Forced Sterilization Is It A CRIME?
Mar 26, 2015 06:24:47 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Several Social Workers from Lutheran Social Services/Lutheran Refugee Service located at, 21700 Northwestern Highway, Ste 1300 Southfield, MI 48075 removed my internal organs and tissues in association with Health Alliance Plan in Washington DC at DC General Hospital & Columbia Women's Hospital without my consent. In fact, I was assaulted by several social workers from Lutheran Social Services of Michigan and Health Care Practitioners from Health Alliance Plan Michigan in Washington DC. In addition, DC General Hospital & Columbia Women's Hospital are closed down as an ending result of the alleged incident. Furthermore, the Federal Government an State of Michigan Legislation are refusing to prosecute the known Social Workers and Health Care Practitioner in a Criminal Court of Law for Stealing My Internal Organs and Tissues. I was physically assaulted, beaten, stomped, kicked, punched in the face until my jaw broke. And still Federal Legislation is refusing to jail the involved parties.
Mar 26, 2015 07:21:19 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
In support of my allegations against Lutheran Social Services/Lutheran Refugee Services of Michigan & Health Alliance Plan of Michigan Forced Sterilization is defined by Wikipedia online encyclopedia as;
Compulsory sterilization, also known as forced sterilization (or compulsory sterilisation respectively forced sterilisation see spelling differences), programs are government policies in violation of human rights conventions which attempt to force people to undergo surgical or other sterilization. The reasons governments implement sterilization programs vary in purpose and intent.[1] In the first half of the 20th century, several such programs were instituted in non-human-rights-compliant countries around the world, usually as part of eugenics programs intended to prevent the reproduction and multiplication of members of the population considered to be carriers of defective, more often than not different and not inferior in a natural combination racial genetic traits.[2]
Managing population growth; sex discrimination; 'sex-normalizing' surgeries of intersex persons; and Statute of Rome attempted and other genocide acts against ethnic minorities, the HIV positive, and the mentally disabled have also been reasons compulsive sterilization has been used.[1] There are countries where transgender people are required to undergo sterilization before gaining legal recognition of their gender. This is not to be confused with forced sterilization not associated with a likely genocidal (re.: Statute of Rome) government program. However the Report of United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment states that LGBT people often suffer the medical abuses or forced surgeries (including female genital mutilation and male genital mutilation) despite the Principles 17 and 18 of the Yogyakarta Principles.[3]
In May 2014, the World Health Organization, OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF issued a joint statement on Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization, An interagency statement. The report references the involuntary sterilization of a number of specific population groups. They include:
women, especially in relation to coercive population control policies, and particularly including women living with HIV, indigenous and ethnic minority girls and women. Indigenous and ethnic minority women often face "wrongful stereotyping based on gender, race and ethnicity".
disabled people, often perceived as sexually inactive. women with intellectual disabilities are "often treated as if they have no control, or should have no control, over their sexual and reproductive choices". Other rationales include menstrual management for the benefit of carers.
intersex persons, who "are often subjected to cosmetic and other non-medically indicated surgeries performed on their reproductive organs, without their informed consent or that of their parents, and without taking into consideration the views of the children involved", often as a "sex-normalizing" treatment.
transgender persons, "as a prerequisite to receiving gender- affirmative treatment and gender-marker changes".
The report recommends a range of guiding principles for medical treatment, including ensuring patient autonomy in decision-making, ensuring non-discrimination, accountability and access to remedies.[1]
United States[edit]
Further information: Eugenics in the United States
A poster from a 1921 eugenics conference displays the U.S. states that had implemented sterilization legislation by then
The United States was the first country to concertedly undertake compulsory sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics.[44] The heads of the program were avid believers in eugenics and frequently argued for their program. It was shut down due to ethical problems. The principal targets of the American program were the intellectually disabled and the mentally ill, but also targeted under many state laws were the deaf, the blind, people with epilepsy, and the physically deformed. According to the activist Angela Davis, women of predominantly ethnic minorities (such as Native Americans, as well as African-American women)[45] were sterilized against their will in many states, often without their knowledge while they were in a hospital for other reasons (e.g. childbirth).
Some sterilizations took place in prisons and other penal institutions, targeting criminality, but they were in the relative minority.[46] In the end, over 65,000 individuals were sterilized in 33 states under state compulsory sterilization programs in the United States in all likelihood without due multiethnic and ethnic minority perspective.[47][48]
The first state to introduce a compulsory sterilization bill was Michigan, in 1897, but the proposed law failed to garner enough votes by legislators to be adopted. Eight years later Pennsylvania's state legislators passed a sterilization bill that was vetoed by the governor. Indiana became the first state to enact sterilization legislation in 1907,[49] followed closely by California and Washington in 1909. Sterilization rates across the country were relatively low (California being the sole exception) until the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell which legitimized the forced sterilization of patients at a Virginia home for the intellectually disabled.[50] In the wake of that later decision, over 62,000 people in the United States, most of them women, were sterilized in service of a nationwide eugenics movement.[51] The number of sterilizations performed per year increased until another Supreme Court case, Skinner v. Oklahoma, 1942, complicated the legal situation by ruling against sterilization of criminals if the equal protection clause of the constitution was violated. That is, if sterilization was to be performed, then it could not exempt white-collar criminals.[52]
Most sterilization laws could be divided into three main categories of motivations: eugenic (concerned with heredity), therapeutic (based on the idea that sterilization could cure one of sexual traits such as masturbation or pedophilia), or punitive (as a punishment for criminals), though of course these motivations could be combined in practice and theory (sterilization of criminals could be both punitive and eugenic, for example). Buck v. Bell asserted only that eugenic sterilization was constitutional, whereas Skinner v. Oklahoma ruled specifically against punitive sterilization. Most operations only worked to prevent reproduction (such as severing the vas deferens in males), though some states (Oregon and North Dakota in particular) had laws which called for the use of castration. In general, most sterilizations were performed under eugenic statutes, in state-run psychiatric hospitals and homes for the mentally disabled.[53] There was never a federal sterilization statute, though eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, whose state-level "Model Eugenical Sterilization Law" was the basis of the statute affirmed in Buck v. Bell, proposed the structure of one in 1922.[54]
After World War II, public opinion towards eugenics and sterilization programs became more negative in the light of the connection with the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany, though a significant number of sterilizations continued in a few states through the 1970s. The Oregon Board of Eugenics, later renamed the Board of Social Protection, existed until 1983,[55] with the last forcible sterilization occurring in 1981.[56] The U.S. commonwealth Puerto Rico had a sterilization program as well. Some states continued to have sterilization laws on the books for much longer after that, though they were rarely if ever used. California sterilized more than any other state by a wide margin, and was responsible for over a third of all sterilization operations. Information about the California sterilization program was produced into book form and widely disseminated by eugenicists E.S. Gosney and Paul B. Popenoe, which was said by the government of Adolf Hitler to be of key importance in proving that large-scale compulsory sterilization programs were feasible.[57] In recent years, the governors of many states have made public apologies for their past programs beginning with Virginia and followed by Oregon[55] and California. Few have offered to compensate those sterilized, however, citing that few are likely still living (and would of course have no affected offspring) and that inadequate records remain by which to verify them. At least one compensation case, Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981), was filed in the courts on the grounds that the sterilization law was unconstitutional. It was rejected because the law was no longer in effect at the time of the filing. However, the petitioners were granted some compensation because the stipulations of the law itself, which required informing the patients about their operations, had not been carried out in many cases.
The 27 states where sterilization laws remained on the books (though not all were still in use) in 1956 were: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin.[58]
As of January 2011, discussions were underway regarding compensation for the victims of forced sterilization under the authorization of the Eugenics Board of North Carolina. Governor Bev Perdue formed the NC Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation in 2010 in order "to provide justice and compensate victims who were forcibly sterilized by the State of North Carolina".[59] In 2013 North Carolina announced that it would spend $10 million beginning in June 2015 to compensate men and women who were sterilized in the state's eugenics program; North Carolina sterilized 7,600 people from 1929 to 1974 who were deemed socially or mentally unfit.[60]
The Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologist (ACOG) believes that mental disability is not a reason to deny sterilization. The opinion of ACOG is that "the physician must consult with the patients family, agents, and other caregivers" if sterilization is desired for a mentally limited patient.[61] In 2003, Douglas Diekema wrote in Volume 9 of the journal Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews that "involuntary sterilization ought not be performed on mentally retarded persons who retain the capacity for reproductive decision-making, the ability to raise a child, or the capacity to provide valid consent to marriage." [62] The Journal of Medical Ethics claimed, in a 1999 article, that doctors are regularly confronted with request to sterilize mentally limited people who cannot give consent for themselves. The article recommend that sterilization should only occur when there is a "situation of necessity" and the "benefits of sterilization outweigh the drawbacks." [63] The American Journal of Bioethics published an article, in 2010, that concluded the interventions used in the Ashley treatment may benefit future patients.[64] These interventions, at the request of the parents and guidance from the physicians, included a hysterectomy and surgical removal of the breast buds of the mentally and physically disabled child.[65]
The inability to pay for the cost of raising children has been a reason courts have ordered coercive or compulsory sterilization. In June 2014, a Virginia judge ruled that a man on probation for child endangerment must be able to pay for his seven children before having more children; the man agreed to get a vasectomy as part of his plea deal.[66] In 2013, an Ohio judge ordered a man owing nearly $100,000 in unpaid child support to "make all reasonable efforts to avoid impregnating a woman" as a condition of his probation.[67]
148 female prisoners in two California institutions were sterilized between 2006 and 2010 in a supposedly voluntary program involving the suppression of women of closer equal status in personal assertion capacity to men, but voluntary consent can not be given while under duress.[68] In September 2014, California enacted Bill SB 1135 that bans sterilization in correctional facilities, unless the procedure shall be required in a medical emergency to preserve inmate's life.[69]
Discussions have yet to begin regarding compensation for victims of forced sterilization in other states. Read More:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
Compulsory sterilization, also known as forced sterilization (or compulsory sterilisation respectively forced sterilisation see spelling differences), programs are government policies in violation of human rights conventions which attempt to force people to undergo surgical or other sterilization. The reasons governments implement sterilization programs vary in purpose and intent.[1] In the first half of the 20th century, several such programs were instituted in non-human-rights-compliant countries around the world, usually as part of eugenics programs intended to prevent the reproduction and multiplication of members of the population considered to be carriers of defective, more often than not different and not inferior in a natural combination racial genetic traits.[2]
Managing population growth; sex discrimination; 'sex-normalizing' surgeries of intersex persons; and Statute of Rome attempted and other genocide acts against ethnic minorities, the HIV positive, and the mentally disabled have also been reasons compulsive sterilization has been used.[1] There are countries where transgender people are required to undergo sterilization before gaining legal recognition of their gender. This is not to be confused with forced sterilization not associated with a likely genocidal (re.: Statute of Rome) government program. However the Report of United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment states that LGBT people often suffer the medical abuses or forced surgeries (including female genital mutilation and male genital mutilation) despite the Principles 17 and 18 of the Yogyakarta Principles.[3]
In May 2014, the World Health Organization, OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF issued a joint statement on Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization, An interagency statement. The report references the involuntary sterilization of a number of specific population groups. They include:
women, especially in relation to coercive population control policies, and particularly including women living with HIV, indigenous and ethnic minority girls and women. Indigenous and ethnic minority women often face "wrongful stereotyping based on gender, race and ethnicity".
disabled people, often perceived as sexually inactive. women with intellectual disabilities are "often treated as if they have no control, or should have no control, over their sexual and reproductive choices". Other rationales include menstrual management for the benefit of carers.
intersex persons, who "are often subjected to cosmetic and other non-medically indicated surgeries performed on their reproductive organs, without their informed consent or that of their parents, and without taking into consideration the views of the children involved", often as a "sex-normalizing" treatment.
transgender persons, "as a prerequisite to receiving gender- affirmative treatment and gender-marker changes".
The report recommends a range of guiding principles for medical treatment, including ensuring patient autonomy in decision-making, ensuring non-discrimination, accountability and access to remedies.[1]
United States[edit]
Further information: Eugenics in the United States
A poster from a 1921 eugenics conference displays the U.S. states that had implemented sterilization legislation by then
The United States was the first country to concertedly undertake compulsory sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics.[44] The heads of the program were avid believers in eugenics and frequently argued for their program. It was shut down due to ethical problems. The principal targets of the American program were the intellectually disabled and the mentally ill, but also targeted under many state laws were the deaf, the blind, people with epilepsy, and the physically deformed. According to the activist Angela Davis, women of predominantly ethnic minorities (such as Native Americans, as well as African-American women)[45] were sterilized against their will in many states, often without their knowledge while they were in a hospital for other reasons (e.g. childbirth).
Some sterilizations took place in prisons and other penal institutions, targeting criminality, but they were in the relative minority.[46] In the end, over 65,000 individuals were sterilized in 33 states under state compulsory sterilization programs in the United States in all likelihood without due multiethnic and ethnic minority perspective.[47][48]
The first state to introduce a compulsory sterilization bill was Michigan, in 1897, but the proposed law failed to garner enough votes by legislators to be adopted. Eight years later Pennsylvania's state legislators passed a sterilization bill that was vetoed by the governor. Indiana became the first state to enact sterilization legislation in 1907,[49] followed closely by California and Washington in 1909. Sterilization rates across the country were relatively low (California being the sole exception) until the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell which legitimized the forced sterilization of patients at a Virginia home for the intellectually disabled.[50] In the wake of that later decision, over 62,000 people in the United States, most of them women, were sterilized in service of a nationwide eugenics movement.[51] The number of sterilizations performed per year increased until another Supreme Court case, Skinner v. Oklahoma, 1942, complicated the legal situation by ruling against sterilization of criminals if the equal protection clause of the constitution was violated. That is, if sterilization was to be performed, then it could not exempt white-collar criminals.[52]
Most sterilization laws could be divided into three main categories of motivations: eugenic (concerned with heredity), therapeutic (based on the idea that sterilization could cure one of sexual traits such as masturbation or pedophilia), or punitive (as a punishment for criminals), though of course these motivations could be combined in practice and theory (sterilization of criminals could be both punitive and eugenic, for example). Buck v. Bell asserted only that eugenic sterilization was constitutional, whereas Skinner v. Oklahoma ruled specifically against punitive sterilization. Most operations only worked to prevent reproduction (such as severing the vas deferens in males), though some states (Oregon and North Dakota in particular) had laws which called for the use of castration. In general, most sterilizations were performed under eugenic statutes, in state-run psychiatric hospitals and homes for the mentally disabled.[53] There was never a federal sterilization statute, though eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, whose state-level "Model Eugenical Sterilization Law" was the basis of the statute affirmed in Buck v. Bell, proposed the structure of one in 1922.[54]
After World War II, public opinion towards eugenics and sterilization programs became more negative in the light of the connection with the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany, though a significant number of sterilizations continued in a few states through the 1970s. The Oregon Board of Eugenics, later renamed the Board of Social Protection, existed until 1983,[55] with the last forcible sterilization occurring in 1981.[56] The U.S. commonwealth Puerto Rico had a sterilization program as well. Some states continued to have sterilization laws on the books for much longer after that, though they were rarely if ever used. California sterilized more than any other state by a wide margin, and was responsible for over a third of all sterilization operations. Information about the California sterilization program was produced into book form and widely disseminated by eugenicists E.S. Gosney and Paul B. Popenoe, which was said by the government of Adolf Hitler to be of key importance in proving that large-scale compulsory sterilization programs were feasible.[57] In recent years, the governors of many states have made public apologies for their past programs beginning with Virginia and followed by Oregon[55] and California. Few have offered to compensate those sterilized, however, citing that few are likely still living (and would of course have no affected offspring) and that inadequate records remain by which to verify them. At least one compensation case, Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981), was filed in the courts on the grounds that the sterilization law was unconstitutional. It was rejected because the law was no longer in effect at the time of the filing. However, the petitioners were granted some compensation because the stipulations of the law itself, which required informing the patients about their operations, had not been carried out in many cases.
The 27 states where sterilization laws remained on the books (though not all were still in use) in 1956 were: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin.[58]
As of January 2011, discussions were underway regarding compensation for the victims of forced sterilization under the authorization of the Eugenics Board of North Carolina. Governor Bev Perdue formed the NC Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation in 2010 in order "to provide justice and compensate victims who were forcibly sterilized by the State of North Carolina".[59] In 2013 North Carolina announced that it would spend $10 million beginning in June 2015 to compensate men and women who were sterilized in the state's eugenics program; North Carolina sterilized 7,600 people from 1929 to 1974 who were deemed socially or mentally unfit.[60]
The Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologist (ACOG) believes that mental disability is not a reason to deny sterilization. The opinion of ACOG is that "the physician must consult with the patients family, agents, and other caregivers" if sterilization is desired for a mentally limited patient.[61] In 2003, Douglas Diekema wrote in Volume 9 of the journal Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews that "involuntary sterilization ought not be performed on mentally retarded persons who retain the capacity for reproductive decision-making, the ability to raise a child, or the capacity to provide valid consent to marriage." [62] The Journal of Medical Ethics claimed, in a 1999 article, that doctors are regularly confronted with request to sterilize mentally limited people who cannot give consent for themselves. The article recommend that sterilization should only occur when there is a "situation of necessity" and the "benefits of sterilization outweigh the drawbacks." [63] The American Journal of Bioethics published an article, in 2010, that concluded the interventions used in the Ashley treatment may benefit future patients.[64] These interventions, at the request of the parents and guidance from the physicians, included a hysterectomy and surgical removal of the breast buds of the mentally and physically disabled child.[65]
The inability to pay for the cost of raising children has been a reason courts have ordered coercive or compulsory sterilization. In June 2014, a Virginia judge ruled that a man on probation for child endangerment must be able to pay for his seven children before having more children; the man agreed to get a vasectomy as part of his plea deal.[66] In 2013, an Ohio judge ordered a man owing nearly $100,000 in unpaid child support to "make all reasonable efforts to avoid impregnating a woman" as a condition of his probation.[67]
148 female prisoners in two California institutions were sterilized between 2006 and 2010 in a supposedly voluntary program involving the suppression of women of closer equal status in personal assertion capacity to men, but voluntary consent can not be given while under duress.[68] In September 2014, California enacted Bill SB 1135 that bans sterilization in correctional facilities, unless the procedure shall be required in a medical emergency to preserve inmate's life.[69]
Discussions have yet to begin regarding compensation for victims of forced sterilization in other states. Read More:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
Mar 26, 2015 07:29:51 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
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] Read More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_rights
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] Read More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_rights
Mar 26, 2015 07:38:04 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Human Rights Abuses: North Carolina Prepares To Pay Black Victims of Sterilization
The U.S. government and other slave holding nations make getting reparations for slavery paid a hit or miss subject.
Mainly, its because white-led decision-makers resist any real efforts at compensating Blacks who are descendants of slaves [or Afro-descendants] for Transatlantic Slavery.
But North Carolinas efforts, covered in the following article, are a good beginning at compensating victims for Americas hideous acts of systematic racism and human rights abuses. Read More: http://nareparationstaskforce.org/2013/07/human-rights-abuses-north-carolina-pay-blacks-sterilization/
The U.S. government and other slave holding nations make getting reparations for slavery paid a hit or miss subject.
Mainly, its because white-led decision-makers resist any real efforts at compensating Blacks who are descendants of slaves [or Afro-descendants] for Transatlantic Slavery.
But North Carolinas efforts, covered in the following article, are a good beginning at compensating victims for Americas hideous acts of systematic racism and human rights abuses. Read More: http://nareparationstaskforce.org/2013/07/human-rights-abuses-north-carolina-pay-blacks-sterilization/
Mar 26, 2015 10:00:45 #
JuliaMi2 wrote:
Human Rights Abuses: North Carolina Prepares To Pa... (show quote)
You DO realize, of course, that almost every single slave who was brought to this country from Africa had already been enslaved by either Muslims or other blacks? You DO realize that slavery persisted in both black and/or Muslim countries in some cases for more than a hundred years after it had been outlawed in the US? You DO realize that Mauritania, which is both majority Muslim and majority black, allowed slavery until 2005? Your experience is tragic, and wrong, but there is no need to inject fairy tales about slavery into the discussion.
Mar 26, 2015 10:20:09 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Loki,
You do realize the debate here is not about slavery in general terms in more concise terms the debate is about Forced Sterilization is it humane? Do you think its right for Medical Doctors and Licensed Social Workers to Force Sterilize anyone whether it be male or female with out consent of the patient? And Slavery is used to demonstrate how forced sterilization became a modern medical practice in the United States Until the late 1980's. What is your opinion on forcing a person to remove their reproductive internal organs and tissues without consent.
You do realize the debate here is not about slavery in general terms in more concise terms the debate is about Forced Sterilization is it humane? Do you think its right for Medical Doctors and Licensed Social Workers to Force Sterilize anyone whether it be male or female with out consent of the patient? And Slavery is used to demonstrate how forced sterilization became a modern medical practice in the United States Until the late 1980's. What is your opinion on forcing a person to remove their reproductive internal organs and tissues without consent.
Mar 26, 2015 13:01:29 #
JuliaMi2 wrote:
Loki, br br You do realize the debate here is not... (show quote)
I did not say what happened to you was right. I just cannot see your introduction of some slavery argument about white slave masters as being germane to the legal points, if any, that you are making. What does your situation have to do with a practice that ended in 1865 in the US? Reparations for slavery? You should ask the descendants of the African tribesmen who enslaved your ancestors in the first place. Forced sterilization is wrong almost all the time, but it has nothing to do with white slave masters.
Apr 4, 2015 06:26:00 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Loki,
Most sterilization laws could be divided into three main categories of motivations: eugenic (concerned with heredity), therapeutic (based on the idea that sterilization could cure one of sexual traits such as masturbation or pedophilia), or punitive (as a punishment for criminals), though of course these motivations could be combined in practice and theory (sterilization of criminals could be both punitive and eugenic). Therefore, Forced Sterilization is wrong, but has nothing to do with Slavery. In fact in May 2014, the World Health Organization, OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF issued a joint statement on Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization, An interagency statement. The report references the involuntary sterilization of a number of specific population groups. In bias, Eugenics and Forced Sterilization Laws occurred because of heredity in my opinion.
Most sterilization laws could be divided into three main categories of motivations: eugenic (concerned with heredity), therapeutic (based on the idea that sterilization could cure one of sexual traits such as masturbation or pedophilia), or punitive (as a punishment for criminals), though of course these motivations could be combined in practice and theory (sterilization of criminals could be both punitive and eugenic). Therefore, Forced Sterilization is wrong, but has nothing to do with Slavery. In fact in May 2014, the World Health Organization, OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF issued a joint statement on Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization, An interagency statement. The report references the involuntary sterilization of a number of specific population groups. In bias, Eugenics and Forced Sterilization Laws occurred because of heredity in my opinion.
Apr 4, 2015 06:39:22 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
Lawmakers seek safeguards against sterilization of prison inmates
August 13, 2013 | By Patrick McGreevy
SACRAMENTO -- Advocates for women prison inmates called Tuesday for state law to be changed to make sure convicts are not subject to sterilization surgery for birth control, and oversight over medical care is improved. The proposal by members of the group Justice Now was made at a legislative hearing into reports that 148 women in California prisons were given tubal ligation surgery without the required approval of a state medical committee during a five-year period ending in 2010. Read More:http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/sterilization
NEWS
Retarded Woman Faces Sterilization
November 13, 1994 | Associated Press
The mother of a severely retarded woman is planning to have her sterilized after a Supreme Court justice refused to block the operation. But the legal guardian for Cindy Wasiek, a 26-year-old with the mental capacity of a 5-year-old, has vowed to appeal the case to the full Supreme Court--even if it is too late to stop the sterilization. "There are such important issues at stake," Lorrie McKinley said. Justice David H. Read More Articles: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/sterilization
Lawmakers seek safeguards against sterilization of prison inmates
August 13, 2013 | By Patrick McGreevy
SACRAMENTO -- Advocates for women prison inmates called Tuesday for state law to be changed to make sure convicts are not subject to sterilization surgery for birth control, and oversight over medical care is improved. The proposal by members of the group Justice Now was made at a legislative hearing into reports that 148 women in California prisons were given tubal ligation surgery without the required approval of a state medical committee during a five-year period ending in 2010. Read More:http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/sterilization
NEWS
Retarded Woman Faces Sterilization
November 13, 1994 | Associated Press
The mother of a severely retarded woman is planning to have her sterilized after a Supreme Court justice refused to block the operation. But the legal guardian for Cindy Wasiek, a 26-year-old with the mental capacity of a 5-year-old, has vowed to appeal the case to the full Supreme Court--even if it is too late to stop the sterilization. "There are such important issues at stake," Lorrie McKinley said. Justice David H. Read More Articles: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/sterilization
Apr 4, 2015 06:48:08 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (CBS) -- A Nashville prosecutor has been fired after reports surfaced that he made sterilization of women part of plea negotiations in some cases.
Former Assistant District Attorney Brian Holmgren confirmed Wednesday that he was fired from the Davidson County District Attorney's office. He declined to comment specifically on his dismissal, and officials would not say what prompted his dismissal. Read More: http://www.local8now.com/news/headlines/Nashville-assistant-DA-fired-amid-reports-of-sterilization-in-plea-deals-298382271.html
By Craig Zirpolo
Capital News Service
8:32 a.m. EST, March 1, 2015
RICHMOND The dwindling number of surviving victims of Virginias 55-year program of forced sterilization of unfit residents would each receive $25,000 in compensation under the revised state budget approved this week by the General Assembly.
Legislators set aside the money a total of $400,000 when they approved amendments to the 2014-16 state budget. The funds, which would be available July 1, will be paid to individuals who were involuntarily sterilized pursuant to the Virginia Eugenical Sterilization Act and who were living as of February 1, 2015, according to the budget amendment. It sets the reimbursement at $25,000 per individual. Read More: http://www.vagazette.com/news/va-vg-compensation-approved-for-forced-sterilization-victims-20150301,0,3730571.story
Former Assistant District Attorney Brian Holmgren confirmed Wednesday that he was fired from the Davidson County District Attorney's office. He declined to comment specifically on his dismissal, and officials would not say what prompted his dismissal. Read More: http://www.local8now.com/news/headlines/Nashville-assistant-DA-fired-amid-reports-of-sterilization-in-plea-deals-298382271.html
By Craig Zirpolo
Capital News Service
8:32 a.m. EST, March 1, 2015
RICHMOND The dwindling number of surviving victims of Virginias 55-year program of forced sterilization of unfit residents would each receive $25,000 in compensation under the revised state budget approved this week by the General Assembly.
Legislators set aside the money a total of $400,000 when they approved amendments to the 2014-16 state budget. The funds, which would be available July 1, will be paid to individuals who were involuntarily sterilized pursuant to the Virginia Eugenical Sterilization Act and who were living as of February 1, 2015, according to the budget amendment. It sets the reimbursement at $25,000 per individual. Read More: http://www.vagazette.com/news/va-vg-compensation-approved-for-forced-sterilization-victims-20150301,0,3730571.story
Apr 4, 2015 06:59:30 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Bring forced sterilization back? Mlive readers say sterilizing would decrease welfare needs
By Lindsay Knake | lknake@mlive.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on June 24, 2011 at 10:00 AM
While North Carolina is dealing with the consequences of its former eugenics program, Mlive readers say bringing the program back might decrease the number of people on welfare.
Michigan was one of the 35 states that once allowed involuntary sterilization of those deemed unfit to reproduce. Often, these people were considered "feeble-minded."
From the early 1900s until Michigan's sterilization law was repealed in 1974, the state sterilized more than 3,000 people.
Nationwide, there were 60,000 victims of forced sterilization.
Many Mlive readers commented the state should bring the program back in some capacity to relieve welfare programs and punish sexual offenders.
yrusonegativ wrote,
Although I agree that some people should be sterilized, I don't think I would force it on a great number of people. I have however for some time been of the opinion that the state should offer an incentive to anyone that has ever taken state assistance to encourage sterilization. I guess a kind of cash for your ability to reproduce program. Whatever benefit would be offered to them would end up being way cheaper than the state paying for all their kids that grow up learning how to abuse the system. I think this would go along way to eliminating the generational welfare culture that exists today.
xrayspecs wrote,
There's a big difference on many levels in being sterilized for what you're born as (black/Indian/mental or emotional issues, etc) and being sterilized for what you have done (or failed to do.)
Eugenics is the practice of sterilizing people *before* the fact - for being the "wrong" race or mind-set or physical type - anmd the standards are determined by the government. This is wrong, wrong, and wrong on many levels.
However...I do think that chronic drug abusers and pedophiles and anyone who is fairly determined in a court of law as a child abuser and breeders who systematically abuse or neglect their children - in other words people who have PROVEN they are incapable of parenting....spay and neuter them, no question.
msufan801 said,
If the people are being honest that post on MLive and are representative of people in Michigan, that is very depressing to think about. Read More: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/bring_forced_sterilization_bac.html
By Lindsay Knake | lknake@mlive.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on June 24, 2011 at 10:00 AM
While North Carolina is dealing with the consequences of its former eugenics program, Mlive readers say bringing the program back might decrease the number of people on welfare.
Michigan was one of the 35 states that once allowed involuntary sterilization of those deemed unfit to reproduce. Often, these people were considered "feeble-minded."
From the early 1900s until Michigan's sterilization law was repealed in 1974, the state sterilized more than 3,000 people.
Nationwide, there were 60,000 victims of forced sterilization.
Many Mlive readers commented the state should bring the program back in some capacity to relieve welfare programs and punish sexual offenders.
yrusonegativ wrote,
Although I agree that some people should be sterilized, I don't think I would force it on a great number of people. I have however for some time been of the opinion that the state should offer an incentive to anyone that has ever taken state assistance to encourage sterilization. I guess a kind of cash for your ability to reproduce program. Whatever benefit would be offered to them would end up being way cheaper than the state paying for all their kids that grow up learning how to abuse the system. I think this would go along way to eliminating the generational welfare culture that exists today.
xrayspecs wrote,
There's a big difference on many levels in being sterilized for what you're born as (black/Indian/mental or emotional issues, etc) and being sterilized for what you have done (or failed to do.)
Eugenics is the practice of sterilizing people *before* the fact - for being the "wrong" race or mind-set or physical type - anmd the standards are determined by the government. This is wrong, wrong, and wrong on many levels.
However...I do think that chronic drug abusers and pedophiles and anyone who is fairly determined in a court of law as a child abuser and breeders who systematically abuse or neglect their children - in other words people who have PROVEN they are incapable of parenting....spay and neuter them, no question.
msufan801 said,
If the people are being honest that post on MLive and are representative of people in Michigan, that is very depressing to think about. Read More: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/bring_forced_sterilization_bac.html
Apr 4, 2015 08:26:43 #
JuliaMi2 wrote:
Loki, br br Most sterilization laws could be divi... (show quote)
If it has nothing to do with slavery, why did you post the following?
The U.S. government and other slave holding nations make getting reparations for slavery paid a hit or miss subject.
Mainly, its because white-led decision-makers resist any real efforts at compensating Blacks who are descendants of slaves [or Afro-descendants] for Transatlantic Slavery.
But North Carolinas efforts, covered in the following article, are a good beginning at compensating victims for Americas hideous acts of systematic racism and human rights abuses. Read More:
Blacks were not the only ones who endured forced sterilizations. I never said it was right. However, I question the wisdom of letting someone who cannot support one child have 5 or 6 and expect someone else to pay for them. Birth Control is fairly inexpensive, and in many cases free. But I digress. You are the one who brought up slavery, and tried, somehow, to tie it to your situation, which is deplorable, but has nothing to do with slavery or reparations.
If you are that concerned about slavery reparations, check the record of Muslim countries in Africa and the Middle East. From roughly the time of the First Crusade, (1100 AD ), until 2006, when slavery was finally made illegal in Mauritania, between 20 and 28 million blacks were enslaved by Muslims and by other blacks. Gelding of males, especially children, was commonplace. If you want reparations for wrongs done to blacks, you should begin in Africa, where the vast majority of them occurred. You specifically made reference to white slave owners, yet neglected to mention that most of these unconscionable actions were perpetrated on blacks by either Arabs or other blacks. When most people say "white" they refer to Caucasians of Northern European descent.
Apr 8, 2015 06:51:10 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Because Eugenics and Compulsive Sterilization originated from experimentation and research on transatlantic slave nations such as Jews and Negros. Further Eugenics and Compulsive Sterilization developed into a modern medical practice as a result of research on Jews and Negros. In fact, Africa is a product of medical research and medical research is Africa's main commodity. Secondary to Zoology. Global Medical Practitioners have been collecting the internal organs and tissue from African citizenry for years without due process. That's one of the main reasons the population is sick and in famine because of Medical Research such as Eugenic's, Compulsive Sterilization, and AIDS and much much more.
To support my stance on Medical Research and Slavery review the following news article:
Medical Research Institute Develops Ebola Diagnostics
By Cheryl Pellerin
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2014 The Ebola crisis in West Africa seized global attention in March, but scientists at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases have worked for years on diagnostics, vaccines and drugs for Ebola and other lethal pathogens that adversaries might use in bioweapons targeting troops on the battlefield.
USAMRIID, based in Frederick, Maryland, has pioneered research since 1969 to develop such medical countermeasures, and its work has contributed to critically needed help in the current outbreak.
On Oct. 25, the World Health Organization reported 10,141 cases of confirmed and suspected Ebola virus disease in six affected countries -- Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone, Spain, and the United States -- and in the previously affected countries of Nigeria and Senegal, and 4,922 deaths, all as of Oct. 23. Read More: http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=123498
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Eugenics and Depopulation
The world is quietly being led to the slaughterhouse. Very few give a damn. Especially the corporate media. Time to exterminate the ELITE!
AIDS/Ebola: Reports Outbreaks "Man-made" and CIA-linked
Sandpoint, Idaho Two African presidents, defending against the political and biological damage caused by AIDS and a new Ebola outbreak, may find relief by giving their nation's health ministers a reading assignment. So advises the author of a bestselling book on the two most feared viruses this doctor calls "man-made."
In letters to both Kenya's president, Daniel Arap Moi, and South African president, Thabo Mbeki, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a public health authority, and author of the bestselling book "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional?", the viruses most people consider an act of nature were rather instigated by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The agency now oversees all AIDS science in America and tracks it overseas. Diplomatic sources say both leaders are poised to heed the doctor's counsel. Read More: http://eugenicsanddepopulation.blogspot.com/2009/01/aidsebola-reports-outbreaks-man-made.html
To support my stance on Medical Research and Slavery review the following news article:
Medical Research Institute Develops Ebola Diagnostics
By Cheryl Pellerin
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2014 The Ebola crisis in West Africa seized global attention in March, but scientists at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases have worked for years on diagnostics, vaccines and drugs for Ebola and other lethal pathogens that adversaries might use in bioweapons targeting troops on the battlefield.
USAMRIID, based in Frederick, Maryland, has pioneered research since 1969 to develop such medical countermeasures, and its work has contributed to critically needed help in the current outbreak.
On Oct. 25, the World Health Organization reported 10,141 cases of confirmed and suspected Ebola virus disease in six affected countries -- Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Sierra Leone, Spain, and the United States -- and in the previously affected countries of Nigeria and Senegal, and 4,922 deaths, all as of Oct. 23. Read More: http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=123498
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Eugenics and Depopulation
The world is quietly being led to the slaughterhouse. Very few give a damn. Especially the corporate media. Time to exterminate the ELITE!
AIDS/Ebola: Reports Outbreaks "Man-made" and CIA-linked
Sandpoint, Idaho Two African presidents, defending against the political and biological damage caused by AIDS and a new Ebola outbreak, may find relief by giving their nation's health ministers a reading assignment. So advises the author of a bestselling book on the two most feared viruses this doctor calls "man-made."
In letters to both Kenya's president, Daniel Arap Moi, and South African president, Thabo Mbeki, Dr. Leonard Horowitz, a public health authority, and author of the bestselling book "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional?", the viruses most people consider an act of nature were rather instigated by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The agency now oversees all AIDS science in America and tracks it overseas. Diplomatic sources say both leaders are poised to heed the doctor's counsel. Read More: http://eugenicsanddepopulation.blogspot.com/2009/01/aidsebola-reports-outbreaks-man-made.html
Apr 8, 2015 07:05:29 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
Loki,
UNDER EUGENICS, YOU ARE A HUMAN RESOURCE SLAVE TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER
Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 1, 2013
Under the eugenics world government system, individual human beings are literally considered to be human resources to be planned and manipulated under a planned economy with total control over your health care, employment, housing, food and reproduction yet somehow government officials tell us that this is freedom.
In the 1984 sense of the matter, this kind of freedom really is slavery to a system where the State believes it is God.
This is coming to America in a number of ways, but certainly through Obamacare, where technocrats try to sell us on the argument of rationed health care, where cost-benefit analysis determine the value of individual human lives. Kurt Nimmo points this out in his article today, Democrats Crank Up Death Panel Talk Following Obama Win. Read More: http://www.infowars.com/under-eugenics-you-are-a-human-resource-slave-to-the-new-world-order/
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Eugenics
"Ethnic Cleansing in Connecticut: Our state's role in the Nazi eugenics movement," by Edwin Black, 11 September 2003: Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a co-called "Master Race." But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race was not Hitler's. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in Connecticut, two to three decades before Hitler came to power, the product of the American eugenics movement. Hartford and indeed the state of Connecticut played an important albeit unknown role in this country's campaign of ethnic cleansing. What's more, Connecticut was an important player in America's eugenic nexus with Nazi Germany. Read More: http://usslave.blogspot.com/2011/08/eugenics.html
UNDER EUGENICS, YOU ARE A HUMAN RESOURCE SLAVE TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER
Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 1, 2013
Under the eugenics world government system, individual human beings are literally considered to be human resources to be planned and manipulated under a planned economy with total control over your health care, employment, housing, food and reproduction yet somehow government officials tell us that this is freedom.
In the 1984 sense of the matter, this kind of freedom really is slavery to a system where the State believes it is God.
This is coming to America in a number of ways, but certainly through Obamacare, where technocrats try to sell us on the argument of rationed health care, where cost-benefit analysis determine the value of individual human lives. Kurt Nimmo points this out in his article today, Democrats Crank Up Death Panel Talk Following Obama Win. Read More: http://www.infowars.com/under-eugenics-you-are-a-human-resource-slave-to-the-new-world-order/
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Eugenics
"Ethnic Cleansing in Connecticut: Our state's role in the Nazi eugenics movement," by Edwin Black, 11 September 2003: Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a co-called "Master Race." But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race was not Hitler's. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in Connecticut, two to three decades before Hitler came to power, the product of the American eugenics movement. Hartford and indeed the state of Connecticut played an important albeit unknown role in this country's campaign of ethnic cleansing. What's more, Connecticut was an important player in America's eugenic nexus with Nazi Germany. Read More: http://usslave.blogspot.com/2011/08/eugenics.html
Apr 8, 2015 07:55:24 #
JuliaMi2
Loc: Detroit Michigan
The Truth About MARGARET SANGER
(This article first appeared in the January 20, 1992 edition of Citizen magazine)
How Planned Parenthood Duped America
At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the "black" and "yellow" peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.
Sanger's other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as "scientific" and "humanitarian." And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America's human "breeding stock" and purging America's "bad strains." These "strains" included the "shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South."
Not to be outdone by her followers, Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as "unfit," a plan she said would be the "salvation of American civilization.: And she also spike of those who were "irresponsible and reckless," among whom she included those " whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers." She further contended that "there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped." That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment of Sanger considered "unfit" cannot be easily refuted. Read More: http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html
Eugenics and genocide are best described as examples of __________. A. extreme population management policies B. common population management policies C. extreme diplomatic management. Read More: http://www.weegy.com/?ConversationId=3FB0FD15
MAAFA 21 [A documentary on eugenics and genocide] - YouTube
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eWxCRReTV4 Cached
Oct 27, 2012 · [Starts at 5:30] This film is not mine. It was done by an excellent team of researchers and filmmakers, whom I encourage you to meet and support, at http ... Website Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eWxCRReTV4
(This article first appeared in the January 20, 1992 edition of Citizen magazine)
How Planned Parenthood Duped America
At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the "black" and "yellow" peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.
Sanger's other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as "scientific" and "humanitarian." And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America's human "breeding stock" and purging America's "bad strains." These "strains" included the "shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South."
Not to be outdone by her followers, Margaret Sanger spoke of sterilizing those she designated as "unfit," a plan she said would be the "salvation of American civilization.: And she also spike of those who were "irresponsible and reckless," among whom she included those " whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers." She further contended that "there is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped." That many Americans of African origin constituted a segment of Sanger considered "unfit" cannot be easily refuted. Read More: http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html
Eugenics and genocide are best described as examples of __________. A. extreme population management policies B. common population management policies C. extreme diplomatic management. Read More: http://www.weegy.com/?ConversationId=3FB0FD15
MAAFA 21 [A documentary on eugenics and genocide] - YouTube
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eWxCRReTV4 Cached
Oct 27, 2012 · [Starts at 5:30] This film is not mine. It was done by an excellent team of researchers and filmmakers, whom I encourage you to meet and support, at http ... Website Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eWxCRReTV4
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.