Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where are you seeing the part about his parents not wanting him to have kids? I came to question the OP but you said it too. I'm only seeing that his dad died and his mom had been institutionalized prior and couldn't take care of him so he was sent to the institution and "felt he had no choice but to submit to sterilization". It was the State of CA that was pushing it.
"Leonard Bisel was 15 when the state of California decided that he should not have children, threatening to lock him up and force to to do hard labor if he did not submit to sterilization."
"Leonard Bisel was 15 when the state of California decided that he should not have children, threatening to lock him up and force to to do hard labor if he did not submit to sterilization."
Yes...the State of CA, not HIS PARENTS, one of which was already dead.
For some reason I thought the article said his parents...I guess I was wrong. Sorry to be like talking to a wall, I forgot how highly intelligent everyone here is lol. Seriously get a life. The point of this is that no matter who made the decision it's terrible.
For some reason I thought the article said his parents...I guess I was wrong. Sorry to be like talking to a wall, I forgot how highly intelligent everyone here is lol. Seriously get a life. The point of this is that no matter who made the decision it's terrible.
I think we can all agree with that.
That's why government should not have control of our bodies and medical decisions.
The Eugenics programs and mind set was popular during her time. She never forced anyone to be sterilized nor was this her movement. She fought for reproduction rights for women, legal reproduction information and birth control. She agreed with sterilization but " We maintain that a woman possessing an adequate knowledge of her reproductive functions is the best judge of time and conditions under which her child should be brought into the world. We maintain that it is her right, regardless of all other considerations, to determine whether she shall bear children or not, and how many children she shall bear if she chooses to become a mother."
Perhaps Carnegie, Rockefeller, Harriman, Kellogg and Davenport would be proud.
As much a I sometimes look as some people and think to myself they should be sterilized, it is never right for the government to intrude on any individuals right to their own reproduction.
Margaret Sanger was into Eugenics and forced sterilizations up to her eye-balls.
You’re the one defending a known racist and eugenicist, not me.
So.
I can find nothing that indicated she forced sterilizations on anyone. She did a lot of good for women to insure they could legally get birth control information and reproductive care they needed. She was instrumental in the development and funding of oral contraceptives. She was not forcing anything on anyone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
