Legalised non-consensual sterilisation – eugenics put into practice before 1945, and the aftermath. Part 1: USA, Japan, Canada and Mexico

References

• Goffman E. Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1963.
   Google Scholar
• Carey AC. Gender and compulsory sterilization programs in America: 1907–1950. J Hist Sociol. 1998;11:74–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerodetti N. Whose reparation claims count? Gender, history and (in)justice. Aust Feminist Legal J. 2016;42:97–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galton F. Inquiries into human faculty and its development. London: Macmillan; 1883.
   Google Scholar
• Trombley S. The right to reproduce: a history of coercive sterilization. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Macnicol J. Eugenics and the campaign for voluntary sterilization in Britain between the wars. Soc Hist Med. 1989;2:147–169.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gawin M. Polish psychiatrists and eugenic sterilization during the interwar period. Int J Ment Health. 2007;36:67–78.
   Google Scholar
• Taguieff PA. Qu’est ce que le racisme? Sciences Humaines. 1998;81:38–41.
   Google Scholar
• Björkman M, Widmalm S. Selling eugenics: the case of Sweden. Notes Rec R Soc Lond. 2010;64:379–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowlands S, Amy JJ. Non-consensual sterilisation of women living with HIV. Int J STD AIDS. 2018 [Feb 22]. DOI:10.1177/0956462418758116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grinspan MC, Carpenter M, Ehrt J, et al. The Yogyakarta principles plus 10 – additional principles and state obligations on the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics to complement the Yogyakarta principles [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Jan 13]. Available from: http://yogyakartaprinciples.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/A5_yogyakartaWEB-2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rowlands S, Amy JJ. Preserving the reproductive potential of transgender and intersex people. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018;23:58–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Elements of crimes [Internet]. The Hague: International Criminal Court; 2011 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: https://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/336923D8-A6AD-40EC-AD7B-45BF9DE73D56/0/ElementsOfCrimesEng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pearson V. Population policy and eugenics in China. Br J Psychiatry. 1995;167:1–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ERRC. Coercive and cruel: sterilisation and its consequences for Romani women in the Czech Republic (1966–2016) [Internet]. Budapest: European Roma Rights Centre; 2016 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/coercive-and-cruel-28-november-2016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Stojanovski V. Surgical castration of sex offenders and its legality: the case of the Czech Republic. Brno: Faculty of Law Masaryk University; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Gawande A. The unkindest cut: the science and ethics of castration [Internet]. 1997 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/1997/07/the_unkindest_cut.html
   Google Scholar
• Sreenivasan S, Weinberger LE. Surgical castration and sexual recidivism risk. In: Phenix A, Hoberman HM, editors. Sexual offending. New York (NY): Springer; 2016: 769–777.
   Google Scholar
• Sofair AN, Kaldjian LC. Eugenic sterilization and a qualified Nazi analogy: the United States and Germany, 1930–1945. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:312–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tännsjö T. Compulsory sterilisation in Sweden. Bioethics. 1998;12:236–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haavie S. Sterilization in Norway – a dark chapter? Eurozine [Internet]. 2003 Apr 9 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.eurozine.com/sterilization-in-norway-a-dark-chapter/
   Google Scholar
• Parizeau MH, Stérilisation. In: Hottois G, Missa JN, editors. Nouvelle encyclopédie de bioéthique. Brussels: De Boeck Université; 2001. p. 759–762.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• David HP. Reproductive rights and reproductive behavior: clash or convergence of private values and public policies? Am Psychol. 1994;49:343–349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King MH. China’s infamous one-child policy. Lancet. 2005;365:215–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Center for Reproductive Rights. Rethinking population policies: a reproductive rights framework [Internet]. New York (NY): Center for Reproductive Rights; 2003: 8–9. [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: https://www.reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/pub_bP_rethinkingpop.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Amy JJ, Rowlands S. Legalised non-consensual sterilisation – eugenics put into practice before 1945, and the aftermath. Part 2: Europe. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weindling P. International eugenics: Swedish sterilization in context. Scand J Hist. 1999;24:179–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reilly PR. Involuntary sterilization in the United States: a surgical solution. Q Rev Biol. 1987;62:153–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diekema DS. Involuntary sterilization of persons with mental retardation: an ethical analysis. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9:21–26.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chessler E. Woman of valor: Margaret Sanger and the birth control movement in America. New York (NY): Simon & Schuster; 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Rowlands S, Amy JJ. Sterilization of those with intellectual disability: evolution from non-consensual interventions to strict safeguards. J Intellect Disabil. 2018 [Jan 1]. DOI:10.1177/1744629517747162
   Google Scholar
• Holder AR. Compulsory sterilization. JAMA. 1972;221:229–230.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kaelber L. Eugenics: compulsory sterilization in 50 American States [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2017 Nov 26]. Available from: https://www.uvm.edu/∼lkaelber/eugenics/
   Google Scholar
• Teper S. Sterilization 1: the changing attitude. Bull Eugen Soc. 1977;9:116–122.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen RA, Cohen AM. Compulsory sterilization statutes: public sentiment and public policy. Res Community Ment Health. 1981;2:327–357.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Washington Supreme Court. In Re Hayes, 608 P.2d 635 (Wash. 1980) [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1208766/in-re-hayes/
   Google Scholar
• Krase K. History of forced sterilization and current US abuses [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/health-info/forced-sterilization/
   Google Scholar
• Nagpal J. The children of eugenics in North Carolina [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Aug 19]. Available from: http://www.appstate.edu/∼elorantaj/Nagpal.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schoen J. Between choices and coercion: women and the politics of sterilization in North Carolina, 1929–1975. J Women’s Hist. 2001;13:132–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Governor’s task force to determine the method of compensation for victims of North Carolina’s Eugenics Board. Preliminary report to the Governor of the State of North Carolina [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.sterilizationvictims.nc.gov/documents/preliminary_report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Josefson D. Oregon’s governor apologises for forced sterilisations. BMJ. 2002;325:1380.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kitzhaber J. Proclamation of Human Rights Day, an apology for Oregon’s forced sterilization of institutionalised patients [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://archivedwebsites.sos.state.or.us/Governor_Kitzhaber_2003/governor/speeches/s021202.htm
   Google Scholar
• Mass B. Puerto Rico: a case study of population control. Lat Am Perspect. 1977;4:66–79.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rodriguez-Trias H. Guidelines on sterilization under attack. Women Health. 1976;1:30–31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Torpy SJ. Native American women and coerced sterilization: on the trail of tears in the 1970s. Am Indian Cult Res J. 2000;24:1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker C. An Act of genocide: Canada’s coerced sterilization of First Nations women [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: https://intercontinentalcry.org/canadas-coerced-sterilization-of-first-nations-women/
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro TM. Population control politics: women, sterilization, and reproductive choice. Philadelphia (PA): Temple University Press; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• McBarnette L. Women and poverty: the effects on reproductive status. Women Health Care. 1987;12:55–81.
   Google Scholar
• Ross L. Sterilization and “de facto” sterilization. Amic J. 1994 Feb;29.
   Google Scholar
• SSHRCC. Eugenics archive. Ottawa: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Japan discloses 16,520 “eugenic” sterilizations. JOICFP News. 1997;281:6.
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Eugenic sterilizations in Japan and recent demands for apology: a report. Newsletter of the Network on Ethics and Intellectual Disability [Internet]. 1997;3:1–4. [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.lit.osaka-cu.ac.jp/user/tsuchiya/gyoseki/paper/JPN_Eugenics.html
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Over half of forced sterilization surgeries performed on minors: Miyagi Pref. records. The Mainichi [Internet]. 2018 Jan 30 [cited 2018 Feb 26]. Available from: https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180130/p2a/00m/0na/003000c
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Letter shows ex-health ministry pressured pref. gov’ts to boost eugenic surgeries. The Mainichi [Internet]. 2018 Feb 20 [cited 2018 Feb 26]. Available from: https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180220/p2a/00m/0na/016000c
   Google Scholar
• Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Concluding observations on the combined seventh and eighth periodic reports of Japan [Internet]. CEDAW/C/JPN/CO/7-8. 2016 Mar 7 [cited 2018 Feb 26]. Available from: http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CEDAW/Shared%20Documents/JPN/CEDAW_C_JPN_CO_7-8_21666_E.pdf
   Google Scholar
• McCurry J. Japanese woman sues government over forced sterilisation. The Guardian [Internet]. 2018 Jan 30 [cited 2018 Jan 31]. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/30/japanese-woman-sues-government-forced-sterilisation
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. Hokkaido man third person to seek damages over forced eugenic sterilization surgery. The Mainichi [Internet]. 2018 Feb 22 [cited 2018 Feb 26]. Available from: https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180222/p2a/00m/0na/010000c
   Google Scholar
• Barr AM. The never-ending story: the lengthy history of sterilization surgery in Alberta and California. Edmonton: University of Alberta; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Grekul J, Krahn A, Odynak D. Sterilizing the “feeble-minded”: eugenics in Alberta, Canada, 1929–1972. J Historical Sociol. 2004;17:358–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh JH. Eugenics: keeping Canada sane [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2017 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/eugenics-keeping-canada-sane-feature/
   Google Scholar
• van Heeswijk G. An act respecting sexual sterilization: reasons for enacting and repealing the Act. Vancouver: University of British Columbia; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Stote K. An act of genocide: colonialism and the sterilization of aboriginal women. Black Point: Fernwood Publishing; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Stern AM. “The hour of eugenics” in Veracruz, Mexico: radical politics, public health, and Latin America’s only sterilization law. Hisp Am Hist Rev. 2011;91:431–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar