Women Prisoners Sterilized To Cut Welfare Costs In California

[CaseyJones]

http://tellmenow.com/2014/04/women-p...in-california/

Well, this is a story I never thought I’d be reading.

In California of all places, prison doctors have sterilized over 150 women. Why? They don’t want to have to provide welfare funding for any children they may have in the future.

The sterilization procedures cost California taxpayers $147,460 between 1997 and 2010. The doctors at the prison argue it is money well-spent.

Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN at Valley State Prison for Women, said, “Over a 10-year period, that isn’t a huge amount of money compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more.”

Although such procedures may seem harsh, they are not illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that women can be forcibly sterilized in jail in Buck vs Bell. Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

[phill4paul]

Government eugenics. Nothing new under the sun.

[amy31416]

This is especially wrong given the drug war and false convictions. I am curious why they don't sterilize the men as well, not that I'd approve of that either.

[RJB]

This is especially wrong given the drug war and false convictions. I am curious why they don't sterilize the men as well, not that I'd approve of that either.

yeah. If they didn't have felony records for victimless "crimes," they could get jobs easier.

[Danke]

I will hopefully be opening my halfway house for these wayward women soon. Chip-ins appreciated.

[mrsat_98]

I will hopefully be opening my halfway house for these wayward women soon. Chip-ins appreciated.

I would expect no less you. Always putting others first.

[Anti Federalist]

Not intentionally malevolent.

[anaconda]

I am flabbergasted. Is this one of those prank hoax articles? How is this any more "Constitutional" than slavery once was? How is this not "cruel and unusual?"

[Anti Federalist]

I am flabbergasted. Is this one of those prank hoax articles? How is this any more "Constitutional" than slavery once was? How is this not "cruel and unusual?"

Nope, real...and so is the SCROTUS ruling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell

And look at this gem from Oliver Holmes writing for the 8-1 majority ruling in favor of the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck.

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.

The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.

Compulsory vaxxers are eugenicists.

[Anti Federalist]

Don't read the comments.

Don't.

[Natural Citizen]

Don't read the comments.

Don't.

Too late for me but...yeah...what the Anti-Federalist said...

[amy31416]

So....instead of saving the state money by not allowing former convicts to go on the dole, they sterilize.

Yeah, that's eugenics. It's also not a reasonable option because it's possible these women may have been better off not going on welfare, which would have motivated them to take care of themselves and any subsequent offspring.

[Anti Federalist]

I was unaware of this ruling, and it's ramifications and the fact that it has never been reversed.



The effect of Buck v. Bell was to legitimize eugenic sterilization laws in the United States as a whole. While many states already had sterilization laws on their books, their use was erratic and effects practically non-existent in every state except for California. After Buck v. Bell, dozens of states added new sterilization statutes, or updated their constitutionally non-functional ones already enacted, with statutes which more closely mirrored the Virginia statute upheld by the Court.[11]

The Virginia statute which the ruling of Buck v. Bell supported was designed in part by the eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, superintendent of Charles Benedict Davenport's Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Laughlin had, a few years previously, conducted a number of studies on the enforcement of sterilization legislation throughout the country and had concluded that the reason for their lack of use was primarily that the physicians who would order the sterilizations were afraid of prosecution by patients whom they operated upon. Laughlin saw the need to create a "Model Law"[12] which could withstand a test of constitutional scrutiny, clearing the way for future sterilization operations.

Adolf Hitler closely modeled his Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring on Laughlin's "Model Law". The Third Reich held Laughlin in such regard that they arranged for him to receive an honorary doctorate from Heidelberg University in 1936.

At the Nuremberg trials after World War II, Nazi doctors explicitly cited Holmes's opinion in Buck v. Bell as part of their defense.

[heavenlyboy34]

I move that this thread be stickied. It's fascinating and depressing at the same time.

[Occam's Banana]

Adolf Hitler closely modeled his Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring on Laughlin's "Model Law". The Third Reich held Laughlin in such regard that they arranged for him to receive an honorary doctorate from Heidelberg University in 1936.

At the Nuremberg trials after World War II, Nazi doctors explicitly cited Holmes's opinion in Buck v. Bell as part of their defense.

The Nazis also used the US government's policies regarding American Indians as a "template" for their own systematic efforts at genocide. In fact, their infamous phrasing of "the final solution to the Jewish question" was inspired by General Sherman's reference to "the final solution of our Indian problem" (with the "solution" in both cases being "extermination").

Things like this and Buck v. Bell just go to show that the Nazis were merely planting in a field the US government had already tilled.

But yay, us! USA! USA! 'Merica. *belch*

[tod evans]

Sterilizing politicians and government employees might do some good...

Let's try that first....

[donnay]

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it.

[tod evans]

Aw geeze Donnay...

Here I was enjoying this fantasy about emasculating kops,DA's judges and politicians....

[Anti Federalist]

I am flabbergasted. Is this one of those prank hoax articles? How is this any more "Constitutional" than slavery once was? How is this not "cruel and unusual?"

From another source, with a link to the report it is based on.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1392816

[oyarde]

This is hard to believe.They do not need to do this .Just eliminate welfare .Everybody wins .

[GunnyFreedom]

This is hard to believe.

Aye, truly it is. And yet...

[GunnyFreedom]

I was unaware of this ruling, and it's ramifications and the fact that it has never been reversed.



The effect of Buck v. Bell was to legitimize eugenic sterilization laws in the United States as a whole. While many states already had sterilization laws on their books, their use was erratic and effects practically non-existent in every state except for California. After Buck v. Bell, dozens of states added new sterilization statutes, or updated their constitutionally non-functional ones already enacted, with statutes which more closely mirrored the Virginia statute upheld by the Court.[11]

The Virginia statute which the ruling of Buck v. Bell supported was designed in part by the eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, superintendent of Charles Benedict Davenport's Eugenics Record Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Laughlin had, a few years previously, conducted a number of studies on the enforcement of sterilization legislation throughout the country and had concluded that the reason for their lack of use was primarily that the physicians who would order the sterilizations were afraid of prosecution by patients whom they operated upon. Laughlin saw the need to create a "Model Law"[12] which could withstand a test of constitutional scrutiny, clearing the way for future sterilization operations.

Adolf Hitler closely modeled his Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring on Laughlin's "Model Law". The Third Reich held Laughlin in such regard that they arranged for him to receive an honorary doctorate from Heidelberg University in 1936.

At the Nuremberg trials after World War II, Nazi doctors explicitly cited Holmes's opinion in Buck v. Bell as part of their defense.

Now, just imagine going back all the way to the beginning, all the satanic crap we have in common law and US Code. Just waiting for someone evil enough to step up and use it.

[GunnyFreedom]

I am flabbergasted. Is this one of those prank hoax articles? How is this any more "Constitutional" than slavery once was? How is this not "cruel and unusual?"

Surely it is, but it doesn't count, because it's legal. So there.

[Paulbot99]

Disgusting. Shouldn't be surprised California passed it. Progressives support eugenics. They just quieted down after World War II.

[Nirvikalpa]

Shocked and outraged. I'm literally speechless.

This, this might be the most horrific thing I've read in a long, long time (if not ever).

[Philhelm]

This, this might be the most horrific thing I've read in a long, long time (if not ever).

This sounds like a Double Dog Dare. They're just getting warmed up.

[Origanalist]

Don't read the comments.

Don't.

Thanks, I won't.

[tod evans]

Coming soon;

3 months behind on your childsupport?

Jail and a vasectomy!

[Danke]

I wish more woman were sterile.

[kcchiefs6465]

Shocked and outraged. I'm literally speechless.

This, this might be the most horrific thing I've read in a long, long time (if not ever).

It's nothing new. People are $#@!ed up.

The opinions in and details of Buck v. Bell is something you'd do yourself a favor not to read but something that everyone should know.

I made a thread on it a little while ago.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...37-Buck-v-Bell