because you feel wronged, but that you want to stay on the state’s dole somehow.”

California’s dark legacy of forced sterilizations

Posted in Eugenics in California, Planned Parenthood and Hispanics on March 16, 2012 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

California’s dark legacy of forced sterilizations, posted with vodpod

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Eugenicists In California Trained The Nazi Party, posted with vodpod

NOTE the book “Sterilization for Human Betterment” mentioned in this CNN Piece above, that was used to train Nazis was written by ES Gosney and Paul Popenoe – two people Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger spoke highly about in her Birth Control Review:

In the April 1933 BCR – it states, “THE following two bills were prepared by the
Human Betterment Foundation as a revision of the California sterilization is President E S Gosney of this foundation states that bills of this
type, if adopted in any state, would probably cover satisfactorily for the present the necessity of providing not merely for the sterilization of patients In any state hospital or institution but also for sterilization of the indigent the defectives not committed legally, who particularly need and desire such sterilization.”


And in July , 1931, Gosney was published by Sanger’s BCR again about Sterilizations and Contraception and he writes this in support of state forced sterilization , Eugenic sterilization is applied by the state to persons who are, for the most part, Irresponsible Contraceptives can be used only voluntarily by people who are responsible.”

Read this lovely letter by : E.S. Gosney (Human Betterment Foundation) letter to L.I. Dublin (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company), about pending NY sterilization bill (5/8/1934)

We are advised that a sterilization bill is being prepared for introduction in the next session of your state legislature. The basic reasons for such a law are deep-rooted in the problem of race progress or degeneracy; therefore should be of interest to every earnest citizen. Knowing the wide-spread misunderstanding as to the purpose and results of eugenic sterilization, we should be glad to aid in disseminating the facts proved by California’s twenty-five years experience. Can you tell us something of the trend of public sentiment on this measure, the opposition to the bill, if any, and the parties actively interested in it? Cordially yours, [signed] E. S. Gosney, President B [handwritten in] Note to Davenport [end]

Paul Popenoe was on the 1938 Committee for Planned Parenthood – Published in Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Review- April 1938 , He was also on Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Federation Advisory Board in 1939, the American Birth Control later changed its name to Planned Parenthood.

The German Sterilization Law,”” by Paul Popenoe, The Journal of Heredity, American Genetic Association, page 257″

The German Sterilization Law By Paul Popenoe Human Betterment Foundation,

Pasadena Germany’s eugenic sterilization law, which went into effect on January 1, 1934, is no hasty improvisation of the Nazi regime. It has been taking shape gradually during many years, in the discussions of eugenicists. From one point of view, it is merely an accident that it happened to be the Hitler administration which was ready to put into effect the recommendations of specialists. But Hitler himself – though a bachelor – has long been a convinced advocate of race betterment through eugenic measures. Probably his earlier thinking was colored by Nietzsche, but he studied the subject more thoroughly during his years in prison, following the abortive revolutionary movement of 1923.

Here, it is said, he came into possession of the two-volume text on heredity and eugenics, by E. Baur, E. Fischer, and F. Lenz, which is the best-known statement of eugenics in the German language, and evidently studied it to good purpose.

In his book, “Mein Kampf”, most of which was written during these prison years, and which outlines most of the policies since adopted by the Nazis as a political party, he bases his hopes of national regeneration solidly on the application of biological principles to human society. “He who is not sound and worthy in body and mind, should not perpetuate his handicaps in the bodies of his children,” Hitler declares in this book. “The state must take care that only he who is sound shall be a parent. “To prevent defective persons from producing equally defective offspring, is an act dictated by the clearest light of reason. Its carrying out is the most human act of mankind. It would prevent the unmerited suffering of millions of persons, and above all would, in the end, result in a steady increase in human welfare.”

That he has no illusions about producing immediate and miraculous results, but is taking the long time view, is evidenced by his remark that “If for only 600 years the reproduction of the physically defective and mentally diseased were prevented, not only would mankind be freed from an unmeasurable misery, but it would reach a vigor which today is hardly dreamed of. “In an age when races are poisoning themselves,” he concludes, “any state which devotes itself to the care of its best racial elements must some day dominate the earth.” He recognizes, however, that negative measures are not enough to safeguard the racial values of a people.

There must be an encouragement of sound parenthood, and he declares that “the fertility of sound women must not be limited by the disgusting materialism which transforms the blessing of children into a curse for their parents.” While he points clearly to the need for financial reforms, such as the family wage, he seems to lay the greatest stress on educational changes and reforms in public opinion, that will promote earlier marriage and larger families among the fit. Since the Nazis came into full power, changes have been so frequent that it has been difficult to keep track of them. The sterilization law was one of the first eugenic measures to be adopted. Its text, in full, is as follows:
Section I (1) Anyone with hereditary disease may be rendered sterile by surgical means, when, according to medical experience, it is highly probably that the offspring of such person will suffer from sever inherited mental of bodily disorders.
(2) The law applies to all who suffer

For more on the eugenics connections to the Nazis and Planned Parenthood watch Maafa21

Eugenicists In California Trained The Nazi Party – had ties to Planned Parenthood’s founder

Posted in ES Gosney, Eugenics in California, Hitler, Human Betterment, Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger on Segregation and sterilization, Nazi, Paul Popenoe, Planned Parenthood and Eugenics with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 13, 2012 by saynsumthn

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Eugenicists In California Trained The Nazi Party, posted with vodpod

NOTE the book “Sterilization for Human Betterment” mentioned in this CNN Piece above, that was used to train Nazis was written by ES Gosney and Paul Popenoe – two people Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger spoke highly about in her Birth Control Review:

In the April 1933 BCR – it states, “THE following two bills were prepared by the
Human Betterment Foundation as a revision of the California sterilization is President E S Gosney of this foundation states that bills of this
type, if adopted in any state, would probably cover satisfactorily for the present the necessity of providing not merely for the sterilization of patients In any state hospital or institution but also for sterilization of the indigent the defectives not committed legally, who particularly need and desire such sterilization.”


And in July , 1931, Gosney was published by Sanger’s BCR again about Sterilizations and Contraception and he writes this in support of state forced sterilization , Eugenic sterilization is applied by the state to persons who are, for the most part, Irresponsible Contraceptives can be used only voluntarily by people who are responsible.”

Read this lovely letter by : E.S. Gosney (Human Betterment Foundation) letter to L.I. Dublin (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company), about pending NY sterilization bill (5/8/1934)

We are advised that a sterilization bill is being prepared for introduction in the next session of your state legislature. The basic reasons for such a law are deep-rooted in the problem of race progress or degeneracy; therefore should be of interest to every earnest citizen. Knowing the wide-spread misunderstanding as to the purpose and results of eugenic sterilization, we should be glad to aid in disseminating the facts proved by California’s twenty-five years experience. Can you tell us something of the trend of public sentiment on this measure, the opposition to the bill, if any, and the parties actively interested in it? Cordially yours, [signed] E. S. Gosney, President B [handwritten in] Note to Davenport [end]

Paul Popenoe was on the 1938 Committee for Planned Parenthood – Published in Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Review- April 1938 , He was also on Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control Federation Advisory Board in 1939, the American Birth Control later changed its name to Planned Parenthood.

The German Sterilization Law,”” by Paul Popenoe, The Journal of Heredity, American Genetic Association, page 257″

The German Sterilization Law By Paul Popenoe Human Betterment Foundation,

Pasadena Germany’s eugenic sterilization law, which went into effect on January 1, 1934, is no hasty improvisation of the Nazi regime. It has been taking shape gradually during many years, in the discussions of eugenicists. From one point of view, it is merely an accident that it happened to be the Hitler administration which was ready to put into effect the recommendations of specialists. But Hitler himself – though a bachelor – has long been a convinced advocate of race betterment through eugenic measures. Probably his earlier thinking was colored by Nietzsche, but he studied the subject more thoroughly during his years in prison, following the abortive revolutionary movement of 1923.

Here, it is said, he came into possession of the two-volume text on heredity and eugenics, by E. Baur, E. Fischer, and F. Lenz, which is the best-known statement of eugenics in the German language, and evidently studied it to good purpose.

In his book, “Mein Kampf”, most of which was written during these prison years, and which outlines most of the policies since adopted by the Nazis as a political party, he bases his hopes of national regeneration solidly on the application of biological principles to human society. “He who is not sound and worthy in body and mind, should not perpetuate his handicaps in the bodies of his children,” Hitler declares in this book. “The state must take care that only he who is sound shall be a parent. “To prevent defective persons from producing equally defective offspring, is an act dictated by the clearest light of reason. Its carrying out is the most human act of mankind. It would prevent the unmerited suffering of millions of persons, and above all would, in the end, result in a steady increase in human welfare.”

That he has no illusions about producing immediate and miraculous results, but is taking the long time view, is evidenced by his remark that “If for only 600 years the reproduction of the physically defective and mentally diseased were prevented, not only would mankind be freed from an unmeasurable misery, but it would reach a vigor which today is hardly dreamed of. “In an age when races are poisoning themselves,” he concludes, “any state which devotes itself to the care of its best racial elements must some day dominate the earth.” He recognizes, however, that negative measures are not enough to safeguard the racial values of a people.

There must be an encouragement of sound parenthood, and he declares that “the fertility of sound women must not be limited by the disgusting materialism which transforms the blessing of children into a curse for their parents.” While he points clearly to the need for financial reforms, such as the family wage, he seems to lay the greatest stress on educational changes and reforms in public opinion, that will promote earlier marriage and larger families among the fit. Since the Nazis came into full power, changes have been so frequent that it has been difficult to keep track of them. The sterilization law was one of the first eugenic measures to be adopted. Its text, in full, is as follows:
Section I (1) Anyone with hereditary disease may be rendered sterile by surgical means, when, according to medical experience, it is highly probably that the offspring of such person will suffer from sever inherited mental of bodily disorders.
(2) The law applies to all who suffer

For more on the eugenics connections to the Nazis and Planned Parenthood watch Maafa21

Vodpod videos no longer available.

California’s dark legacy of forced sterilizations, posted with vodpod