Sterilization and eugenics have a prominent history in the United States. Through the 1900s, several states petitioned and advocated for the sterilization of “undesirable” populations fueled by discriminatory stereotypes aimed primarily at Latinas. As a result, thousands of Latinas were sterilized across America as a form of eugenics without consent. It has had a lasting impact on women, many of whom are still suffering the consequences of medical doctors to date.
Sterilization in California
Sterilization and eugenics policies and efforts plagued minority populations, especially in the Mexican-American community. Throughout the 1920s through the 1950s, an extensive amount of Mexican-American males and females were sterilized, typically without consent, as a form of eugenics to improve the quality of the community (Lira & Stern, 2014). Sterilization and eugenics were highly prevalent in the United States, with 32 states documenting the sterilization of about 60,000 individuals; however, California had a prominent impact by sterilizing about 33% of those individuals after the passing of its third eugenic sterilization law (Novak et al., 2018). Other rural states focused on sterilizing unfavorable populations like indigent white people. However, California discriminately focused its efforts on Mexican Americans. A study based on the documented sterilizations between the 1920s and 1950s showed that 17,362 individuals were recommended for sterilization in California state homes and hospitals, with Latinas at 59% greater risk of sterilization than non-Latinas (Novak et al., 2018).
One of the many justifications they used to perform the sterilizations was the intelligence level. Many were forced to take IQ tests where they were labeled as imbeciles, morons, and other terms to dehumanize them and justify taking away their right to have children (Lira & Stern, 2014). Their IQ tests were used against them to justify medical professionals’ decisions to prevent Mexican Americans from producing more children with low IQs (Lira & Stern, 2014). Additionally, medical professionals used sexual promiscuity to rationalize sterilization. Latina women, especially Mexican Americans, were perceived as hypersexual and hyperfertile. They used terms such as sexually delinquent to push for sterilizations to prevent what medical professionals perceived as Mexicans producing “unintelligent and unsocial” children (Lira & Stern, 2014).
Although its prominence reigned throughout the early 1900s, Latina women were still being sterilized after giving birth in the 1960s in Los Angeles. Doctors at the USC Medical Hospital were required to ask women of all ages if they would like to be sterilized, most of whom were primarily Latinas (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021). Although many would decline, doctors would take an immoral approach and not inform patients of the procedures they consented to. Women would be asked to sign or would be scared into signing consent forms during labor or fearing for the health of their children (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021). One woman was told that she needed to sign a form in order to have a c-section to save her child when, in actuality, she was signing consent forms for sterilization. Other women were spoken to in English when they only spoke Spanish, and the language barrier allowed them to be taken advantage of (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021). Some of the women who were sterilized were either unaware, ashamed, or hurt that they could never have the family they wanted. A lawsuit, Madrigal v. Quilligan, was brought forward by the affected women; unfortunately, they were unsuccessful, but it prompted patient advocacy and informed consent (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021).
Victims of Forced Sterilization
Minelva Orosco was a teenager who was presumably sterilized without her consent or her parents’ consent due to her low IQ and sexual deviancy in 1936 (Lira & Stern, 2014). Minelva was placed at a mental institution after having experienced poverty, rape, and sexually transmitted diseases, which medical professionals used to label her sexually delinquent and socially deviant. Minelva’s parents refused to consent to the sterilization and even sought aid from community allies such as the Mexican consul and religious leaders; however, the director of the California Department of Institutions allowed doctors to perform the procedure without consent (Lira & Stern, 2014). Minelva was presumably sterilized.
In 1939, a woman named Andrea was fighting against the Board of Institutions’ decision to sterilize her, and her case was heard in court (Lira & Stern, 2014). Unfortunately, she lost her case and was sterilized without her consent; however, the judge presiding over the case disagreed with the ruling and dissented, stating, “To clothe legislative agencies with this plenary power, withholding as it does any opportunity for a hearing or any opportunity for recourse to the courts, to my mind partakes of the essence of slavery and outrages constitutional guarantees” (Lira & Stern, 2014). The judge believed that medical institutions should not have the right, and giving them the power to do so violates the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, highlighting the injustice and abuse of power among medical institutions and how unjustified it is to make medical decisions about one’s body without consent. It is important to note that legality does not mean morality.
Melvina Hernández was a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the doctor at USC Medical. Melvina was sterilized at twenty-three years old and did not find out until four years later (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021). While she was in labor, she was instructed to sign a consent form written in English for a C-section. Melvina refused to sign without her husband present, and the nurse took her hand and signed the document on her behalf (Tajima-Pena et al., 2021). She is one of the many women who were denied the right to choose whether or not to have more children.
Conclusion
Latinas have been discriminated against for centuries in the United States, which has led to eugenic policies and actions that still affect individuals today. Thousands of Latinas were stereotyped as uneducated and hypersexual as a form of justification to take away their right to have children. Reproductive rights are an essential aspect of any individual’s rights, and sterilization and eugenics directly conflict with this right. The most vital part of reproductive justice is the ability to make decisions regarding one’s reproductive system. The sterilizations that took place directly violate the right to choose, and it is essential to bring awareness to this issue.
References
Lira, N., & Stern, A. M. (2014). Mexican Americans and Eugenic Sterilization: Resisting Reproductive Injustice in California, 1920-1950. Aztlán, 39(2), 9–34.
Novak, N. L., Lira, N., O’Connor, K. E., Harlow, S. D., Kardia, S. L. R., & Stern, A. M. (2018). Disproportionate Sterilization of Latinos Under California’s Eugenic Sterilization Program, 1920-1945. American Journal of Public Health (1971), 108(5), 611–613. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304369
Tajima-Pena, R., Espino, V., Hurtado, M., Hermosillo, C., Hernández, A., & Rosenfeld, B. (2021). No más bebés = No more babies. [Distributed by] GOOD DOCS.
