{"id":201866,"date":"2015-08-19T01:41:39","date_gmt":"2015-08-19T05:41:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/uncategorized\/virginia-eugenics-university-of-vermont.php"},"modified":"2015-08-19T01:41:39","modified_gmt":"2015-08-19T05:41:39","slug":"virginia-eugenics-university-of-vermont","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/eugenics\/virginia-eugenics-university-of-vermont.php","title":{"rendered":"Virginia Eugenics &#8211; University of Vermont"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><\/p><p>    Number of victims  <\/p><p>    In total, 7325 individuals were sterilized in Virginia under    its sterilization law. Of those sterilized about half were    deemed mentally ill and the other half deemed mentally    deficient. Approximately 62% of total individuals sterilized    were female. Some estimate the total number of sterilizations    as high as 8,300 individuals (Dorr 2006, p. 382).<\/p><p>    Period during which sterilization occurred  <\/p><p>    Sterilization in Virginia occurred under state law between 1924    and 1979. It thus appeared to have continued such    sterilizations longer than any other state (Landman 1932, pp.    83-4; Largent 2008, p. 80). There are known instances of    eugenic sterilization before 1924 (Dorr 2008, p. 116).<\/p><p>    Temporal pattern of sterilization and rate of    sterilization  <\/p><p>    Although Virginia formally adopted a sterilization law in 1924,    sterilization was not practiced widely until after the United    State Supreme Court ruling against Carrie Buck in 1927. This    ruling set a precedent on the legality of sterilization not    only in Virginia but also throughout the nation. During the    1930s, immediately after this Supreme Court ruling,    sterilization in Virginia occurred at its highest rate with    approximately 13 sterilizations per 100,000 state residents. A    1938 report stated that 632 of the first 1,000 patients    sterilized had been paroled, and that 812 of the same group    were from impoverished families (Trent 1994, 217). After the    1930s  prior to, during, and following WWII  sterilization    initially decreased and thereafter maintained a fairly constant    rate. After this, sterilization rates dropped dramatically    until the practice faded out and then was subsequently forced    out of practice with the repeal of the 1924 act in 1974 and the    additional removal of all mention of eugenic sterilization to    prevent hereditary forms of mental illness that are recurrent    from being passed on from Virginia code in 1979 (Dorr 2008, p.    221, Lombardo 2008b, p. 250). Compulsory sterilizations for    non-eugenic purposes continue today, but under very strict    regulations. A compulsory sterilization patient must be unable    to give informed consent, in need of contraception, unable to    use any other form of contraception, and permanently unable to    raise a child (Lombardo 2008b, p. 267).<\/p><p>    Passage of law(s)  <\/p><p>    On March 20, 1924, Virginia SB 281, the Eugenical    Sterilization Act, was signed into law (Landman 1932, pp.    83-4).  <\/p><p>    Groups identified in the law  <\/p><p>    Under the Eugenical Sterilization Act, individuals confined to    state institutions afflicted with hereditary forms of insanity    that are recurrent, idiocy, imbecility, feeble-mindedness or    epilepsy could be sterilized (Landman 1932, p. 84).  <\/p><p>    Process of the law  <\/p><p>    In order for a sterilization to take place under the 1924    Eugenical Sterilization Act the superintendent of a    colony or hospital had to present the case for each individual    to be sterilized in the form of a petition to a special board    of directors at said institution. A copy of this petition was    also required to be presented to the patient and the legal    guardian of the patient. Thirty days after the board deemed an    individual fit for sterilization, the sterilization was    permitted to occur. Appeals were heard but rarely considered.    No individual involved in this process could be held civilly or    criminally liable. Additionally, nothing in the Eugenical    Sterilization Act could prevent a legally licensed doctor from    partaking in a medical procedure that could incidentally    involve the nullification or destruction of reproductive    functions (SB 281, Virginia Sterilization Act; (Landman 1932,    p. 84).  <\/p><p>    Precipitating factors and processesThe white,    Virginia elite of the time was immersed in the idea of    perpetuating and protecting the purity of the American race    (i.e., Anglo-Saxon Whites). This socioeconomic elite group    wanted to maintain their traditional Southern identity while    also embracing modern progressive ideology. The eugenic    movement offered an avenue to pursue both of these notions    simultaneously. Through the embrace of eugenics as a    progressive science and ideology, Virginians were able to    modernize their identity while maintaining the purity of their    state through the coerced sterilization of minorities and    undesirable whites alike (Dorr 2000, p. 262). Often, mongrels    and worthless whites were collected in mountain sweeps.    This involved a sheriff of a nearby town driving into mountain    villages and forcibly removing individuals and taking them to    institutions where they would only be released upon submission    to sterilization (Black 2003, pp. 3-8). More often than not    these individuals were unaware of the consequences of the    procedures that they underwent.  <\/p><p>    On March 20, 1924 (the same day as the    passage of SB 281, the Eugenical Sterilization Act) Virginia    signed into law SB 219, the Racial Integrity Act. Under this    piece of legislation it became unlawful for any white person    in [Virginia] to marry any [person] save a white person (SB    219, Racial Integrity Act). The Racial Integrity Act garnered    lots of public attention, allowing the Sterilization Law    (written by Carrie Bucks defense lawyer) to pass without much    public notice (Lombardo 2008b, p. 100).  <\/p><p>    The Virginia sterilization law was paramount to the perceived    legality of sterilization throughout the country. With the    Carrie Buck Supreme Court case of 1927, the American eugenics    movement gained the legitimacy necessary to avoid adversity in    various courts (Paul 1965, p. 497). This ruling precipitated    high rates of sterilization in Virginia and throughout the rest    of the United States. This sterilization pattern continued    throughout the first half of the twentieth century until rates    began to decline in the mid-1950s (Paul, p. 504). In both    1956 and 1962, bills were proposed that allowed for compulsory    sterilization of women with multiple illegitimate children.    Both bills failed (Lombardo 2008b, p. 242-243). Furthermore,    with the issue of Recommendation 6 of the Commission to Study    Problems Relating to Children Born Out of Wedlock in 1959,    compulsory sterilization was seriously questioned for the first    time since its legalization (Paul 1965, pp. 504-6). Even in the    presence of such concern, the 1961 report of the Virginia    Advisory Legislative Council recommended no change to the    sterilization statute because there had been no substantial    complaint (Dorr 2008, p. 213). At this time every other state    in the Nation, with the exception of North Carolina, had found    reason to stop or slow sterilization (Paul 1965, pp. 506-9).    Virginia enacted additional voluntary sterilization legislation    in 1962 (Windle 1965, p. 307), which allowed women to volunteer    to be sterilized as a birth control measure (Lombardo 2008b, p.    243). In order to qualify for voluntary sterilization, women    needed to be married and to have obtained spousal consent.    Virginias current law, enacted in the early 1980s, only allows    for those with a need for contraception, who have no other    options in obtaining it, to be sterilized. Patients can be    sterilized involuntarily, but the process one must go through    before gaining permission to involuntarily sterilize a patient    is very protective (Lombardo 2008b, p. 267).  <\/p><p>    Groups targeted and victimized  <\/p><p>    After Brown v. Board of Education in    1954, racist eugenics became more prominent. The 1954 Supreme    Court case brought a resurgence of racist eugenics called    Massive Resistance to prevent desegregation (Dorr 2008, p.    196).  <\/p><p>    Racist eugenics once again came into    discussion with the 1962 and 1964 proposed laws for punitive    sterilization of welfare mothers with illegitimate children.    There was some fear that African, Far eastern, Indian, and    African American populations were expanding far more rapidly    than others, and these proposed laws were in part to target    such communities (Dorr 2008, p. 196, 211). Even with the    voluntary sterilization law, there was some concern that a    woman might consent to being sterilized if strongly advised by    a physician to do so. This trust in physicians could have given    them the power to influence women to undergo sterilization for    ultimately eugenic purposes (Dorr 2008, p. 214).   <\/p><p>    Other restrictions placed on those identified in the law  <\/p><p>    On March 20, 1924 (the same day as the passage of SB 281, the    Eugenical Sterilization Act) Virginia signed into law SB 219,    the Racial Integrity Act. Under this piece of legislation to    became unlawful for any white person in [Virginia] to marry    any [person] save a white person (SB 219, Racial Integrity    Act).  <\/p><p>    (Photo origin:    University of Virginia Health Systems' Claude Moore Health    Sciences Library, available    athttp:\/\/www.hsl.virginia.edu\/historical\/eugenics\/3-buckvbell.cfm)  <\/p><p>    After the 1924 act was passed, Priddy was a key proponent in    the sterilization of a Virginia Colony patient, Carrie Buck, in    order to test the strength of sterilization legislation and set    a precedent of its legality. (The court case Buck v. Bell was    originally Buck v. Priddy, however; Albert Priddy died before    the case went into the appeals process and the Virginia    Colonys new Superintendent Dr. J.H. Bell replaced Priddy in    the case during appeals.) Priddys power and eugenic ideology    was a key factor in the success of eugenics throughout Virginia    (Claude Moore Health Sciences Library).    While there were many major other proponents of eugenics and    sterilization in Virginia, it is important to note the    influence of Walter Plecker, the University of Virginia, and of    the journal Virginia Medical Monthly.    Walter Plecker, in his role as State Registrar at the Bureau of    Vital Statistics, intended to maintain the purity of the states    white race by classifying all residents in the state of    Virginia by their race to prevent any intermarriage through the    threat of prosecution of those who dissented (Black 2003, pp.    165-70). It was under the great influence of Plecker and his    racist rhetoric that the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 became    law (Lombardo 1996, p. 9).  <\/p><p>    Additionally, the University of Virginia acted as a highly    respected educational institution that pushed the thought and    science of eugenics through research and education. In the    words of Dr. H.E. Jordan, Dean of the Department of Medicine at    the University of Virginia, eugenics will work the greatest    social revolution the world has yet known [for] it aims at the    production and the exclusive prevelancy of the highest type of    physical, intellectual and moral man within the limits of human    protoplasm (Claude Moore Health Sciences Library).Having    asimilar influence, the Virginia Medical Monthly    published medical reports from superintendents of various    Virginia institutions as a method to increase the loathing    toward those deemed feeble-minded while also spreading eugenics    theory and practice. These proponents continued to condemn the    unfit to sterilization and with their    continual insistence of the necessity of sterilization, public    support grew (Noll 1995, p. 61).      <\/p><p>    Feeder institutions and institutions where sterilizations    were performed  <\/p><p>    (Photo origin: University    of Virginia Health Systems' Claude Moore Health Sciences    Library, available    athttp:\/\/www.hsl.virginia.edu\/historical\/eugenics\/3-buckvbell.cfm)  <\/p><p>    In Virginia, state hospitals and institutions were used both to    institutionalize and to sterilize patients. Most infamous    throughout Virginia is the Virginia Colony for the    Epileptic and Feebleminded in Lynchburg, Virginia, which    started as a place to house epileptics, who had previously been    put into prisons with criminals (Lombardo 2008b, p. 13).    Pictured above is the Hasley Jennings building at the Virginia    Colony where many individuals, including Carrie Buck, were    sterilized (Claude Moore Health Sciences Library). Its name has    been changed to Central Virginia Training Center (CVTC; Noll    2005, p. 29).  <\/p><p>    While Steven Noll noted in a 2005 article that the CVTC does    not address its role in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case (p. 39), it    does so now withremarkable candor about its past on its    website under \"History\" (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.cvtc.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov\/feedback.htm\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/www.cvtc.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov\/feedback.htm<\/a>).    Its cemetery is open to the public; however,archival    material is not maintained in a manner that permits public    viewing (Noll 2005, p. 37).  <\/p><p>    (Photo origin:    <a href=\"http:\/\/www.wsh.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov\/images\/photoofoldsite.jpg\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/www.wsh.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov\/images\/photoofoldsite.jpg<\/a>)  <\/p><p>    Patients were also sterilized the Western State    Hospital in Staunton, Virginia under the supervision of    Joseph S. DeJarnette. The hospital opened in 1825 as the    Western Lunatic Asylum, but its name was changed in 1894 to the    Western State Hospital. Western State was the second largest    sterilization institution, after Lynchburg (Brocato 2008, p.    113). There is no mention of sterilization on any official    webpages, but the Western State Hospital still functions as a    psychiatric hospital.<\/p><p>    (Photo origin:    <a href=\"http:\/\/www.gotghost.net\/images\/P3010134.JPG\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/www.gotghost.net\/images\/P3010134.JPG<\/a>)<\/p><p>    With less frequency, sterilization occurred at Virginias    Central State Mental Hospital in Petersburg, which    stopped treating intellectual disability patients in 1971, but    continues as a rehabilitation facility under the name Central    State Hospital.<\/p><p>    (Photo origin:    <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Eastern_State_Hospital\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Eastern_State_Hospital<\/a>)<\/p><p>    Sterilizations also took place at Eastern State    Hospital in Williamsburg, which is still functioning and    claims to be America's first psychiatric hospital, and at    Southwestern State Hospital in Marion as well (Black 2003, p.    4). Now a museum, the original hospital built in 1773 has been    rebuilt on excavated foundations.<\/p><p>    Southwestern State Hospital, originally    called Southwestern Lunatic Asylum, is now called    Southwestern Virginia Mental Health Institute. These    institutions make no reference to their history in    sterilization.  <\/p><p>    Commemoration  <\/p><p>    In 2002, a marker was erected to commemorate those    sterilized under the Virginia sterilization law. The marker was    erected by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. The    marker number is Q-28. It reads: In 1924, Virginia, like a    majority of states then, enacted eugenic sterilization laws.    Virginias law allowed state institutions to operate on    individuals to prevent the conception of what were believed to    be genetically inferior children. Charlottesville native    Carrie Buck (19061983), involuntarily committed to a state    facility near Lynchburg, was chosen as the first person to be    sterilized under the new law. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Buck    v. Bell, on 2 May 1927, affirmed the Virginia law. After Buck    more than 8,000 other Virginians were sterilized before the    most relevant parts of the Act were repealed in 1974. Later    evidence eventually showed that Buck and many others had no    hereditary defects. She is buried south of here (Lombardo    2008a).  <\/p><p>    Thelocation of the marker is 382.202N,    7829.303W. It is located in Charlottesville,    Virginia, on Preston Avenue (U.S. 250) 0.2 miles south of Grady    Avenue (U.S. 250), on the left when traveling north. The    approx. address is 800 Preston Avenue, Charlottesville,    Virginia.  <\/p><p>    Opposition  <\/p><p>    Opposition outside of the Catholic Church appears to have been    minimal throughout Virginia. While Catholics opposed    sterilization in any form because such mutilation is in direct    violation of Natural Law, it seems that the strong    Protestant, white supremacist ideology present throughout much    of the South allowed for eugenic sterilizations to go nearly    unquestioned (Windle 1965, p. 308). Very little information    pertaining to the opposition to sterilization is available    prior to Charles Windles case study on the passage of    sterilization legislation in Virginia during the 1962    legislative session. During this session, a bill requiring the    compulsory sterilization of women with more than one    illegitimate child who is also receiving welfare benefits died    in committee debate (Windle 1965, pp. 306-7). While the    compulsory sterilization proposal failed, a voluntary    sterilization bill during the same session passed by a large    margin (Windle 1965, p. 307). It is important to note that this    legislation was considered nearly forty years after    sterilization was first legalized in Virginia and public    opinion allowed for compulsory sterilization in 1924.    Additionally, at the time these bills were considered,    sterilization legislation was still on the books in Virginia.    Even the Buck v. Bell case had little to do with any    opposition to sterilization. Rather, this case was a ploy by    eugenicists to set a nationwide standard of sterilization    legality by taking appeals to the United States Supreme Court    (Claude Moore Health Sciences    Library).Moreover, Virginia is a    traditionally agrarian state and sterilization legislation    (when considered in 1962) was widely supported by individuals    concerned with race relations and welfare in poorer, nonurban    areas with high proportions of nonwhites and of agricultural    and manufacturing employment (Windle 1965, p. 314). The number    of sterilizations that continued to occur into the 1970s is a    testament to the stronghold of eugenic ideology throughout the    state.  <\/p><p>    Bibliography:  <\/p><p>    Brocato, Amanda D. 2008. The Campaign for Eugenics in    Virginia: The Influence of Dr. J.S. DeJarnette. Augusta    Historical Bulletin. pp 105-117.        Claude Moore Health Sciences Library, University of Virginia    Health System. \"Eugenics: Three Generations, No Imbeciles:    Virginia, Eugenics, and Buck v. Bell.\" Available at    <http:>.        Dorr, Gregory M. 2006. Defective or Disabled?: Race, Medicine,    and Eugenics in Progressive Era Virginia and Alabama. Journal    of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 5, 4: 359-92.        Dorr, Gregory Michael. 2000. \"Assuring America's Place in the    Sun: Ivery Foreman Lewis and the Teaching of Eugenics at the    University of Virginia, 1915-1953.\" Journal of Southern History    66, 2: 257-96.  <\/http:><\/p><p>    Dorr, Gregory Michael. 2008. Segregations Science:    Eugenics and Society in Virginia. Rev Ed:    Charlottesville: The University of Virginia Press.        Landman, J. H. 1932. Human Sterilization: The History of    the Sexual Sterilization Movement. New York:    MacMillan.        Largent, Mark A. 2008. Breeding Contempt: The History of    Coerced Sterilizatioin in the United States. New    Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.        Lombardo, Paul. \"Eugenic Sterilization Laws.\" Image Archive on    the American Eugenics Movement. Available at    <http:>.        Lombardo, Paul A. 2008a. The Historical Marker Database: Buck    v. Bell. Available at    <http:>        Lombardo, Paul A. 2003. \"Facing Carrie Buck.\" Hastings Center    Report 33, 2: 14-17.        Lombardo, Paul A. 1996. \"Medicine, Eugenics, and the Supreme    Court: &gt;From Coercive Sterilization to Reproductive    Freedom.\" Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 13, 1:    1-25.  <\/http:><\/http:><\/p><p>    Lombardo, Paul A. 2008b. Three Generations, No Imbeciles:    Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell. Rev. Ed.    Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.  <\/p><p>    Noll, Steven. 2005. The Public Face of Southern Institutions    for the Feeble-Minded. The Public Historian 27, 2: 25-42.  <\/p><p>    Noll, Steven. 1995. Feeble-Minded in Our Midst:    Institutions for the Mentally Retarded in the South,    1900-1940. Chapel Hill: University of North    Carolina Press.  <\/p><p>    Paul, Julius. 1965. Three Generations of Imbeciles Are    Enough: State Eugenic Sterilization Laws in American Thought    and Practice. Unpublished manuscript. Washington, D.C.: Walter    Reed Army Institute of Research.  <\/p><p>    Trent, James W. Jr. 1994. Inventing the Feeble Mind: A    History of Mental Retardation in the United States.    Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.        Windle, Charles. 1965. \"Factors in the Passage of Sterilization    Legislation: The Case of Virginia.\" The Public Opinion    Quarterly 29, 2: 306-14.  <\/p><p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p><p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.wsh.dmhmrsas.virginia.gov\/images\/photoofoldsite.jpg\" style=\"padding-left:10px; padding-right: 10px;\"><\/p><p>Visit link: <\/p><p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.uvm.edu\/~lkaelber\/eugenics\/VA\/VA.html\" title=\"Virginia Eugenics - University of Vermont\">Virginia Eugenics - University of Vermont<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Number of victims In total, 7325 individuals were sterilized in Virginia under its sterilization law. Of those sterilized about half were deemed mentally ill and the other half deemed mentally deficient.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/eugenics\/virginia-eugenics-university-of-vermont.php\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"limit_modified_date":"","last_modified_date":"","_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-201866","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-eugenics"],"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201866"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=201866"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201866\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=201866"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=201866"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=201866"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}