5 ms·

Illegal involuntary sterilisations in California’s women’s prisons

Supermancho 6y ago
"As part of the investigation prompted by Kelli* speaking out, the Center for Investigative found California State audit & prison records showed nearly 1400 sterilization procedures occurred btwn 1997-2013. FOIA requests to other states confirmed: only 6 <prisons> have banned sterilizations." *Kelli Dillon - was incarcerated and subject to one of these illegal? sterilizations. *prisons - added for clarity
- MikeUt 6y ago
  Were all of those 1400 involuntary?
  - AlotOfReading 6y ago
    There's a pretty good argument to be made that jailers should not be performing sterilizations given that it's optional, risky, and historically abused, regardless of patient consent. That's ignoring the fact that the penal system is inherently in a position of power over inmates and that many of those people will not be able to fully consent due to mental or emotional issues.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - MikeUt 6y ago
      > should not be performing sterilizations given that it's optional 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysterectomy
      - AlotOfReading 6y ago
        A lot of these are tubal ligations, which are generally not medically necessary. In some cases the women weren't preemptively informed of the procedure or otherwise had denied consent and only found out they had received it later. 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-sterilization-abuse-of-female-inmates-heads-to-governor/ https://revealnews.org/article-legacy/bill-to-prevent-steril...
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    How about just one? https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1364922685013295105 https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1364922685013295105
aaomidi 6y ago
Kamala Harris was AJ of California from 2011 to 2017. 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.
- Craighead 6y ago
  Dang, why are blatent bad faith statements like this allowed on HN?
- felipellrocha 6y ago
  How is this related to her?
  - brutal_chaos_ 6y ago
    Not OP, but: Kamala sent people knowingly or naively to potentially be sterilized. And given she is VP, I assume OP doesn't believe anything will change and is therefore related.
    - aaomidi 6y ago
      I'm actually scared that she's either so incompetent and didn't realize what's happening in her prisons. Or that she didn't care. I'm not sure which one is scarier as a person who now holds the potentially presidency seat.
      - throwaway19937 6y ago
        > I'm actually scared that she's either so incompetent and didn't realize what's happening in her prisons. Or that she didn't care. 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.
krylon 6y ago
As a German, I find this highly disturbing, given my country's history. Maybe I am just a bit naive (probably), but I had not expected to read about something like this happening in a ____ing democracy that claims some regard for human rights.
- MsMowz 6y ago
  To make it more alarming, this news comes only a few months after reports of forced sterilization in migrant concentration camps[1]. [1]: https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower-and-forced-sterilization https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower...
- yellowapple 6y ago
  As an American, I find this highly disturbing, too. We need substantial prison reform, ASAP. And if the prisons don't want reform, then abolition. Forced sterilization is barbaric.
- ysleepy 6y ago
  I was pretty appalled when I read about the history of eugenics in the US, it was a thing till the 70s iirc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#Sterilization_of_Latina_women 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.
CivBase 6y ago
What do prisons even have to gain from sterilizing inmates? It's not like they're in an environment where they could be expected to become pregnant. It seems like cruelty for cruelty's sake.
- DanBC 6y ago
  Imagine a woman who is addicted to alcohol and drugs; who has had a string of abusive partners (who abused her and her children); and who has had several children permanently removed by the state because she was abusive and she failed to protect the children from her abusive partners. 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 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.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
throwawinsider 6y ago
It's a pretty good idea if you ask me. But it should be part of law.
throwawinsider 6y ago
Eugenics is one of those ideas that are both USEFUL but drastically CENSORED.
8bitsrule 6y ago
That shit's been going on the US for over a century - and not just in prisons. 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-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php 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.
- Aerroon 6y ago
  >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."
  - 8bitsrule 6y ago
    I certainly don't call it justice. In my view, this 'just is' about a combination of institutionalized racism ... abetted by people with the power to get away with it... some of whom are themselves morally-challenged. 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.

"As part of the investigation prompted by Kelli* speaking out, the Center for Investigative found California State audit & prison records showed nearly 1400 sterilization procedures occurred btwn 1997-2013. FOIA requests to other states confirmed: only 6 <prisons> have banned sterilizations." *Kelli Dillon - was incarcerated and subject to one of these illegal? sterilizations. *prisons - added for clarity

MikeUt 6y ago
Were all of those 1400 involuntary?
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  There's a pretty good argument to be made that jailers should not be performing sterilizations given that it's optional, risky, and historically abused, regardless of patient consent. That's ignoring the fact that the penal system is inherently in a position of power over inmates and that many of those people will not be able to fully consent due to mental or emotional issues.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - MikeUt 6y ago
    > should not be performing sterilizations given that it's optional 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysterectomy
    - AlotOfReading 6y ago
      A lot of these are tubal ligations, which are generally not medically necessary. In some cases the women weren't preemptively informed of the procedure or otherwise had denied consent and only found out they had received it later. 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-sterilization-abuse-of-female-inmates-heads-to-governor/ https://revealnews.org/article-legacy/bill-to-prevent-steril...
- aaomidi 6y ago
  How about just one? https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1364922685013295105 https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1364922685013295105

aaomidi 6y ago

Kamala Harris was AJ of California from 2011 to 2017. 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.

Craighead 6y ago
Dang, why are blatent bad faith statements like this allowed on HN?
felipellrocha 6y ago
How is this related to her?
- brutal_chaos_ 6y ago
  Not OP, but: Kamala sent people knowingly or naively to potentially be sterilized. And given she is VP, I assume OP doesn't believe anything will change and is therefore related.
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    I'm actually scared that she's either so incompetent and didn't realize what's happening in her prisons. Or that she didn't care. I'm not sure which one is scarier as a person who now holds the potentially presidency seat.
    - throwaway19937 6y ago
      > I'm actually scared that she's either so incompetent and didn't realize what's happening in her prisons. Or that she didn't care. 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.

krylon 6y ago

As a German, I find this highly disturbing, given my country's history. Maybe I am just a bit naive (probably), but I had not expected to read about something like this happening in a ____ing democracy that claims some regard for human rights.

MsMowz 6y ago
To make it more alarming, this news comes only a few months after reports of forced sterilization in migrant concentration camps[1]. [1]: https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower-and-forced-sterilization https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/914465793/ice-a-whistleblower...
yellowapple 6y ago
As an American, I find this highly disturbing, too. We need substantial prison reform, ASAP. And if the prisons don't want reform, then abolition. Forced sterilization is barbaric.
ysleepy 6y ago
I was pretty appalled when I read about the history of eugenics in the US, it was a thing till the 70s iirc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States#Sterilization_of_Latina_women 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.

CivBase 6y ago

What do prisons even have to gain from sterilizing inmates? It's not like they're in an environment where they could be expected to become pregnant. It seems like cruelty for cruelty's sake.

DanBC 6y ago
Imagine a woman who is addicted to alcohol and drugs; who has had a string of abusive partners (who abused her and her children); and who has had several children permanently removed by the state because she was abusive and she failed to protect the children from her abusive partners. 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 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.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

throwawinsider 6y ago

It's a pretty good idea if you ask me. But it should be part of law.

throwawinsider 6y ago

Eugenics is one of those ideas that are both USEFUL but drastically CENSORED.

8bitsrule 6y ago

That shit's been going on the US for over a century - and not just in prisons. 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-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php 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.

Aerroon 6y ago
>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."
- 8bitsrule 6y ago
  I certainly don't call it justice. In my view, this 'just is' about a combination of institutionalized racism ... abetted by people with the power to get away with it... some of whom are themselves morally-challenged. 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.