Images Timeline

Swedish Sterilizations

Indiana Sterilizaitons

Patient Voices

Carrie Buck

State Perspective

Global Perspective

National Perspective

1924

Click Here

Click Here

The "why"

Click Here

The "what"

Image Citation

The final piece to this project is on the next two pages. I was able to view a gathering of transcripts from the Indiana Medical Archives thanks to Dr. Adler. This piece of evidence is exactly what I was hoping to display. Here you can read exactly what patients had to say when they were presented with the question of sterilization. It's important to note that while some of these women understood what they were being asked to agree to, all of them were aware beforehand what procedure was going to be done. I still think these conversations are important to the discussion of forced sterilizations because while they were informed, there were many women who were instatutionalized against their will unless they agreed to sterilization. Becuase of this, these converstaions still have relevance to the topic.

1945

Unidentified Woman

Mary Alice and Minnie Lee Relf

Patient Voices

Valerie Cliette

1977

Click Here

+info

"Q. Did you have a notice served on you to have an operation of sterilization performed? A. I did. Q. And do you fully understand what that means? A. I do. Q. And are you willing to have this operation performed? A. Anything to get out of this (joint) place. Q. Are you willing to have this done? A. I am." (14 November 1932; p. 39)

"Q. Do you know the nature of the operation that is being considered for you? A. (No answer) Q. You know that they have been talking of an operation for you, don't you? A. (No answer). Q. Do you know enough about it to know if you want it performed? A. (No answer). Q. Would you like to have this operation and then go home? A. Yes, sir." (2 Nov 1943, p. 400)

"Q. Did you have a notice served on you to have an operation of sterilization performed? A. I did. Q. And do you fully understand what that means? A. I do. Q. And are you willing to have this operation performed? A. Anything to get out of this (joint) place. Q. Are you willing to have this done? A. I am." (14 November 1932; p. 39)

Patient Testimonials

"Q. Do you understand about the paper read to you and what it means? A. Yes, I understand. Q. Are you willing to have that done? A. I would rather not. Q. Well I am afraid that is the only way you can get home. The operation will not do you any harm physically. A. Well, if I can go home afterwards, I am willing. Q. You will go home afterwards. That is our intention. A. How soon could I go? Q. It would be about sixty days before you could go home. A. Well I am willing to have it done." (5 June 1933, p. 56).

"Q. Do you know the nature of the operation which is being considered for you? A. No. Q. Are you willing to have the operation performed? A. Yes." (2 November 1938, p. 218).

"Q. Do you know the nature of the operation that is being considered for you? A. No. Q. Have you talked to anyone about it? A. No. Q. Do you want the operation performed? A. Yes. Q. You do even if you don't know anything about the operation? A. Yes." (1 October 1946, p. 508)

"Q. Do you know the nature of the operation being talked of for you? A. Yes, it's for my benefit. It's for my protection and prevents the bringing of more feebleminded children into the world." (3 April 1941, p.296)

Patient Testimonials

Bakst, Daren. North Carolina’s Eugenics Program: An Overview. John Locke Foundation, 2016. https://www.johnlocke.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/NCeugenics.pdf. Brozan, Nadine. "The Volatile Issue of Sterilization Abuse." The New York Times, 9 Dec. 1977, https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/09/archives/the-volatile-issue-of-sterilization-abuse-a-tangle-of-accusations-a.html. Center for Bioethics and Humanities. "Daisy Patton." University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, https://www.cuanschutz.edu/centers/bioethicshumanities/arts-and-humanities/daisy-patton. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024. Drummon Ayres Jr., B. "Sterilizing the Poor." The New York Times, 8 July 1973, https://www.nytimes.com/1973/07/08/archives/exploring-motives-and-methods-the-nation-sterilizing-the-poor.html. Hyatt, Stephanie. "Title of the Paper." Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, vol. 8, p. 475, https://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/practice/law-reviews/iiclr/pdf/vol8p475.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024. Indiana Historical Bureau. "1907 Indiana Eugenics Law." State Historical Markers, https://www.in.gov/history/state-historical-markers/find-a-marker/1907-indiana-eugenics-law/. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024. Moore, Johanna Schoen. "Eugenics in North Carolina: A Reassessment of the Work of the Eugenics Board of North Carolina." University of North Carolina K-12 Database, https://k12database.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2012/05/EugenicsInReMoore.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024. Mukherjee, Siddhartha. The Gene: An Intimate History. Scribner, 2016. Reilly, Phillip. "Sterilization of Latinas: Coerced Contraception or Commonsense Family Planning?" PubMed, National Library of Medicine, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26322647/. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024.

Citations

The conversation in our textbook surrounding “feebleminded” women such as Carrie sparked a curiosity in me that was further inspired by my visit to the Purdue Archives. While I wasn’t able to see any patient accounts on my visit, I did see many remarks from prominent men who were at the forefront of the eugenics movement. It was these remarks that kept making me wonder how the women of the day received these comments. Did they conform to them, believing their identity to be whatever the doctors decided? Or did they rise above the rude and unkind comments to find their own sense of identity? The court addressing Carrie phrased their one question to her in such a way that there seemed to be nothing left for her to say to impact the ruling in her case. Other examples from the archives were phrases such as “feeble little people, with silly faces and sickening smiles…” or calling women “unfit mothers.” If this was the common lingo of the time, how did the women respond when their identity was targeted and demeaned by those in positions of power and influence? These two key experiences played a major role in my decision to pursue this topic, and to continue searching when the research seemed to come to a dead end.

This map shows the order of the states in establishing sterilization laws; also from ~1935. Notice which state was first...

This map shows the states that had compulsory sterilizations vs vountary, a whopping 21 to 7. This map is from around 1935. Click on the image to see more the map in more detail.

Forced sterilizations were not only found in the US and Germany, many other countries around the world had sterilization laws at one point or other. Places such as Sweden, China, and Canada have a similar history, with many people now seeking compensation from their governments. Sweden, in particular, sterilized ~63,000 people between the years of 1937-1976. One surviving account from a Swedish woman says, “I had a dream of a home of my own, and having my own children. Nobody said anything about sterilization. I knew, though, and said I didn’t want it. I led an ordinary life after that. I applied for damages from the government last year (c.a. 1940), but that has been denied because the institution had only followed the law. I’m angry and bitter and sad. I’m trying to forget, but it will not work.” (Article)

Carrie Buck

First Sterilization Case in the Supreme Court

The case Buck vs Bell was a landmark decision in the history of the United States, allowing the state to forcibly sterilize Carrie Buck on the basis of her being feebleminded as deemed by the “Boards of Mental Health institutions.” Siddhartha rightly demonstrates that “right from the onset, the case was clearly neither about Buck nor Bell. It was a charged time; the entire nation was frothing with anguish about its history and inheritance.” (Mukherjee, 82). Carrie’s personal response was also discussed in The Gene. She was asked only one question, “Do you care to say anything about having the operations performed on you?” to which she meekly responded “No, sir, I have not. It is up to my people.” (Mukherjee, 81).

More on the backstory of American Eugenics is revealed in The Gene. In the chapter titled “Three Generations of Imbeciles is Enough,” Siddhartha unashamedly discusses the intense racial anxiety surrounding the movement in the United States. While the movement in England was mostly derived from class anxiety, in 1920s America there was an ever increasing influx of immigrants. According to Siddhartha, eugenecists were worried by this, “worried that the flooding of America by immigrants would precipitate “race suicide.” The right people were being overrun by the wrong people, they argued, and the right genes [were] corrupted by the wrong ones.” (Mukherjee, 83). Eugenicists decided a way to prevent this would be to disallow unsuspecting victims from bearing children of mixed races, thus avoiding the feared “race suicide.”

It's unfortunate being a born and raised hoosier who never learned about Indiana's role in the eugenics movement. Indiana was the first state to create and enforce eugenics laws. On our archives visit, I learned that one of the prominant Hoosiers who helped to make the sterilization laws in Indiana was also a Purdue man. The founder of the Purdue school of Pharmacy, John Hurty, played a crucial role in establishing Indiana's eugenics laws.

It was quite disturbing to learn about American influence over Nazi eugenics. I had hoped it would stop there, but after doing more research, I discovered that many other countries around the world had a similar point in their history, with some still allowing forced sterilizations. The idea of eugenics, if traced back to Sir Francis Galton, didn't being in America, but soon enough the ideas spread like wildfire to many other nations. It seems to me, if this discussion were to be had with different representatives from other countries, we could all share similary stories of the tragedy that the eugenic movement inspired. This issue was certainly not isolated to the United States or Germany as I once thought.

What was the sterilization movement?

After the introduction of eugenics, a term and idea coined by Sir Francis Galton, the United States took action to create an organized effort to better the health and gene pool of humanity as a whole; a sort of hurried natural selection. What action did they propose, you might ask? In 1907, the first eugenic sterilization law was put into place in the state of Indiana. These laws, which soon spread throughout the country, allowed state sponsored programs to pick and choose who would be sterilized, often against their will or without informed consent. These programs often targeted minorities, as well as a staggering amount of women with mental disabilities. While the main motive was to create a purer gene pool, absent of promiscuous or disabled genes, other arguments were put forth to appease upset citizens. Another reason given was to “protect” vulnerable women from unwanted pregnancies, but again, consent was rarely obtained so we have no way of knowing whether those women wanted children or not. The research I’ve done for this project is to uncover more of the truth behind the era of forced sterilizations. My goal was to find records of the accounts from women who were involuntarily sterilized in hopes of revealing how manipulative the US eugenics movement was for many people. However, I soon realized it would be very difficult to locate actual patient accounts or testimonies. While not impossible, many of these records were either deliberately hidden to hide a national shame or they’re inaccessible to the public because of sensitive medical information. Either way, I was able to locate a few first hand accounts thanks to archivists and other historians. It is important to note that there are many opportunities for bias in the accounts I found, but the more concerning aspect is how rare these accounts are. As sad as this reality is, I still wanted to share what I did find in order to honor the patients of forced sterilizations who had life-altering decisions made for them.

Why this topic?

This is a picture of Carrie Buck, one of the prominent names in the American discussion of sterilization laws.

This work is meant to celebrate the culmination of a semester filled with enlightening conversations and eye opening experiences. Through discussions over The Gene by Siddhartha Mukherjee and my own experience viewing the Purdue University Archives, I’ve come to realize there is so much more to the medical and genetic history of the United States than I was taught growing up. I wish to share this revelation with others so that our history isn’t lost, and in some cases, certainly isn’t repeated. The topic I’ve chosen for my final project is a heavier, more serious conversation about forced sterilizations throughout the US. Because of this, I anticipate this presentation to engage those in the general public who are mature enough to interact with the negative consequences of past practices as well as the raw emotions of those who experienced forced procedures.

*See the NYT article by clicking here

These two sisters were two of the 80 minors sterilized by a government funded birth control clinic. Their mother "gave consent" to a procedure she was uneducated about. Once their father learned what had happened, he was justifiably upset and took their case to the courts. Being minors, it wasn't necessary for them to understand, only their mother could give consent. This is shown in the sad account between Minnie Lee and her lawyer where she clearly demonstrated that she didn't undersatnd what had been done to her future.

1973

A conversation between Minnie Lee and her Lawyer

Q. Are you ever going to get married? A. Yes. Q. Are you going to have any children? A. Yes. Q. How many? A. One. Q. A boy or a girl? A. A little girl.

Mrs. Cliett was interviewed for a NYT article where she discussed how she found out six months after having her third child that she couldn't have any more. She didn't have any memory of ordering or asking for a tubal ligation, but it had been issued anyway. In Valerie's case, she was able to find doctors who were willing to do their best to reverse the ligation, but she hadn't been able to concieve at the time the interview took place. Mrs. Cliett's response was less not as despairing as others, she still had hope for more children and this was demonstrated in her requests to be put back together with her consent this time.

1977 - Valerie Cliett

“I really don't want to sue,” she said. “I just want them to put me back like they found me.”

It's precicely quotes like this that broke my heart while doing this research. It saddened me to see this woman begging for what should have been her undeniable right to have a family if she chose to. I don't believe anyone should have had the ethical permission to make this decision for her.

Woman pleading with North Carolina's Eugenics Board

"I don’t want it. I don’t approve of it, sir. I don’t want a sterilize operation….Let me go home, see if I get along all right. Have mercy on me and let me do that."

Click here to see the fill article

Here is another portion from the article interviewing Valerie Cliett. If you click on the image, you can view the piece and read the stories of many other victims of forced sterilizations. It saddened me to see that there were multiple women who were sterilized at the Universtiy of Sourthern California-Los Angelos Medical Center. To think that women's familial rights were being taken away on the campus of a well known univeristy is harrowing. I think it's important to learn about this history so we can be more aware of how impactful our decisions are in the present and how they can shape the future of many lives outside of our own.

Photographer: Gary Settle Article: Exploring Motives and Methods B. DRUMMOND AYRES Jr.July 8th, 1973