Demographic Patterns of Eugenic Sterilization in Three U.S. States: Mixed Methods Investigation of Reproductive Control of the 'Unfit'

项目摘要/摘要 从1907年美国印第安纳州通过第一部州绝育法到20世纪70年代，大约有6万人 人们是根据优生标准进行绝育的，这些标准旨在限制不适合生育的人的繁殖。我们队有 使用我们创建的20,000多个数据集，对这种做法进行了原始的经验历史分析 加州的绝育批准。历史学家和我们的跨学科合作 流行病学家产生了方法创新，并揭示了重要的发现，包括 对拉丁裔/加州人，特别是年轻的拉丁裔人进行不成比例的绝育，以及 在不同的人口群体和不同的州立医院之间实施同意程序。我们 建议将我们的分析扩展到北卡罗来纳州和爱荷华州，正式确定一种方法，将我们的 定量流行病学方法，结合定性、历史分析。 为了更多地区和更多层次地了解美国的优生绝育 20世纪，我们建议复制和扩展我们对加州优生学记录的分析，以包括 1929年至1974年期间，北卡罗来纳州7068份绝育请愿书的定量和定性数据， 以及1934年至1974年间来自爱荷华州的2185份绝育申请。最终，我们的数据集将包含 近30,000份绝育请愿书，约占美国报告的所有优生绝育的一半 20世纪的美国。 我们将为每个州制作、协调和分析未确认的优生绝育数据集，包括 关于患者的性别、年龄、种族、国籍、诊断、住院所和家族史的数据 考虑进行灭菌。我们将结合个体水平分析优生绝育数据集 人口普查微观数据，估计和比较基于人口的绝育率。我们将深化混合的 方法在我们的R21分析中开发的方法，将定量结果与深入的定性结果相结合 分析患者表格上的注释，以更丰富地了解30,000人的经历 在优生学时代已经绝育。 这项研究与当代人类基因组学中的伦理、法律和社会问题相关，因为它将提供 关于基因决定论的一种特定变体如何导致 国家强制普遍剥夺生育能力。我们将研究优生刻板印象是如何 关于种族和民族、性别、性行为和智力残疾影响了三个州的 干预住院和弱势群体的生殖生活。我们的发现可以作为一种 当代对话的背景是关于正常、残疾和 基因污名可以影射到疾病预防和人类的规范中 进步。

PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT From the passage of the first US state sterilization law in Indiana in 1907 until the 1970s, approximately 60,000 people were sterilized based on eugenic criteria designed to limit the reproduction of the “unfit”. Our team has produced original empirical historical analyses of this practice, using a dataset we created of over 20,000 sterilization approvals from California. Our interdisciplinary collaboration between historians and epidemiologists has generated methodological innovations and revealed important findings, including the disproportionate sterilization of Latina/o Californians, especially young Latinas, and the disparate implementation of consent processes across different demographic groups and different state hospitals. We propose to extend our analysis to North Carolina and Iowa, formalizing a method to rigorously integrate our quantitative epidemiologic approach with qualitative, historical analysis. To capture a more multiregional and layered understanding of eugenic sterilization in the United States in the 20th century, we propose to replicate and extend our analyses of the California eugenics records to include quantitative and qualitative data on 7,068 sterilization petitions from North Carolina between 1929 and 1974, and 2,185 sterilization applications from Iowa between 1934 and 1974. Ultimately our dataset will contain nearly 30,000 sterilization petitions, approximately one half of all eugenic sterilizations reported in the United States in the 20th century. We will produce, harmonize and analyze de-identified eugenic sterilization datasets for each state, including data on the gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, diagnosis, institutional home, and family history of patients considered for sterilization. We will analyze eugenic sterilization datasets in conjunction with individual-level Census microdata, estimating and comparing population-based sterilization rates. We will deepen the mixed methods approaches developed in our R21 analysis, integrating quantitative findings with in-depth qualitative analysis of notes on patient forms to generate a richer understanding of the experiences of 30,000 people sterilized during the eugenics era. This study is relevant to contemporary ethical, legal, and social issues in human genomics, as it will provide new scholarly knowledge about the ways in which a particular variant of genetic determinism resulted in the widespread state-mandated deprivation of reproductive capacity. We will examine how eugenic stereotypes about race and ethnicity, gender, sexual behavior, and intellectual disability influenced three states' interventions into the reproductive lives of institutionalized and vulnerable persons. Our findings can serve as a backdrop for contemporary conversations about the extent to which conceptions of normality, disability, and genetic stigmatization can insinuate themselves into the norms of disease prevention and human improvement.