can someone please summarize this for me please add the important details.?
In 1907, Indiana passed the first eugenics-based compulsory sterilization law in the world. Thirty U.S. states would soon follow their lead. Although the law was overturned by the Indiana Supreme Court in 1921, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Buck v. Bell, upheld the constitutionality of the Virginia Sterilization Act of 1924, allowing for the compulsory sterilization of patients of state mental institutions in 1927.
Some states sterilized "imbeciles" for much of the 20th century. Although compulsory sterilization is now considered an abuse of human rights, Buck v. Bell was never overturned, and Virginia did not repeal its sterilization law until 1974. The most significant era of eugenic sterilization was between 1907 and 1963, when over 64,000 individuals were forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in the United States.
Beginning around 1930, there was a steady increase in the percentage of women sterilized, and in a few states only young women were sterilized. From 1930 to the 1960s, sterilizations were performed on many more institutionalized women than men. By 1961, 61 percent of the 62,162 total eugenic sterilizations in the United States were performed on women. A favorable report on the results of sterilization in California, the state with the most sterilizations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_Unit... here is the link thanks! if possible can you highlight important dates in order!
- 4 years agoFavorite Answer
I imagine we are waiting for an update. :)
This reads like a Wikpedia cite. Please provide the link, so I can review the entire article.
* * *
Well, some quick observations.
The eugenics movement arose, at first, out of a sincere effort to apply the newly-developing scientific understanding of genetics to improve the human race. As we all know, however, the road to hell is frequently paved with good intentions.
What happened in America concerning forced sterilizations, etc., is what frequently happens when politicians begin to imagine that they are scientists, and attempt to apply the principles of science to social engineering.
The forced sterilization of a human being is obviously an egregious violation of that human being's fundamental human rights. I am shocked to learn that Buck v. Bell was never overturned, but I imagine that it is because no test case ever reached SCOTUS. The Court can only rule on cases that are brought before it.
I am even more shocked that Virginia did not repeal its sterilization law until 1974, but this is not that surprising, since Virginia was the state that brought us Virginia v. Loving, the landmark SCOTUS case that overturned all "anti-miscegenation laws," throughout the country - laws that made it a crime punishable, in Virginia's case, with up to five years in prison, for blacks and whites to marry.
The fundamental idea of eugenics, in the abstract, is not inherently offensive. Every day, prospective parents have genetic testing to help them decide whether they should have a child, if there is a strong risk that the child will be burdened with horrible birth defects, that will destroy the quality of the child's life.
But there is a world of difference between voluntary eugenics activities, pursued by parents, for example, and forced eugenics activities conducted by a state entity. Of course, the most extreme example of the evils of state-sponsored eugenics occurred in Nazi Germany, when thousands of citizens were sterilized, in pursuit of the Nazi dream of a pure, Aryan race.
We know a lot more about the role of genes and the environment in determining the intelligence of individuals than we did at the turn of the 20th Century. For example, we now understand that an enriched environment for infants and children plays a much larger role in the development of "fluid intelligence," the generally-accepted measure of IQ in humans.
In short, genes are only one part of the intelligence picture. Good pre-natal and post-natal nutrition, the elimination of environmental toxins such as alcohol and tobacco, an enriched social environment during childhood, and other environmental factors frequently play an overriding role in the development of a child's intelligence. For example, there are studies that indicate that the number of words that a child hears between birth and age 3 is highly-correlated with above-average performance on IQ tests, both at age 3 and the third grade, and beyond.
Genetic factors of intelligence appear to play a much larger role later in life, when general cognitive performance begins naturally to decline.
Therefore, even if one discounts the obvious moral problems with forced sterilization and other, state-instituted eugenics programs, there is an apparent scientific problem with the practice. Under normal genetic and environmental conditions, such programs do not work. It is much more effective to implement "head-start" intellectual and nutritional education programs, for parents and children, if we want to promote a robust and cognitively-healthy population. imho