Tag Archives: Feeble-Minded

THE TRUTH ABOUT MARGARET SANGER, ABORTION & EUGENICS

Posted on by
1

“While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”
Margaret Sanger – 1920.

Margaret Sanger and Her Sons.

Margaret Sanger and Her Sons.

In 1916, Margaret Sanger, a nurse and Progressive Activist, opened a clinic in Brooklyn, New York, to provide women with health education on Birth Control, prevention of venereal diseases, and the use of prophylactics. It is hard for us in the 21st Century to understand why information about contraception was illegal, but it was. The Comstock Law of 1873 “was a federal law that made it a crime to sell or distribute materials that could be used for contraception or abortion, to send such materials or information about such materials through the federal mail system, or to import such materials from abroad.” My particular beef with all the fanfare about what a great woman Margaret Sanger was is the fact that virtually all bloggers intentionally leave out the fact that she was a fervent supporter of the Eugenics Movement in the United States who advocated for the FORCED STERILIZATION of the mentally ill and developmentally disabled.

Was it a good thing to educate women and men about contraception? Yes. Was Margaret Sanger‘s intent to educate women based on the belief that she cared so deeply for them? No. Margaret Sanger was appalled and disgusted by the lower classes, the newly arrived immigrants, prostitutes, mentally ill, blind, crippled, developmentally disabled, and criminal types. Her intent was to rid these defective, delinquent, and dependent people from the American Melting Pot once and for all in order to produce a hearty, healthy, literate breed of educated Americans who would only bring children into this world that they could support and who didn’t drain the economy. She saw the devastation and mutilation to women’s bodies by self-inflicted and botched abortions and thought that abortion itself was barbaric; “that an educated society would never need to resort to such drastic measures.”

Was Margaret Sanger a great woman? You decide. As always, I present the facts and the historical documents FOR YOU TO READ FOR YOURSELF! To learn more about this issue and the history of Eugenics, click on the RED links below.

“The American Birth Control League, Margaret Sanger, President, The Birth Control Review, Volume VI, No. 8, Page 162, August 1922.

PRINCIPLES:
The complex problems now confronting America as the result of the practice of reckless procreation are fast threatening to grow beyond human control. Everywhere we see poverty and large families going hand in hand. Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly. People who cannot support their own offspring are encouraged by Church and State to produce large families. Many of the children thus begotten are diseased or feeble-minded; many become criminals. The burden of supporting these unwanted types has to be borne by the healthy elements of the nation. Funds that should be used to raise the standard of our civilization are diverted to the maintenance of those who should never have been born. In addition to this grave evil we witness the appalling waste of women’s health and women’s lives by too frequent pregnancies. These unwanted pregnancies often provoke the crime of abortion, or alternatively multiply the number of child workers and lower the standard of living. To create a race of well-born children it is essential that the function of motherhood should be elevated to a position of dignity, and this is impossible as long as conception remains a matter of chance.

We hold that children should be:
1. Conceived in love;
2. Born of the mother’s conscious desire;
3. And only begotten under conditions which render possible the heritage of health.

Therefore we hold that every woman must possess the power and freedom to prevent conception except when these conditions can be satisfied. Every mother must realize her basic position in human society. She must be conscious of her responsibility to the race in bringing children into the world. Instead of being a blind and haphazard consequence of uncontrolled instinct, motherhood must be made the responsible and self-directed means of human expression and regeneration. These purposes, which are of fundamental importance to the whole of our nation and to the future of mankind, can only be attained if women first receive practical scientific education in the means of Birth Control. That, therefore, is the first object to which the efforts of this League will be directed.

AIMS: THE AMERICAN BIRTH CONTROL LEAGUE aims to enlighten and educate all sections of the American public in the various aspects of the dangers of uncontrolled procreation and the imperative necessity of a world program of Birth Control. The League aims to correlate the findings of scientists, statisticians, investigators and social agencies in all fields. To make this possible, it is necessary to organize various departments:

RESEARCH: To collect the findings of scientists, concerning the relation of reckless breeding to delinquency, defect and dependence.

INVESTIGATION: To derive from these scientifically ascertained facts and figures, conclusions which may aid all public health and social agencies in the study of problems of maternal and infant mortality, child-labor, mental and physical defects and delinquence in relation to the practice of reckless parentage.

HYGIENIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL instruction by the Medical profession to mothers and potential mothers in harmless and reliable methods of Birth Control in answer to their requests for such knowledge.

STERILIZATION of the insane and feeble-minded and the encouragement of this operation upon those afflicted with inherited or transmissible diseases, with the understanding that sterilization does not deprive the individual of his or her sex expression, but merely renders him or her incapable of producing children.

EDUCATIONAL: The program of education includes: The enlightenment of the public at large, mainly through the education of leaders of thought and opinion—teachers, ministers, editors and writers—to the moral and scientific soundness of the principles of Birth Control and the imperative necessity of its adoption as the basis of national and racial progress.

POLITICAL AND LEGISLATIVE: To enlist the support and co-operation of legal advisors, statesmen and legislators in effecting the removal of state and federal statutes which encourage dysgenic breeding, increase the sum total of disease, misery and poverty and prevent the establishment of a policy of national health nd strength.

ORGANIZATION: To send into the various States of the Union field workers to enlist the support and arouse the interest of the masses to the importance of Birth Control so that laws may be changed and the establishment of clinics made possible in every State.

INTERNATIONAL: This department aims to co-operate with similar organizations in other countries to study Birth Control in its relations to the world population problem, food supplies, national and racial conflicts, and to urge upon all international bodies organized to promote world peace, the consideration of these aspects of international amity.” SOURCE: Birth Control Review, Volumes 5-6, 1920, Page 162.

Captive Mother by Stephen Sinding.

Captive Mother by Stephen Sinding.

The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda by Margaret Sanger

“[The following brief statement of the dependence of any sound and effective program of Eugenics upon BIRTH CONTROL, in view of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, recently held in New York at the Museum of Natural History, assumes a peculiar timeliness.]

Seemingly every new approach to the great problem of the human race must manifest its vitality by running the gauntlet of prejudice, ridicule and misinterpretation. Eugenists may remember that not many years ago this program for race regeneration was subjected to the cruel ridicule of stupidity and ignorance. Today Eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems. The most intransigeant and daring teachers and scientists have lent their support to this great biological interpretation of the human race. The war has emphasized its necessity.

The doctrine of BIRTH CONTROL is now passing through the stage of ridicule, prejudice and misunderstanding. A few years ago this new weapon of civilization and freedom was condemned as immoral, destructive, obscene. Gradually the criticisms are lessening-understanding is taking the place of misunderstanding. The eugenic and civilizational value of BIRTH CONTROL is becoming apparent to the enlightened and the intelligent.

In the limited space of the present paper, I have time only to touch upon some of the fundamental convictions that form the basis of our BIRTH CONTROL propaganda, and which, as I think you must agree, indicate that the campaign for BIRTH CONTROL is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical in ideal with the final aims of Eugenics.

First: We are convinced that racial regeneration, like individual regeneration, must come “from within.” That is, it must autonomous, self-directive, and not imposed from without. In other words, every potential parent, and especially every potential mother, must be brought to an acute realization of the primary and central responsibility of bringing children into this world.

Secondly: Not until the parents of the world are thus given control over their reproductive faculties will it ever be possible not alone to improve the quality of the generations of the future, but even to maintain civilization even at its present level. Only by self-control of this type, only by intelligent mastery of the procreative powers can the great mass of humanity be awakened to the great responsibility of parenthood.

Thirdly: We have come to the conclusion, based on widespread investigation and experience, that this education for parenthood must be based upon the needs and demands of the people themselves. An idealistic code of sexual ethics, imposed from above, a set of rules devised by high-minded theorists who fail to take into account the living conditions and desires of the submerged masses, can never be of the slightest value in effecting any changes in the mores of the people. Such systems have in the past revealed their woeful inability to prevent the sexual and racial chaos into which the world has today drifted.

The almost universal demand for practical education in BIRTH CONTROL is one of the most hopeful signs that the masses themselves today possess the diving spark of regeneration. It remain for the courageous and the enlightened to answer this demand, to kindle the spark, to direct a thorough education in Eugenics based upon this intense interest.

BIRTH CONTROL propaganda is thus the entering wedge for the Eugenic educator. In answering the needs of these thousands upon thousands of submerged mothers, it is possible to use this interest as the foundation for education in prophylaxis, sexual hygiene, and infant welfare. The potential mother is to be shown that maternity need not be slavery but the most effective avenue toward self-development and self-realization. Upon this basis only may we improve the quality of the race.

As an advocate of BIRTH CONTROL, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the “unfit” and the “fit,” admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the overfertility of the mentally and physically defective.

BIRTH CONTROL is not advanced as a panacea by which past and present evils of dysgenic breeding can be magically eliminated. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism.

But to prevent the repetition, to effect the salvation of the generations of the future-nay of the generations of today-our greatest need is first of all the ability to face the situation without flinching, and to cooperate in the formation of a code of sexual ethics based upon a thorough biological and psychological understanding of human nature; and then to answer the questions and the needs of the people with all the intelligence and honestly at our command. If we can summon the bravery to do this, we shall best be serving the true interests of Eugenics, because our work will then have a practical and pragmatic value.”
SOURCE: The Birth Control Review, Dedicated To Voluntary Motherhood, Margaret Sanger, Editor, Volume V., No.10, October 1921, Page 5 (43).

Definitions:
Propaganda – 1. Information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
2. The deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
3. The particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement. (1)

Race Suicide – The extinction of a race or people that tends to result when, through the unwillingness or forbearance of its members to have children, the birthrate falls below the death rate. (1)

Infanticide – The practice of killing newborn infants. (1)

Abortion – Also called voluntary abortion. the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy. (1)

Feticide – The act of destroying a fetus or causing an abortion. (1)

Eugenics – Selective breeding. The study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics). (1)

Birth Control – Voluntary limitation or control of the number of children conceived, especially by planned use of contraceptive techniques. (1)

Privation – 1. Loss or lack of the necessities of life, such as food and shelter.
2. Hardship resulting from this. 3.The state of being deprived. (1)

Progressive Movement – A movement for reform that occurred roughly between 1900 and 1920. Progressives typically held that irresponsible actions by the rich were corrupting both public and private life. They called for measures such as trust busting, the regulation of railroads, provisions for the people to vote on laws themselves through referendum, the election of the Senate by the people rather than by state legislatures, and a graduated income tax (one in which higher tax rates are applied to higher incomes). The Progressives were able to get much of their program passed into law. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were associated with the movement. (1)

Prophylactic – A protective measure against disease. A device, usually a rubber sheath, used to prevent conception or venereal infection; condom. (1)

Venereal Disease – Any of various diseases, such as syphilis or gonorrhoea, transmitted by sexual intercourse. (1)

Neo-Malthusian – Designating, or pertaining to, a group of modern economists who hold to the Malthusianism doctrine that permanent betterment of the general standard of living is impossible without decrease of competition by limitation of the number of births. (2)

SOURCES: 1. Dictionary.com, 2. Fine Dictionary.com.

Additional Reading:

Woman And The New Race by Margaret Sanger, 1920.

The Birth Control Review, Volumes 1-3.

Birth Control Review, Volumes 5-6.

The Trend Of The Race by Samuel J. Holmes, 1921.

Definitions In Political Economy by Rev. Thomas Robert Malthus, 1827.

An Essay On The Principle Of Population by Rev. T.R. Malthus, 1888.

Studies In The Psychology Of Sex by Havelock Ellis, Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company, Publishers, 1922.

Planned Parenthood 2013.

1907 Eugenics.

1912-1920 Eugenics in New York State.

1922 Eugenics New York State.

1872 Scientific Charity Movement & Charity Organization Societies

Posted on by
Reply

On the surface, many of the key people who were involved in the Scientific Charity Movement during the late nineteenth century appear to be caring individuals who wanted nothing more than to lift the poor out of poverty with education and employment so that they could support themselves without government assistance. These charities did not receive state aid but depended on donations mainly from wealthy Americans. There is no doubt that these societies helped the plight of poor children, many of whom were under the age of 10 and working under terrible conditions in order to help out their families. But when it came to the defective, dependent, and delinquent classes, which was the label used to describe the insane, feeble-minded, blind, crippled, maimed, deaf and dumb, epileptic, criminal types, prostitutes, drug addicts, and alcoholics, the sincerity of their intentions to purely provide care to these individuals was overshadowed by the underlying goal of Eugenics.

@Columbia University 1

@Columbia University 1

Photo: Columbia University – Social Forces Visualized: Photography and Scientific Charity, 1900-1920.

They didn’t want to see these poor, unfortunate souls suffering in squalor on the streets and in the poor houses but their ultimate objective of eradicating poverty and the financial drain that it caused on society resulted in the building of more asylums for the sole purpose of removing the defective classes from society so that they could not procreate. The Charity Organization Societies wanted to isolate the defective class in asylums in order to stop them from “breeding,” Alienists wanted to study and experiment on them, Medical Students wanted their dead bodies, Pathologists wanted their brains, Anthropologists wanted their bones, and the general public was just happy that someone was taking care of the problem. With the passage of the Social Security Act of 1935, the Poor Houses were abolished. Insane Asylums thrived and many remained in operation for over one hundred years. For more information, click on the RED links below.

@Columbia University 2

@Columbia University 2

Photo: Columbia University – Social Forces Visualized: Photography and Scientific Charity, 1900-1920.

“Scientific charity built on Americans’ notion of self-reliance, limited government, and economic freedom. Proponents of scientific charity shared the poorhouse advocates’ goals of cutting relief expenses and reducing the number of able-bodied who were receiving assistance, as well as the moral reformers’ goal of uplifting people from poverty through discipline and religious education via private charity. In this model, individuals responded to charity and the government stayed out of the economic sphere. Individuals were seen as rational actors who freely made decisions based on their own self-interest and who were responsible for how they fared economically. Scientific charity fit well with the post–Civil War concept of social Darwinism, which held that humans were in competition and the strong survived and thrived while the weak did not. Not surprisingly, Charity Organization Societies were generally opposed to unions.

Two of the leading advocates for Charity Organization Societies were Josephine Lowell and S. Humphrey Gurteen. Lowell, who was from a radical abolitionist family, believed that idleness was a major cause of poverty, and she advocated giving those who requested relief a labor test (such as breaking stones or chopping wood) before they received private charity. During her life, she developed several principles to guide her social reform work. One of her key principles was that “charity must tend to develop the moral nature of those it helps.” Lowell opposed both local government relief and almsgiving (individual giving directly to the poor) since she felt this practice did not morally uplift the people and created dependency. She felt that charity agents and visitors could provide a personal relationship conducive to helping needy individuals instead of treating them as “cases.”  Lowell thought “that each case must be dealt with radically and a permanent means of helping it to be found, and that the best way to help people is to help them to help themselves.”

Gurteen provided many practical ideas to implement organized Charity Organization Societies. Gurteen’s plan was to have various groups already providing services to the poor coordinate their efforts. There would be a central office that served as a charity clearinghouse where “friendly visitors” (COS agents) involved in investigating the poor would meet to compare notes to determine who was worthy of relief and who was an imposter. This collaboration would result in a complete registry of every person in the city who was receiving public or private assistance. The goal of this organized approach was to stop providing relief to the undeserving poor but continue to provide the deserving poor with the assistance to solve their own problems. Gurteen believed that COS would end outdoor relief, stop pauperism, and reduce poverty to its lowest possible level.”  SOURCE: Excerpted from “Social Solutions to Poverty” Scott Myers-Lipton, Pages 68-69 © Paradigm Publishers 2006.

@Columbia University 3

@Columbia University 3

Photo: Columbia University – Social Forces Visualized: Photography and Scientific Charity, 1900-1920.

Social Darwinism: “Theory that persons, groups, and “races” are subject to the same laws of natural selection as Charles Darwin had proposed for plants and animals in nature. Social Darwinists, such as Herbert Spencer and Walter Bagehot in England and William Graham Sumner in the U.S., held that the life of humans in society was a struggle for existence ruled by “survival of the fittest,” in Spencer‘s words. Wealth was said to be a sign of natural superiority, its absence a sign of unfitness. The theory was used from the late 19th century to support laissez-faire capitalism and political conservatism. Social Darwinism declined as scientific knowledge expanded.”

Breaker Boys by Lewis W. Hine

Breaker Boys by Lewis W. Hine

“An illustration of these times and the rise of a professional beggar class was described in 1880 by Reverend Oscar C. McCulloch, Pastor of Plymouth Church, Indianapolis at the seventh annual meeting of the National Conference of Charities and Corrections. His presentation entitled “Associated Charities” detailed the need to organize charities:

“…Every worker among the poor in our cities finds himself saying, “Who is sufficient for these things?” Let him conscientiously attempt to dispense charity wisely in any one instance, and he is made sensible of the organization of pauperism, and of the complex problem of poverty; of suffering beyond his reach, and of setting tides of evil beyond his control. My own introduction to this work was in this wise: In a small room I found an old blind woman, her son, his wife and two children, his sister with one child. There was no chair, table or stool, a little ” monkey stove,” but no fire; no plates, or kettles, or knife, fork or spoon. Such utter poverty horrified me. I soon had coal, provisions and clothing there. Chance led me into the office of our township trustee, where the historical records of all applicants for public aid are registered. Here I found that I had touched one knot of a large family known as “American Gypsies.” Three generations have been, and are, receiving public aid, numbering 125 persons; 65 per cent. were illegitimate; 57 per cent of the children died before the age of five. Distinctions of relationship were ignored. In the case above cited, the child of the sister was by her own brother. Since then I have found that family underrunning our society like devil-grass. In the diagram which I hold before you, the extent of it is traced to over 400 individuals. They are found on the street begging, at the houses soliciting cold victuals. Their names appear on the criminal records of the city court, the county jail, the house of refuge, the reformatory, the State prison and the county poor asylum. I give this as an illustration of the organization of pauperism, which takes it beyond the control of the individual and of the single society, making necessary an organization of charitable forces if the evil is ever to be controlled….”

COS leaders wanted to reform charity by including a paid agent’s investigation of the case’s “worthiness” before distributing aid. They believed that unregulated and unsupervised relief caused rather than cured poverty. The paid agent, usually a male, made an investigation and carried out the decisions of the volunteer committee concerning each applicant, including maintaining records. A volunteer or “friendly visitor” was recruited to offer advice and supervise the family’s progress. COS visitors sought to uplift the family and taught the values of hard work and thrift to individuals and families. The COS set up centralized records and administrative services and emphasized objective investigations and professional training. There was a strong scientific emphasis as the COS visitors organized their activities and learned principles of practice and techniques of intervention from one another. COS views dominated private charity philosophy until the 1930s and influenced the face of social welfare as it evolved during the Progressive Era.
SOURCE: The Social Welfare History Project – Charity Organization Societies: 1877-1893 by John E. Hansan, Ph.D.

The Social Welfare History Project – Progressive Era by John E. Hansan, Ph.D.

The Social Welfare History Project – Theodore Roosevelt.

The Social Welfare History Project – Josephine Shaw Lowell.

Unsentimental Reformer: The Life Of Josephine Shaw Lowell by Joan Waugh, 1997.

In Memoriam: Josephine Shaw Lowell, The Charity Organization Society Of The City Of New York, 1906.

Almost Worthy: The Poor, Paupers, and the Science of Charity in America, 1877-1917 by Brent Ruswick, 2012. (Info on Reverend Oscar C. McCulloch).

Reverend Stephen Humphreys Gurteen – The Charities Review, Volume 8, March-February 1898-99, Page 364.

Eugenics, Past and Future by Russ Douthat, June 9, 2012, New York Times.

Columbia University – Social Forces Visualized: Photography and Scientific Charity, 1900-1920.

1915 State Charities Aid Association News

Posted on by
Reply

The State Charities Aid Association, S.C.A.A., was founded in 1872. The S.C.A.A. inspected all charitable institutions that included all New York State Hospitals, Custodial Institutions for the Feeble-Minded, Prisons, Tuberculosis Hospitals, County Poor Houses, Polio Clinics, Houses of Refuge, and Orphanages. Charity Organization Societies (COS), were part of the “scientific charity movement” that began in the late nineteenth century. S.C.A.A. News, Volumes 3-11, 1915 through 1923 is a TREASURE TROVE of information and photographs!

SCAA 01

SCAA 01

SCAA 02

SCAA 02

SCAA 03

SCAA 03

SCAA 04

SCAA 04

SCAA 05

SCAA 05

“Brief Facts About State Charities Aid Association:

The object of the State Charities Aid Association, which is a voluntary body of citizens of New York State, is to improve conditions in public institutions and to promote public health and child care.

It is an incorporated body, State-wide, but without State aid.

Its budget is about $329,000 a year, and is met by voluntary contributions.

It has 12,000 members; it has local committees in every county. Its volunteer visitors visit and inspect all public institutions. The Association employs abut 95 persons in its Central Office, and about 20 in the field. It devotes itself to the following objects:

Finding homes for destitute or orphaned children.

Assisting mothers with babies.

Preventing mental disorders and securing better care for the mentally sick and defective.

Visiting public institutions in order to improve conditions, to promote with welfare and comfort of patients and inmates.

Helping to provide suitable occupations for sick persons in hospitals and institutions.

Assisting in securing wise laws about public health, care of the sick, institutions, and the expenditure of public funds for these purposes.”
SOURCE: S.C.A.A. News, Published Monthly by The State Charities Aid Association, 105 East 22nd Street, New York, N.Y., Volume X, No. 9, June, 1922, Page 13.

1872 Miss Louisa Lee Schuyler – The State Charities Aid Association.

SCAA 06

SCAA 06

SCAA 07

SCAA 07

SCAA 08

SCAA 08

SCAA 09

SCAA 09

SCAA 10

SCAA 10

SCAA 11

SCAA 11

SCAA 12

SCAA 12

SCAA 13

SCAA 13

SCAA 14

SCAA 14

1901 Detained For 15 Years As “Feeble-Minded”

Posted on by
1

DETAINED FOR 15 YEARS AS “FEEBLE-MINDED”
Girl Then Pronounced Insane Is Declared to be of Sound Mind.
Now Under Commissioner Feeny’s Protection – Tells a Story of Ill-Treatment at Newark (N.Y.) Asylum.

Fifteen years a prisoner as feeble-minded, has apparently been the lot of Mary Lake, now an inmate of the Richmond Borough Almshouse, but about to be set at liberty. Commissioner of Charities James Feeny of Richmond Borough is largely responsible for justice being done the girl even now.

The young woman is a daughter of George Lake of New Dorp. Lake, on Dec. 5, 1883, was sentenced for a serious offense to ten years in State prison. Lake’s children were committed to the County Almshouse, and the records show that on Sep. 10, 1886, Mary, twelve years old, was committed to the State Institution for Feeble-Minded Children at Syracuse. She remained at that institution until she became of age on Jan. 4, 1896, when she was transferred to the New York Custodial Asylum for Feeble-Minded Women, at Newark, N.Y.

Commissioner Feeny on Sept. 19 last received a letter from C.W. Winspear, the Superintendent of that institution, stating that Mary Lake had become insane, and demanding that she be removed. The Commissioner found that she must be brought back to Richmond County, and preceedings were taken to have her legally declared before she could be committed to an insane asylum. Some correspondence ensued between Commissioner Feeny and Superintendent Winspear, and under date of Oct. 1 the latter sent a certificate made by the attending physician at the institution, which follows:

“Mary Lake has had a number of attacks of excitement, but none so severe as the present attack, nor did they last as long. Has been very much worse the last two weeks. I have no doubt of her insanity. N.E. LANDO“

Upon the receipt of this the Commissioner sent Superintendent of Almshouse Pierce with a nurse, and armed with straitjackets and other paraphernalia to bring the supposed insane and violent girl to her home county, and the Superintendent was surprised to have placed in his custody an attractive-looking young woman entirely docile, well-educated, bright, and intelligent. Miss Lake was brought to the almshouse on Oct. 2, and since that time she has been under careful inspection, and has undergone several severe examinations at the hands of Dr. Isaac L. Millspaugh and Dr. John T. Sprague, who finally certified to Commissioner Feeny that the young woman is not now insane, and perhaps never has been; that there is no evidence that she has ever been even feeble-minded, and, on the contrary, she is intelligent, well-educated, is willing to work, and is most competent in every respect.

Commissioner Feeny did not feel justified in turning the young woman out upon the world, for, while she had been educated and trained to household duties, she is unsophisticated, and with the aid of Mrs. George William Curtis and other ladies whom he has interested in the case, the Commissioner is attempting to find her a good home.

Miss Lake, when seen at the almshouse, talked freely of her life in the institutions, and told stories of ill-treatment at the hands of some of the assistants at the Newark institution. She says there are others at the institution who are sound-minded, and who desire to be and should be discharged from the asylum.

She claims the reason she was declared insane and sent back to Richmond is that she was charged with being the originator of a plan to appeal to Gov. Odell upon the occasion of his visit to the institution during his recent tour of State Institutions. The plan was not carried out by the inmates. While she was among the number who agreed to speak to the Governor, she was not, she says, the leader or the originator of the plan. She declared her determination to leave, however, and fearing that she would make some trouble, the authorities at the institution, she says, took the above-mentioned method to get rid of her.

Of the other Lake children, one son has been lost sight of, another is in an institution for the blind in Brooklyn, and one daughter is said to have been brought up in a private family in ignorance of her parentage, and to have been happily married very recently.

SOURCE: Reprinted from The New York Times, Published: October 26, 1901, Copyright @ The New York Times.

Newark State School for Women & Cemetery

Posted on by
29

New York State School – Newark Custodial Institution for Developmentally Disabled, Childbearing Age Women. February 17, 1932, Begins Accepting Boys.

1878-1885: The Newark State School operated as part of the Syracuse State School.
1885: By statute erected as the State Custodial Asylum for Feeble-Minded Women.
1919: Name changed to Newark State School for Mental Defectives.
1927: Became a part of the Department of Mental Hygiene and name changed to Newark State School.
1932: Accepts boys.

1916 Newark State Custodial Institution For Feeble-Minded Women.
Early State Schools in New York.
State of New York Thirty-Seventh Annual Report of the Board of Managers of the Newark State School for Mental Defectives, 1921 – Through – Fifty-Ninth Annual Report of the Board of Visitors of the Newark State School, at Newark, Wayne County, New York to the Department of Mental Hygiene 1943.

Newark State School 1937

Newark State School 1937

Newark State School 1937-2

Newark State School 1937-2

Newark State School 1937-3

Newark State School 1937-3

 

Newark State School for Women

Newark State School for Women

Photograph courtesy of The Museum of disABILITY History 

“The New York State Custodial Asylum for Feeble-Minded Women was established in 1878 in response to an increasing awareness that almshouses were improper places for ‘feeble-minded’ women. Social reformer Josephine Shaw Lowell led the crusade, with assistance from the State Board of Charities. Lowell delivered several reports before the state legislature expressing her concern that feeble-minded women often disregarded moral and sexual restraint when placed in the undisciplined environment of an almshouse and frequently had illegitimate children who, in turn, became dependent on the state for their welfare. Women of child-bearing age, fifteen to forty-five, were admitted into this institution, in order to “prevent them from multiplying their kind.” (New York State Board of Charities Report, 1879).

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO They’re Buried Where? by Seth Voorhees

THE BAD NEWS: Thousands Remain Nameless! 6.15.2015.

THE GOOD NEWS: One Man Is Remembered! 6.14.2015.

Letchworth Village for the Developmentally Disabled and Epileptics & Cemetery

Posted on by
4

Letchworth Village – New York State Custodial Institution for Epileptics and the Intellectually Disabled.

1916 Letchworth Village State Custodial Institution For Feeble-Minded and Epileptics.
Letchworth Village Cemetery Names – Find A Grave.
Legend Tripping in Letchworth Village – AbandonedNYC – Will Ellis.

Letchworth Village

Letchworth Village

Photograph courtesy of The Museum of disABILITY History

“Letchworth Village was established in 1912 to alleviate overcrowding at the existing state institutions of New York. Because the institution admitted people with developmental disabilities and people with epilepsy, a complex system of classification was established for both living arrangements and the educational training methods. Significant efforts were undertaken to ensure that the institutional atmosphere resembled a calm country village and emphasis was placed on the students’ happiness. Letchworth Village also focused on scientific research and Dr. George A. Jervis received international acclaim for his studies on phenylketonuria (PKU) in the 1930s.”

There is a plaque at the cemetery that has all the names of the patients who are buried there. I do not know if the town or any particular group maintains the cemetery.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO They’re Buried Where? by Seth Voorhees

THE BAD NEWS: Thousands Remain Nameless! 6.15.2015.

THE GOOD NEWS: One Man Is Remembered! 6.14.2015.

 

1922 Eugenics – New York State

Posted on by
1

Thirty New York State Institutions were subject to the 1912 statute. One man and forty-one women were sterilized. It is interesting to read the opinions of the superintendents of the custodial institutions from which sterilization was tested or performed: Auburn State Prison; Rome Custodial Asylum for the Feeble-Minded (test case of Frank Osborn challenged the New York statute); Buffalo and Gowanda State Hospitals. To read the opinions in their entirety, click on the RED link below.

Eugenics Record Office, Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association, 1918 (Laughlin in front, Stewart House in background) http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/index2.html?tag=1664

Eugenics Record Office, Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association, 1918 (Laughlin in front, Stewart House in background) http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/index2.html?tag=1664

NAMES: 1. Alexander Weinstein, 2. Dr. Howard J. Banker, 3. Robert W. Kegner, 4. Sarah Oates, 5. Dr. Oscar Riddle, 6. Ella Newman, 7. Mrs. H.H. Laughlin, 8. George MacArthur, 9. Ruth Gardiner, 10. Laura Garrett (Mrs. Clafflin), 11. Leslie E. Peckhem, 12. Edna Rosselot, 13. Dr. Arthur M. Banta, 14. No Name, 15. Emilee Viccari, 16. Mathilda Koch, 17. Louise A. Nelson, 18. Nua A. Minns, 19. Dr. B. Onuf, 20. Annie Henchman, 21. Dr. Wilhelmina E. Key, 22. Mrs. Howard J. Banker, 23. Mrs. Helen Martin Pitcher, 24. Julia F. Goodrich, 25. Dr. Arthur H. Harris, 26. Ethel Thayer, 27. Mrs. W.B. Browning, 28. Caroline E. Conway, 29. Alfie M. Newbuk, 30. Marion Collins, 31. Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 32. Mrs. Estella Hughes, 33. Dr. Rene Sand, 34. Mrs. W.L.F. Brown, 35. Frederick Hoffman, 36. Mary Kitchell, 37. Mrs. Charles B. Davenport. 

New York “The statute dates from 1912. Present status (January 1, 1922): Repealed 1920, after having been declared unconstitutional by the lower courts in 1918. Thirty (30) state institutions were subject to the act before its repeal; they performed eugenical sterilizing operations as follows:

1. State Prison, Auburn – 1 Vasectomy
2. Clinton State Prison, Dannemora
3. Sing Sing Prison, Ossining
4. Great Meadow Prison, Comstock
5. Farm for Boys, Valatie
6. Reformatory, Elmira
7. Eastern New York Reformatory, Napanoch
8. Agricultural and Industrial School, Industry
9. Training School for Girls, Hudson
10. Western House of Refuge for Women, Albion
11. Reformatory for Women, Bedford Hills
12. Institution for Feeble-Minded Children, Syracuse
13. Newark State School, Newark
14. Custodial Asylum, Rome – Frank Osborn Test Case for New York Statute
15. Craig Colony for Epileptics, Sonyea
16. Letchworth Village, Thiells
17. Matteawan State Hospital, Beacon
18. State Hospital, Utica
19. State Hospital, Willard
20. Hudson River State Hospital, Poughkeepsie
21. State Hospital, Middletown
22. State Hospital, Buffalo – 12 Salpingectomies
23. State Hospital, Binghamton
24. St. Lawrence State Hospital, Ogdensburg
25. State Hospital, Rochester
26. Gowanda State Hospital, Collins – 29: 24 Salpingectomies; 5 Ovariotomies
27. State Hospital, Kings Park
28. State Hospital, Central Islip
29. Long Island State Hospital, Brooklyn
30. Manhattan State Hospital, Ward’s Island, N.Y.
Total to January 1, 1921: (42) 1 Vasectomy; 36 Salpingectomies; 5 Ovariotomies

(Institutions 3, 4, 5, 8, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25 and 29 did not supply historical comment.) 3. Sing Sing Prison, Ossining; 4. Great Meadow Prison, Comstock; 5. Farm for Boys, Valatie; 8. Agricultural and Industrial School, Industry; 17. Matteawan State Hospital, Beacon; 18. State Hospital, Utica; 19. State Hospital, Willard; 24. St. Lawrence State Hospital, Ogdensburg; 25. State Hospital, Rochester; 29. Long Island State Hospital, Brooklyn.

Auburn State Prison, Auburn, (a) Dr. Frank L. Heacox, Physician.
“The State Commission made a special study of a few cases, but no recommendations were made as to the cases investigated. One operation of double vasectomy was performed on one patient at his own and his family’s request. The patient was a youth twenty years of age, who was suffering from tubercular testicles.” Dr. Heacox stated that, in his opinion, the medical value of the statute was very little, but that eugenically it was invaluable. March, 1918. (b) “Our one case of eugenical sterilization was a voluntary one.” January, 1921.

Custodial Asylum, Rome. Dr. Charles Bernstein, Superintendent, from whose institution the test case for the New York statute arose, reported that there had been no operations under the law in his institution; that he could not in the ordinary course of professional practice perform any operation under this law that would be forbidden or illegal without it; that, in his opinion, “there was no medical value in the statute; and that, instead of being of eugenical value, the statute was a eugenical hindrance.” January, 1918.

Buffalo State Hospital (a) Dr. Arthur W. Hurd, Superintendent, in answer to inquiries, reported that he was doubtful whether the law, as it stood before tested in the courts, was applicable to inmates of the hospitals for the insane. He stated also that in reference to the medical value to the institution: “That it may be of a great deal of value in selected cases, as child-bearing, for instance, brings on recurrent attacks of insanity. Eugenically the statute is of much value in preventing the propagation of defectives. * * * Since 1912 six sterilizations have been done in this institution on women to produce sterility on account of the mental condition, which made it unwise that the patients should have any more children, and in two instances where the mental condition was in unmarried insane women and was accompanied by immoral tendencies. In each one of the cases we obtained the written consent of the relatives, which was filed in the case before such an operation was undertaken. We have always felt that indiscriminate sterilization among the insane was not indicated, but believe very strongly in it, and think it is of very great value in decreasing the number of people who would be born with a bad heredity, and also in saving the strength of women, for instance: If continued child-bearing would weaken the system, and in that way increase the tendency to mental breakdown.” February, 1918. (b) F. W. Parsons, Superintendent. “There have not been any untoward mental or physical effects resulting from our cases of salpingectomy, as the menstruation has continued uninterrupted. Before operating we obtain and file the written consent of husband, parent or guardian. Several defectives of bad moral tendencies were sterilized before they were allowed to go on parole, also a number of insane women with good intelligence and who had repeated attacks of insanity during pregnancy or the puerperium. The sterilization act is not in force in New York State. The hospital assumes the responsibility.” January, 1921.

Gowanda State Hospital, Collins. Dr. C. A. Potter, Superintendent. (a) In answer to inquiry concerning the medical and eugenical values of the statute, Dr. Potter replied: “If properly amended, the law would be of very great value in preventing recurrence of attacks of insanity, one of our cases has proven this conclusively. If enforced, after amendment, its eugenical value would be greater than any law of recent years which applies to institutions.” February, 1918. (b) “We note that several of our patients who have been sterilized have had no mental breakdown since the operation and have been able to fill their places in the household since they have not been exposed to pregnancy. Those cases which became insane on account of child-bearing or have a bad heredity but who could remain outside if not exposed to frequent child-bearing, are selected for sterilization and written consent is obtained from the husband or legal guardian, or nearest relative, the whole process and reasons therefor having been thoroughly explained. The public should be shown that insane, epileptics, feeble-minded and criminals have no right to procreate, from an economic standpoint as well as from the point of eugenics. The insane, feeble-minded, epileptics and criminals of child-bearing age should be sterilized.” January, 1921.”

1922 Eugenics Enforcement, Information and Opinions.

Eugenics Archive.

SOURCE: Reprinted from Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, Harry Hamilton Laughlin, D.Sc., Assistant Director of the Eugenics Record Office, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York, and Eugenics Associate of the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago. Published by Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, December, 1922, Pages 81, 82, 84-87.

1912-1920 Eugenics in New York State

Posted on by
2

This is the story of Frank Osborn, a twenty-two year old man who was chosen to be sterilized by the Board of Examiners of Feeble-Minded (including idiots, imbeciles and morons), Epileptics and Other Defectives in the State of New York in 1915. Frank had committed no crime. He was feeble-minded, which in today’s terms would mean he was developmentally disabled. Frank had the intelligence of an eight year old and had been an inmate at the Rome State Custodial Asylum, Rome, New York, since 1907. Previous to that time, he had been an inmate at the Rochester Industrial School at Rochester, New York. Frank must have born about 1893. I do not know when or where he died, or where he was buried.

The whole point of Eugenics was to stop the defective population (insane, feeble-minded, criminal), from procreating. Frank Osborn was not sterilized because the New York State statute was ruled unconstitutional. What I find disgustingly amazing is the attitude of doctors, lawmakers, and men in general toward women. On page 19 of the testimony given by Dr. Charles Bernstein (The Trial of FRANK OSBORN 9.17.1915), clearly states that a seventeen year old woman had been gang raped but because she was feeble-minded and had been sterilized, the incident was not handled by authorities. “The fact that she was sterile made the authorities feel that it was not a matter for them.” 

To read more about Eugenics in New York State, please click on:
EUGENICS – New York State Timeline 1912-1920

Definitions:
1.Salpingectomy – surgical excision of a fallopian tube.

2. Ovariotomies – surgical incision of an ovary. (Not sure if this procedure is the same as Oophorectomy – the surgical removal of an ovary, called also ovariectomy.)

3. Vasectomy – surgical division or resection of all or part of the vas deferens usually to induce sterility.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Dictionary and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online: http://www.merriam-webster.com/).

4. Eugenics – is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy which advocates for the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and the reduction of reproduction of less desired people and traits.

5. Dysgenics (also known as Cacogenics) – is the study of factors producing the accumulation and perpetuation of defective or disadvantageous genes and traits in offspring of a particular population or species. Dysgenic mutations have been studied in animals such as the mouse and the fruit fly. The term dysgenics was first used as an antonym of eugenics – the social philosophy of improving human hereditary qualities by social programs and government intervention.

6. Defendant -is any party required to answer a plaintiff’s complaint in a civil lawsuit, or any party that has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute. (Respondent is the parallel term used in a proceeding which is commenced by petition).

7. Respondent -is a person who is called upon to issue a response to a communication made by another. In legal usage, this specifically refers to the defendant in a legal proceeding commenced by a petition, or to an appellee, or the opposing party, in an appeal of a decision by an initial fact-finder.

8. Plaintiff – also known as a claimant or complainant, is the term used in some jurisdictions for the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court. In other words, someone who tries to sue. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy, and if successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order (e.g., an order for damages).

9. Appeal – is a process for requesting a formal change to an official decision. The decision maker to whom the appeal is made may be a court, a board, a tribunal or even a single official. Generally, only the party aggrieved below has standing to appeal.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page)

1907 Eugenics

Posted on by
6

The mid-nineteenth century was the dawn of scientific thought and research concerning evolution and the human condition. Three men made an influential mark in history with their provocative theories which are still debated today. These men were: Charles Darwin, “natural selection;” Herbert Spencer, “survival of the fittest;” and Sir Francis Galton, “nature versus nurture.” Galton invented the term “eugenics.” Eugenics is the science of selective breeding in order to manipulate the gene pool and improve the human race. In other words, only certain members of society should be allowed to procreate. One of the goals of the Eugenics Movement was to rid the United States of the dregs of society: the defective, dependent, and delinquent classes by means of forced sterilization.

15 states enacted Eugenics legislation in America: Indiana, Washington, California, Connecticut, Nevada, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Michigan, Kansas, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Oregon, and South Dakota. Eugenics began on March 9, 1907, with Indiana being the first state to enact a law, and ended on December 13, 1921, with Oregon proving the law unconstitutional. But that wasn’t the end. Wisconsin’s law was still active on January 1, 1922. From 1913 to January 1, 1921, the state of Wisconsin performed 76 forced sterilizations on inmates at the Home for Feeble-Minded at Chippewa Falls: 15 males (Vasectomy); and 61 females (Salpingectomy).

New York State passed a Eugenics Law on April 16, 1912, Chapter 445; Declared Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Albany County, March 5, 1918, and by Appellate Division July 1, 1918; and Repealed by the State Legislature, May 10, 1920. Forty-two operations were performed in the State of New York “while the statute was in force, but none of them was performed under this statute; all were performed by special arrangement with the patients and their families under the laws and customs governing ordinary surgical operations.” An agreement was made between the inmate who was targeted for sterilization and the inmate’s family, for permission to perform the needed operation that would make the life of their loved one more comfortable, leaving them to lead a productive, “normal” life. One vasectomy (1) was performed at the Auburn State Prison; twelve salpingectomies (2) at the Buffalo State Hospital; and twenty-four salpingectomies (2) and five ovariotomies (3) by the Gowanda State Hospital at Collins. Buffalo State Hospital opened in December 1880 and Gowanda State Homeopathic Hospital (Collins Farm) opened on August 9, 1898. Both were for the care of the mentally ill and were located in Erie County, New York.

These are the people mentioned in the book as being considered for sterilization and/or involved in litigation. According to my research, none of them were sterilized, with the possible exception of Peter Feilen.

Washington:
Peter Feilen, convicted rapist, inmate; ordered vasectomy, Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

William Henry Harrison, inmate; ordered vasectomy, Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

John Hill, inmate (stole hams for his family); ordered vasectomy, Yakima County, Washington.

Chris McCauley, alias Harry Taylor, inmate; ordered vasectomy, State Reformatory, Monroe, Washington. Formerly at Washington State Penitentiary Walla Walla.

New Jersey:
Alice Smith, epileptic: ordered salpingectomy; State Village for Epileptics at Skillman.

Iowa:
Rudolph Davis, twice convicted of felony; ordered vasectomy; Penitentiary at Fort Madison.

New York:
Frank Osborn, feeble-minded; ordered vasectomy; Rome State Custodial Asylum.

Nevada:
Pearley C. Mickle or Mickie, convict; ordered vasectomy, Elko County.

Michigan:
Nora Reynolds, inmate; ordered sterilization, Michigan Home and Training School at Lapeer.

Oregon:
Jacob Cline, convict; ordered sterilization, Oregon State Penitentiary.

ALL of this information was taken from the book Eugenical Sterilization in the Untied States by Harry Hamilton Laughlin.

Fountain Of The Ages by Charles Haag

Fountain Of The Ages by Charles Haag

Keep The Life Stream Pure

Introduction
Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenics Associate of the Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, and Eugenics Director of Carnegie Institution of Washington, Cold Springs Harbor, N. Y., has rendered the nation a signal service in the preparation of this work, “Eugenical Sterilization in the United States.”

Since the rediscovery of Mendel’s Law of Heredity and the recent advances made by the biologists and psychopathologists in respect to the causes of mental and physical defects in the human race, with the consequent revelation of the great role played by heredity as a producing cause, the science of eugenics has become of vital importance.

“Eugenics,” says Professor Irving Fisher, “stands against the forces which work for racial deterioration, and for improvement and vigor, intelligence and moral fiber of the human race. It represents the highest form of patriotism and humanitarianism, while at the same time it offers immediate advantages to ourselves and to our children. By eugenic measures, for instance, our burden of taxes can be reduced by decreasing the number of degenerates, delinquents and defectives supported in public institutions; such measures will also increase safeguards against crimes committed against our persons or our property.”

America, in particular, needs to protect herself against indiscriminate immigration, criminal degenerates, and race suicide.

The success of democracy depends upon the quality of its individual elements. If in these elements the racial values are high, government will be equal to all the economic, educational, religious and scientific demands of the times. If, on the contrary, there is a constant and progressive racial degeneracy, it is only a question of time when popular self-government will be impossible, and will be succeeded by chaos, and finally a dictatorship.

Dr. Laughlin is well qualified for the work he has undertaken. For twelve years he has been in immediate charge of the Eugenics Record Office (founded in 1910 by Mrs. E. H. Harriman and since 1918 a part of the Carnegie Institution of Washington), located at Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York. There he is engaged in organizing and conducting eugenical investigations. He is, also, Expert Eugenics Agent of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives of Washington, D. C., and recently organized the exhibits of the Second International Congress of Eugenics in New York City.

As a product of scientific research the book will have permanent value. The importance and usefulness of the work is not to be gauged by the extent of its circulation. Enough copies will be published to reach the leaders of the medical, legal and clerical professions, the press and members of legislative bodies.

The Municipal Court of Chicago, which has for years made an intensive study of crime prevention, punishment and suppression, feels privileged to be able to make another notable contribution in this field.

The courts have special functions to perform in the suppression of crime. The first of these is to enforce the laws impartially and justly. Incidental to this duty much original information comes to the judges of our courts, and it has been the policy of the Municipal Court to make public such incidental information, as the relationship between degeneracy and crime and their relationship to heredity, through the reports of its Psychopathic Laboratory. In the performance of this duty the Municipal Court of Chicago has pointed out the need of the permanent segregation of incorrigible defectives, which serves three purposes: First, the protection of society from the individual offender; second, the protection of the individual from himself, and, third, the restriction of propagation of the defective type due to heredity. The alternative to segregation is to continue to do what we have been doing, that is, incarcerate the offender for a time, more or less brief, and then permit him freedom to repeat his offense, and to propagate his kind.

Segregation is necessary, even though sterilization were invoked. Sterilization protects future generations, while segregation safeguards the present as well. The segregation of incorrigible defectives on farm colonies as a measure of crime prevention is urgently needed in the State of Illinois. However, in a number of states, fifteen up to the present time, experiments have been made with sterilization. The two theories of segregation and sterilization are not antagonistic, but both may be invoked.

With the intention of covering every phase of crime prevention, the Municipal Court of Chicago publishes this work as an important contribution to that cause.

We desire to make acknowledgment to the sculptor, Charles Haag, for the use of his “Fountain of the Ages,” to illustrate the significance of heredity and the continuity of the blood stream. Harry Olson, Chief Justice.

Preface
This volume is intended primarily for practical use. It is designed to be of particular service to four classes of persons: First, to law-makers who have to decide upon matters of policy to be worked out in legislation regulating eugenical sterilization; second, to judges of the courts, upon whom, in most of the states having sterilization statutes, devolves the duty of deciding upon the constitutionality of new statutes, and of determining cacogenic individuals and of ordering their sexual sterilization; third, to administrative officers who represent the state in locating, and in eugenically analyzing persons alleged to be cacogenic, and who are responsible for carrying out the orders of the courts; and fourth, to individual citizens who, in the exercise of their civic rights and duties, desire to take the initiative in reporting for official determination and action, specific cases of obvious family degeneracy.

The work is designed also as an historical record of the several types of activities which characterized the early days of modern eugenical sterilization, and of the later working out, through legislation, litigation, experimental administration and scientific research, of a conservative state policy in reference to eugenical sterilization as an aid in protecting the country’s family stocks from deterioration.

The facts here reported have been secured, and the analyses and principles here given have been worked out during the past ten years. The present study was begun by the author in 1911, as secretary of a committee appointed by the Eugenics Section of the American Breeders’ Association “to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population.” Of this committee, Mr. Bleecker Van Wagenen was chairman. He reported a summary of the first year’s work to the First International Congress of Eugenics in London in 1912. In February, 1914, under the authorship of the secretary, it issued bulletins 10-a and 10-b of the Eugenics Record Office, entitled respectively, “The Scope of the Committee’s Work,” and “The Legal, Legislative and Administrative Aspects of Sterilization.”

The statistics reported in this work are brought down to January 1, 1921, and the legal records to January 1, 1922. Great care has been taken to insure completeness and accuracy of record and fact throughout the study, and an attempt has been made to cover the whole field of policy, legality and practice.

Thanks are due for hearty co-operation in securing the facts needed for this work, to the superintendents of the custodial institutions in which eugenical sterilizing operations have been performed, to state officials who willingly supplied copies of official records, to judges of the courts of law before whom seven sterilization statutes have been tested, to the attorneys-at-law who have generously given legal advice and opinions, to many physicians who have been consulted in reference to the medical aspect of the problem, to the scientific field investigators of the Eugenics Record Office, to surgeons who have furnished case-records of persons sexually sterilized, and to authors and publishers of the several text-books on anatomy and surgery who have kindly permitted quotations in reference to the technique of given sterilizing operations.

Besides these many persons who have so generously aided the investigations, special obligations are due to Dr. Charles B. Davenport, Director of the Eugenics Record Office, for many constructive suggestions and for constant encouragement throughout the investigations, and to Hon. Harry Olson, Chief Justice of the Municipal Court of Chicago, for kindly writing the foreword, for rendering an opinion on the legal aspects of sterilization, which appears as Section 1 of Chapter IX, and for publishing the whole of these studies under the auspices of the Psychopathic Laboratory of his court.

Harry Hamilton Laughlin. Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, N. Y., January 1, 1922.”

(SOURCE: Laughlin, Harry Hamilton, Eugenical Sterilization in the Untied States, Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922, Pages v-viii).

Definitions:
1. Salpingectomy – surgical excision of a fallopian tube.

2. Ovariotomies – surgical incision of an ovary. (Not sure if this procedure is the same as Oophorectomy – the surgical removal of an ovary, called also ovariectomy.)

3. Vasectomy – surgical division or resection of all or part of the vas deferens usually to induce sterility.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Dictionary and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online: http://www.merriam-webster.com/).

4. Eugenics – is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy which advocates for the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and the reduction of reproduction of less desired people and traits.

5. Dysgenics (also known as Cacogenics) – is the study of factors producing the accumulation and perpetuation of defective or disadvantageous genes and traits in offspring of a particular population or species. Dysgenic mutations have been studied in animals such as the mouse and the fruit fly. The term dysgenics was first used as an antonym of eugenics – the social philosophy of improving human hereditary qualities by social programs and government intervention.
(SOURCE: Definitions by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page)

1912-1920 Eugenics in New York State.

1920 Margaret Sanger & Eugenics.

1922 Eugenics – New York State.

1907-1909 New York State Feeble-Minded & Epileptic Institutions (Rome)

Posted on by
16

Besides having state insane asylums for the mentally ill, New York State had other institutions for the “care and treatment of its mental defectives.” The medical records and places of anonymous burials of these people, many of whom were children, are unavailable to the public. They are: The Syracuse State Institution for Feeble-Minded Children, (New York Times – Syracuse Asylum), Syracuse, Onondaga County, NY, established in 1851; The New York State Custodial Asylum for Feeble-Minded Women, first opened in 1878 as a branch of the Syracuse State Institution for Feeble-Minded Children, but made an independent institution and located at Newark, Wayne County, NY in 1885; Craig Colony for Epileptics, Sonyea, Livingston County, NY, established in 1892; The Rome State Custodial Asylum, Rome, Oneida County, NY, opened May 1, 1894; Letchworth Village, for the care of feeble-minded and epileptic persons, Thiells, Rockland County, NY, established 1911.

The following excerpts and pictures were reprinted from The Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum for the years 1907, 1908, and 1909.

1907 RSCA Inmates Glee Club

1907 RSCA Inmates Glee Club

1907
FUTURE POLICY.
“We again recommend, as did we last year in our annual report, that arrangements be perfected as soon as possible for separating the sexes and removing all the females from this institution, leaving this a colony purely for males, and that we continue to develop our system of farm colonies for the brighter male inmates to the extent of establishing at least ten such farm colonies with 1,000 acres of land. With such extension of farm lands, we are very sure that we would be in a position to produce all the vegetables required for the maintenance of the asylum as well as all the milk and butter required for the institution.

We continue to feel the necessity, more than ever before, for a separate building for the care of the criminal class of feeble-minded, in which such criminal class may be separated from our general population and be taught trades, and receive the benefit which such continuous occupation will afford them, as well as the institution be benefited through the products of their labor in the manufacture of boots, shoes, clothing, brooms, mats, etc.” (26)

1907 TB Pavilion Exterior

1907 TB Pavilion Exterior

ADMISSIONS.
“The number of admissions during the year, 261, is the largest number by more than 100 that has ever been admitted in any one year’s history of the institution.

The opening of the new ward building J for male inmates, on April 1, 1907, made possible the admission of this large number of cases during the year. Of the number admitted 233 were males and 28 females. It is interesting to note that of the total admissions nearly one-half were under 21 years of age and that 68 were between 16 and 21 years of age, 100 were between the ages of 5 and 16, and 5 below the age of 3. Here again is evidenced the fact that the cases are coming to us at younger ages than heretofore, and this is very desirable as it is during this younger age that most can be done for the feeble-minded, especially the custodial class, toward training them in habits of cleanliness, industry, domestic work, etc.

Of the number admitted during the past year an especially large percentage has been of the more feeble class, as paralytics, with quite a number of cases of tuberculosis, as a result of which we have had more tuberculosis in the institution during the past year than at any time in the previous history of the institution.

Of the admissions this year, 71 came from Greater New York, 61 from county homes, 60 from Syracuse school, 11 from orphan asylums, 9 from reform schools, and 48 direct from their homes.

This tendency of the reform schools indicated above, to transfer their defectives direct to this asylum, again makes it necessary for us to regard the need at this institution for a separate department for the care of the criminal class of feeble-minded separate from our general population. The importance of this can only be fully appreciated through constant daily association with the care of the custodial class of feeble-minded when associated with the criminal classes.

1907 TB Pavilion Interior

1907 TB Pavilion Interior

APPLICATIONS FOR ADMISSION.
We continue to receive, almost every day, applications for the admission of additional cases, and while we stated last year we had 500 applications on file, and during the past year we have admitted 261 cases, still the number of applications on file, for suitable cases for care and treatment here, is over 400, this 400 not including the more than 100 applications which we have received for the admission of epileptics, insane feeble-minded, etc.

However, in this connection, we are of the opinion that were all females to be removed from this asylum, thus creating accommodations here for an additional 300 male inmates in the buildings now occupied by female inmates, and were we to continue our plans for farm colonies for the brighter class of boys to the extent of about 20 per cent, of our population, we will be in a position to accommodate all the applications which we receive for male inmates and thus, when the repairs are completed which are under way at the present time, and the additional repairs contemplated as per our requests for next year of the Legislature, no additional buildings will be required in connection with the main asylum group of buildings for the care of additional cases, with the exception of the separate building of the criminal class as previously referred to.

DISCHARGES AND TRANSFERS.
There were seven males and three females discharged during the year. Of this number four boys were discharged because they were sufficiently improved that they could earn their living and care for themselves outside. Two other boys were discharged to the custody of their families, their parents feeling that they were sufficiently improved that they could be of assistance at home and were practically in a normal condition, and the remaining male was a paralytic and was taken home by his family for home care. Of the females, two were transferred to Newark Custodial Asylum and the other girl was discharged as having been sufficiently improved to be able to properly care for herself and earn her own living.

It continues to be our policy to refuse to discharge all females except as above noted, that is, that no feeble-minded female shall be returned to her family or allowed her freedom after having once been committed to our custody, except that the courts order same, as we believe it should be the policy of the State, after having these cases once committed to its care and custody, that they should retain them, for the protection of society in general and for the economic interests of the State, as well as for the protection of the individual, it having been our experience that when these cases are taken out they are sure to drift into immorality and crime and in the course of a short time application is made to us for their return to the institution, the individual having not only lost all benefit which he had derived from the care, training and treatment here, but also was in much worse condition, both physically and mentally, than when taken away from the institution.

DEATHS.
The death rate during the year was about 4 ½ per cent., there having been 46 deaths, of which number 34 were males and 12 females. The number of deaths from tuberculosis during the year was 10 males and 2 females, this being about the same number as during the preceding year and being about the same percentage of deaths from tuberculosis as the average for the preceding twelve years, that is, about one-third of the deaths is due directly to tuberculosis.

We have had during the year several isolated cases of typhoid fever. However, only one of these cases died and there has been no evidence of the condition spreading or becoming general in nature. The State Board of Health was called upon to assist us in ferreting out the source of infection if possible. However, as the cases were very isolated, no two occurring in one department of the institution and the cases were all confined to inmates, there seemed to be no one source of infection, and as our water supply, milk supply and food supply was free from infection no special importance was placed upon the fact that an occasional one or two isolated cases of typhoid existed in the institution.” (29-32)

ROME STATE CUSTODIAL ASYLUM TRAINING SCHOOL FOR ATTENDANTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN.
“For training attendants in the physical care of the feeble-minded and the physically infirm, and also in the manual, mental, moral and industrial training of the feeble-minded.

The Rome Custodial Asylum is entirely owned and maintained by the State of New York for the care and treatment of feeble-minded and idiotic persons, the following classes being cared for: All of both sexes below the age of seven; all of both sexes between the ages of seven and fourteen who are physically infirm (the ablebodied feeble-minded children who can use language between the ages of seven and fourteen are sent to the Syracuse School for feeble-minded), and cases past the age of fourteen, both sexes, with no further age limit.

The asylum, with its population of 750 (soon to be 1,000) cases, cares for many children, many physically infirm, as cripples, paralytics and bedridden cases, many of the feeble-minded juvenile delinquent class and many adults, among which are a considerable number of the State reformatory classes.

The course of training shall cover two years, of fifty-two weeks each. The first shall be devoted to the training of attendants in all that pertains to the physical care of the physically infirm and mentally enfeebled, and the second year shall be devoted to the training of attendants in the physical, mental, moral and industrial training of the feeble-minded.

For entrance to the school, the applicant shall be twenty-one years of age, and come recommended by two responsible persons who have known the applicant for at least two years, in addition to which the applicant shall file an application, the statements in which are to be sworn to as follows: . . .” (61)

This job paid $20.00 per month for males; $16.00 for females. The hours were: 6:15 AM to 6:00 PM and 6:15 AM to 7:30 PM, on alternating days with one hour off duty every afternoon.

SOURCE: Thirteenth Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum At Rome, N.Y., For The Year Ending September 30, 1907, Adopted At Annual Meeting December 2, 1907, Transmitted To The Legislature February 12, 1908, Albany, J.B. Lyon Company, State Printers, 1908, Pages 26, 29-32, 61.

1908 The American Association for the Study of the Feeble-Minded. In Session at the Asylum June 22 – 25, 1908

1908 The American Association for the Study of the Feeble-Minded. In Session at the Asylum June 22 – 25, 1908

1908-2 Employees Building

1908-2 Employees Building

1908-3 Bailey Farm Colony

1908-3 Bailey Farm Colony

1908-4 Ward D-3

1908-4 Ward D-3

1908-5 Ward E-12

1908-5 Ward E-12

1908-6 Inmates Orchestra

1908-6 Inmates Orchestra

1908-7 Exhibition Of Fancy Work

1908-7 Exhibition Of Fancy Work

1909
SEPARATION OF SEXES.
“The separation of the sexes is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, move that can be made in the direction of economy in management of this asylum, both from the standpoint of a reduced per capita cost of maintenance as well as the betterment of the service. Such separation will allow the inmates the whole freedom of the buildings and grounds, and thus they will require much less supervision when at work or at play to keep them from encroaching on the grounds occupied by the opposite sex, (no fence or partition can prevent the passing of notes or conversation which leads to secret meetings and planned escapes).

1909-8 Brush Farm Colony

1909-8 Brush Farm Colony

Such freedom for the inmates allows of their greater usefulness in doing errands, also in being left to work alone at tasks which they can well do with no supervision. And, too, this freedom from constant supervision, thus throwing the inmate on his own resources and calling into play his own judgment, better qualifies him for the next task, as I have had many opportunities of observing (notwithstanding the overdrawn observation frequently stated that the feeble-minded have no judgment. True, they apparently have none when they are never allowed to use it, and they will continue to show none so long as some supervisor continues to constantly judge for them).

1909-9 Bailey Farm Colony

1909-9 Bailey Farm Colony

Some one may suggest that the damage to property and morals resulting from lack of constant supervision will more than offset any saving that may result in salaries, but to this I say we seldom see a feeble-minded boy when given a suitable task become destructive or meddlesome, even if he is not closely supervised, and I daily see boys at the farm colonies left in the fields to plow, harrow, plant, hoe, etc., with the farmer only occasionally calling around to direct and supervise, and it is seldom indeed that such boys do damage or injury.

1909-10 Inmates Band

1909-10 Inmates Band

Amusements and entertainments have been continued during the year as usual, and all this is made possible through the liberal response received to our annual holiday appeal to relatives and friends of inmates. Such funds have allowed us to place pianos on all the wards and to furnish a liberal supply of music for the band and orchestra as well as an occasional new musical instrument, as mandolins, guitars, horns, violins, etc., for the use of the patients, and I take this opportunity of thanking in behalf of the inmates all who have thus showed their especial interest in the asylum and its work.

1909-11 Inmates Orchestra

1909-11 Inmates Orchestra

I wish to again express my appreciation of the loyal support accorded me by my associate officers and employees, and to most sincerely thank the members of the Board for their continued interest and devotion to the uplift of humanity as exemplified in the work of this asylum.

Respectfully,
CHARLES BERNSTEIN, Superintendent.” (26-28)

SOURCE: Fifteenth Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum At Rome, N.Y., For The Year Ending September 30, 1909, Adopted At Annual Meeting December 6, 1909, Transmitted To The Legislature January 12, 1910, Albany, J.B. Lyon Company, State Printers, 1910, Pages 26-28.

 

1909-12 Inmates Choir

1909-12 Inmates Choir

1909-13 Inmates Mandolin and Guitar Club

1909-13 Inmates Mandolin and Guitar Club

1909-14 Boys Kindergarten

1909-14 Boys Kindergarten

1909-15 Physical Training

1909-15 Physical Training

1909-16 Calisthenics

1909-16 Calisthenics

1909-17 Babies Kindergarten

1909-17 Babies Kindergarten

1909-18 Primary School Work

1909-18 Primary School Work

1909-19 Grammar School Work

1909-19 Grammar School Work

1909-20 Class In Chair Caning

1909-20 Class In Chair Caning

1909-21 Primary Sewing

1909-21 Primary Sewing

1909-22 Primary Sewing

1909-22 Primary Sewing

1909-23 Sewing Class

1909-23 Sewing Class

1909-24 Sewing Class

1909-24 Sewing Class

1909-25 Class In Ironing

1909-25 Class In Ironing

Photographs:
SOURCE: Thirteenth Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum At Rome, N.Y., For The Year Ending September 30, 1907, Adopted At Annual Meeting December 2, 1907, Transmitted To The Legislature February 12, 1908, Albany, J.B. Lyon Company, State Printers, 1908.

SOURCE: Fourteenth Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum At Rome, N.Y., For The Year Ending September 30, 1908, Adopted At Annual Meeting December 7, 1908, Transmitted To The Legislature March 2, 1909, Albany, J.B. Lyon Company, State Printers, 1909.

SOURCE: Fifteenth Annual Report Of The Board Of Managers Of The Rome State Custodial Asylum At Rome, N.Y., For The Year Ending September 30, 1909, Adopted At Annual Meeting December 6, 1909, Transmitted To The Legislature January 12, 1910, Albany, J.B. Lyon Company, State Printers, 1910.

Museum Of disABILITY great resource!