Eugenics, sterilization, and historical memory in the United States

Abstract

From the 1920s to the 1950s, California sterilized approximately 20,000 people in state homes and hospitals based on a eugenic law that authorized medical superintendents to perform reproductive surgeries on patients deemed unfit and “suffering from a mental affliction likely to be inherited.” Working with a unique resource – a dataset created from 19,000 sterilization recommendations – my team and I have reconstructed patterns and experiences of institutionalization of sterilizations. This article presents several of our important initial findings related to ethnic and gender bias in sterilization policies, and reflects on the relevance of the history for contemporary issues in genomics and social justice.

Taking an antiracist posture in scientific publications in human genetics and genomics

“…6 Recent work has further revealed striking trends in American psychiatric facilities that implemented eugenics practices, where Black and Latinx individuals were far more likely to undergo involuntary sterilization compared with White individuals. 7,8 While the German Nazi Party was defeated and American eugenics laws were repealed, the ideology underlying them-the belief that race has a biological and genetic basis-has persisted. This idea remains a fundamental assumption, for example, of white supremacists in the United States.…”

A Web-Based Decision Tool to Improve Contraceptive Counseling for Women With Chronic Medical Conditions: Protocol For a Mixed Methods Implementation Study

“…In accordance with this principle, we assert that a patient-centered contraceptive tool must be designed to prevent unconscious or conscious reproductive coercion, particularly toward individuals from marginalized communities. This concern is based upon the disturbing legacy of compulsory sterilization programs that targeted women of color, poor women, women with disabilities, and immigrant women in multiple US states throughout the twentieth century [ 75 ] and even as recently as 2010 in California [ 76 ]. Therefore, the model explicitly avoids presumptions about the patient’s feelings regarding pregnancy and childbearing and starts with a values clarification [ 77 ] question by asking the patient about her current feelings regarding pregnancy and parenting.…”