Illegal involuntary sterilisations in California’s women’s prisons
twitter.com
twitter.com
[1]: https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower...
We need substantial prison reform, ASAP. And if the prisons don't want reform, then abolition. Forced sterilization is barbaric.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#...
Pressuring women to sterilize, giving them biased information, lack of actual informed consent.
It is a complex topic, I think women should have access to these procedures if they want them, but making it a government agenda can't end well IMO.
*Kelli Dillon - was incarcerated and subject to one of these illegal? sterilizations.
*prisons - added for clarity
I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that these sterilizations included procedures that can be medically necessary, such as hysterectomies [1]. And that any medical care is not performed "by jailers", but by doctors that happen to work in jails, over whom jailers have no sway or authority whatsoever. If that is not the case, I agree that's a glaring problem.
[1] "It is the second most commonly performed gynecological surgical procedure, after cesarean section, in the United States." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysterectomy
There was an investigation on a subset of these some years back, and a quarter or so were done without consent [1]. Even one would be cause for alarm, but there were/are systemic issues with this in the penal system.
[1] https://revealnews.org/article-legacy/bill-to-prevent-steril...
Now imagine that she tells you she intends to get pregnant as soon as she can, but this time it'll be different, and she'll look after the child.
There are some groups who'd want to support the woman to avoid pregnancy until she's got some stability in place, but who would also support her if she has a child.
There are some groups who'd want to try to incentivise her not to have a child, maybe by paying her to have implantable birth control.
And there are some extremist groups who think she's simply an unfit mother who should never have a child, and so they pay for her to be sterilised. This is eugenics.
Inside the Ethics Committee had a programme about an incentive programme in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b01l7wyv
It's a heartbreaking situation for these women, who are repeatedly traumatised by having their children taken away from them.
Kamala Harris was DA of SF from 2004 to 2011.
She is now Vice President.
This is where she was sending people to. She either knew what was happening and ignored it, or was so bad at her job that she didn't know what was happening in prisons.
I'm not sure which one is scarier as a person who now holds the potentially presidency seat.
They weren't her prisons.
The Secretary of California's Department of Correction and Rehabilitation is responsible for prisons.
Attorney generals and district attorneys aren't going to know about a secret program in another department.
Would you know if another department at your employer had a secret project? This is doubly so for an illegal program like involuntary sterilization.
It's not like they receive monthly reports about all the illegal programs that other departments are conducting.
If you're going to rake anyone over the coals for this, go after the Secretaries of California's Department of Correction and Rehabilitation. They were in charge of the department and accountability ends at the top.
It started in Indiana on Mar 9, 1907. In 1909 WA and CA followed. (California sterilized over 20,000 ... 1/3 of the total.) Before the Eugenics fad ended, 30 states had sterilization laws. That crap was supposed to end in 1974 with Public Law No. 60. But no doubt there are still 'public-minded crusaders' who circumvent the law.
https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazi...
"Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement.... Leon Whitney, executive secretary of the American Eugenics Society, declared of Nazism, 'While we were pussy-footing around ... the Germans were calling a spade a spade.'
Edit: In 1927 The US Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell@ (274 U.S. 200) decided that 'compulsory sterilization of the unfit' does not violate due process. That decision has not been reversed.
I really do not understand this. How can you call it a justice system if they can decide to mutilate you even though you've done no wrong?
The more I learn of how 'justice' systems seem to work the more it seems to be propaganda. A just system is based on principles. One of those principles seems to be bodily autonomy, except when it isn't. There are so many exceptions to it that it really doesn't seem like a principle that's upheld. And somehow people don't consider this to be wrong enough to affect change. Instead, what's repeated over and over is: "The law is the law and everyone is equal in front of it."
Some people really believe they're 'doing the right thing' when they decide how others should live or die. Their 'morals' are based on belief systems that are unchecked by reality-tests. They'll call themselves patriots, yet the laws of their gods over-ride the laws of mammon. Most of the history we do know about is full of that. Probably just the tip of the iceberg.