Forced Sterilization Update for Victims in North Carolina
Anderson uncovers the secret world of forced sterilization in this country and speaks with 82-year-old Charlie, who was forcibly sterilized at the age of 14 because his parents were alcoholics and he was in an orphanage.
CNN Senior Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen spoke to Charlie about the incident that robbed him of ever having children, and revealed that California politicians are unwilling to answer questions about what happened.
In North Carolina, however, the General Assembly passed the first bill that would pay these victims whowere sterilized from 1929 to 1974. The measure would set aside $11 million next year to pay remaining survivors $50,000 each. Visit GastonGazette.com for the full update. Also see the Winston-SalemJournal.
Charlie's former caregiver, Rudy, felt it was important to reach out and share Charlie's story in the hopes that Charlie may receive justice and compensation for the emotional distress he has endured.
Sadly, since the show taped, Charlie passed away from pneumonia on March 28.
Comments
I watched the show on forced sterilization. I believe the practice was very prevalent all over the US - and especially at the Indian reservations -IHS
I have no proof because I was a child and just remember adult conversations growing up on the Fort Peck Indian reservation in Montana. (I am not an Indian)
in case you care to look into this.
I am from Canada but just had to log in for the first time . This was awful.....
I can not imagine this happening to me . I have 2 children and 4 grandchildren .
I applauded this lady for saying she would not accept $50000.00. You can't even put a amount on this being done to you never mind never having children. I felt bad for the82 year old man to have no children/grandchildren to help him and just be there.
I hope everyone gets acknowledge for what was done and can move on feeling they have been heard.
Anderson, YES - this forced sterilization is an OUTRAGE, but your piece does NOT tell the viewers which specific organization the governments of these 30 states appointed to do their dirty work ! Was it Planned Parenthood, (as an example) ?
We can blame the State Legislators all we want; who are immune from prosecution, but we can sue the crap out of a specific entities that perform such crimes against humanity - so PLEASE give us "The Rest Of The Story " !!!
RIP CHARLIE--YOU GOT YOUR WINGS TO BE WITH ARE LORD IN HEAVEN!!!!
Please tell me where to write to help these people.I'm so sorry that our country did that to u all.my prayers r with all of you.vickie wenger
so it seems that america, the so said "state of freedom" were acting just like the nazis. there's not such a huge difference between the holocaust and what happened in the US. take care US citizens: you're only beeing offered an ilusion f liberty, and this illusion is begining to be sold around the world. they're planning to sell it to us all.... how is it posible to offer 50000 $ for destroying your whole life? this is unacceptable, and you should rise up and not allow this sort of injustice. your soldiers say they fight for human rights and democracy around the world, but you don't have this in your own country. Wake up US citizens! this is utterly a shame on your country and all of you are responsible for allowing this to happen!!!!!
First, I want to thank the Anderson Cooper Show for bringing a horrible part of American history to the public. This topic has been hidden for way too long.
Anderson Cooper has been very supportive on the issue of forced sterilization. For this I want to thank him personally. Charlie Follett was my Uncle Charles. I am one of two nieces Charles had. My mother is his only sister. Over the years my sister and I never had cousins to share things with and grow up with.
California has brushed this issue under the carpet for years in order to have the victims die of old age and become silent. Well, California got what it wanted because on March 28, 2012, my Uncle Charles lost his battle when he died that morning. Ironically, it was also my first grandchild's 1-year birthday, Charles's great niece.
Thank you for the supportive comments from the kind people who have followed this horrific subject. For the others who have a different viewpoint, I can only hope and pray that you may never be affected by your government deciding your future.
Uncle Charles, may you finally rest in peace...May the Lord watch over you...and give you comfort knowing that you are in a better place...Love, your niece, Sharon
State should not pay anyone-see conmment for woman some subject
Mr. Cooper: I have written about this sterilization effort, citing many cases. I fear the current Healthcare Plan is going to lead again to the government taking the privacy rights away again. Attached is an article I wrote on my website:TheAmericanCommoner'sGuide.com
Up until the 1960...s, State and Federal governments made it very difficult for women to get their hands on contraception . But now, the Federal government wants to mandate that every woman have free contraception. Is this government benevolence? Or, is the reality of this generous, caring concern for women’s reproduction just one more Eugenics-type intrusion on women, specifically poor women by a small faction of elites?
Eugenics was popular with wealthy, educated elites at the beginning of the 1900s. It was the theory of controlled, selective breeding. This new idea swept across America and was instituted into laws which although affected individual Freedom and Liberty, had the feigned goal to promote the health, safety and welfare of society as a whole.
In 1927, when a young girl challenged her mandated sterilization, the U.S. Supreme Court relied on the popular social theory of Eugenics, not the words and spirit of the Constitution to decide her case. In Buck v. Bell , 274 U.S. 200 (1927), the Court rationalized that an individual’s Right to their Freedom and Liberty could be taken by the government when it upheld a Virginia law which required sterilization of those deemed to be mentally defective.
Eugenics was still going strong in America over a decade later. In 1935, the state of Oklahoma acting in accordance with a Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act was going to sterilize Jack Skinner, a man accused of being a thief. But, in 1935, the Supreme Court rather than acting as the social conscience for America, restrained their personal ideology and limited their role to Jurist, interpreting the law within the confines of the U.S. Constitution when this sterilization Act was challenged in the case Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment due process and equal protection clauses.
The Court in this case said, “We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, far-reaching and devastating effects…Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty.”
While Eugenics supporters claimed selective breeding was necessary for the health, safety and longevity of American society, other political and social “leaders” claimed controlling the dissemination of contraceptives and criminalizing interracial marriages were also legitimate methods of government control to safeguard the health of woman to orderly pursue happiness.
Each time the government votes in new laws, regulations and Acts to control a citizen’s Right to individual Liberty and Freedom, it takes decades, and generations to reclaim those fundamental Rights.
Twenty years after the sterilization cases, women were still fighting for their individual Right to control their own body. In 1962, an important case, Griswold v. Connecticut (391 U.S. 145, 85 S. CT. 1678 (1965) challenged a women’s Right to access contraception. Griswold won based on the Right to Privacy claimed to be implicit in the Constitution.
Then in 1972, the Supreme Court overturned a Massachusett’s law which forbid contraception to unmarried individuals. The 1972 case was Eisenstadt v. Baird 405 U.S. 438 (1972). The Court used the Right of Privacy as their basis for deciding against the State. The Court said in part, “If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.
In America, where the “law of the land” is suppose to protect and support individual Freedom and Liberty, American government representatives have been bullied by a few vocal factions as in the past. The popular social and political attitudes of a few seem to continue today to dictate laws and regulations for many.
Slavery to one’s government is worse than slavery to one master. You can’t run away from the government. Former-slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglas opined, “When slaves asked for virtuous freedom, the cunning slaveholder, knowing his ignorance, cheats him with a dose of vicious dissipation, artfully labeled with the name of liberty.”
Americans need to learn from their own history, and stop pushing individual Freedom and Liberty aside for the latest social saviors, or Americans will continue to repeat the sorrows of the past and create unimaginable grief for the future.
Written by Cynthia M. Ramirez – The American Commoner’s Guide.com
Please read the following sterilization cases. This is why Americans do not want a gov't healthcare plan. Just look at what New York is doing to their citizens regarding food.
The Federal government wants to mandate that every woman have free contraception. Is this government benevolence? Or, is the reality of this generous, caring concern for women’s reproduction just one more Eugenics-type intrusion on women, specifically poor women by a small faction of elites?
Eugenics was popular with wealthy, educated elites at the beginning of the 1900s. It was the theory of controlled, selective breeding. This new idea swept across America and was instituted into laws which although affected individual Freedom and Liberty, had the feigned goal to promote the health, safety and welfare of society as a whole.
In 1927, when a young girl challenged her mandated sterilization, the U.S. Supreme Court relied on the popular social theory of Eugenics, not the words and spirit of the Constitution to decide her case. In Buck v. Bell , 274 U.S. 200 (1927), the Court rationalized that an individual’s Right to their Freedom and Liberty could be taken by the government when it upheld a Virginia law which required sterilization of those deemed to be mentally defective.
Eugenics was still going strong in America over a decade later. In 1935, the state of Oklahoma acting in accordance with a Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act was going to sterilize Jack Skinner, a man accused of being a thief. But, in 1935, the Supreme Court rather than acting as the social conscience for America, restrained their personal ideology and limited their role to Jurist, interpreting the law within the confines of the U.S. Constitution when this sterilization Act was challenged in the case Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942) as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment due process and equal protection clauses.
The Court in this case said, “We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. The power to sterilize, if exercised, may have subtle, far-reaching and devastating effects…Any experiment which the State conducts is to his irreparable injury. He is forever deprived of a basic liberty.”
While Eugenics supporters claimed selective breeding was necessary for the health, safety and longevity of American society, other political and social “leaders” claimed controlling the dissemination of contraceptives and criminalizing interracial marriages were also legitimate methods of government control to safeguard the health of woman to orderly pursue happiness.
Each time the government votes in new laws, regulations and Acts to control a citizen’s Right to individual Liberty and Freedom, it takes decades, and generations to reclaim those fundamental Rights.
Twenty years after the sterilization cases, women were still fighting for their individual Right to control their own body. In 1962, an important case, Griswold v. Connecticut (391 U.S. 145, 85 S. CT. 1678 (1965) challenged a women’s Right to access contraception. Griswold won based on the Right to Privacy claimed to be implicit in the Constitution.
Then in 1972, the Supreme Court overturned a Massachusett’s law which forbid contraception to unmarried individuals. The 1972 case was Eisenstadt v. Baird 405 U.S. 438 (1972). The Court used the Right of Privacy as their basis for deciding against the State. The Court said in part, “If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.
In America, where the “law of the land” is suppose to protect and support individual Freedom and Liberty, American government representatives have been bullied by a few vocal factions as in the past. The popular social and political attitudes of a few seem to continue today to dictate laws and regulations for many.
Slavery to one’s government is worse than slavery to one master. You can’t run away from the government. Former-slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglas opined, “When slaves asked for virtuous freedom, the cunning slaveholder, knowing his ignorance, cheats him with a dose of vicious dissipation, artfully labeled with the name of liberty.”
Americans need to learn from their own history, and stop pushing individual Freedom and Liberty aside for the latest social saviors, or Americans will continue to repeat the sorrows of the past and create unimaginable grief for the future.
Written by Cynthia M. Ramirez – The American Commoner’s Guide.com
Government did nothing; it was those in government who committed these crimes. Men and women collectively or individually were harmed by other men and women not some fiction, not by some concept the ignorant refer to as government. All those connected with this atrocity should lose all their property and go the prison for the remainder of their natural lives.
This one is for you Charlie! Our heart goes out to you in heaven-we are your family and you will never be forgotten no matter how a few evil people tried to manipulate you and our population. Godspeed and RIP my friend.
My condolences to all of the victims of this horrendous practice. It must have been hard for Charlie to not have his own children to take care of him when he got older, but hopefully he lived a full life and was well cared for by his caregivers. My hope is that the victims who are still alive can receive closure from this injustice and move on with their lives.
Today's show has touched me deeply. While I can't comprehend the pain of the unknown sterilization, I know first hand the frustration of dealing with uncaring legislators. I live in SC and have an autoimmune disorder. As a result, my digestive system has become paralyzed. The drug I need to take in order to be able to eat must be ordered from Canada. There is one drug available in the US, but it has serious neurological side effects, and I have enough of those without the drug, so I need a safer drug, hence the one from Canada.
I've been told by two doctors that without eating, I'll die. It's that simple, and this drug enables me to eat. Proposed legislation will prohibit me from ordering the drug, crossing the border. I have contacted my US representatives and most have been understanding and supportive, however Senator Lindsey Graham refuses to talk to me. The irony is I live in his home county, so I reached out to him for help. But he won't even answer my calls or letters.
A friend of mine wrote him about me, and he did send a form letter, a response addressing people going to Canada seeking lower cost drugs. How sad that he missed the point entirely. I called and the answer I got from the aide was, "The Senator can't be bothered to answer every letter individually, so we just send form letters that address the basic situation." Really????? We're talking about MY LIFE and the Senator can't be bothered to address me individually????
Sorry Senator, I can't be bothered to vote for you EVER again!
I'm not at all surprised by the uncaring nature of the legislators involved in today's feature. I personally think it's time for a shake up in Washington, and perhaps term limits might be a good starting point.
Maria Stamey
North Carolina sanctioned and authorized an entire network of social, business, and medical professionals to seek out, recommend, and sterilize citizens. The state went one step further and LEGALLY protected those involved in implementing the state authorized eugenics program from any type of prosecution.
Many of the victims would be gratified to receive restitution and consider it closure. Again and again, the state has backed away from doing the right thing citing a host of possible imagined ramifications.
My grandmother and great-aunt (both deceased) were sterilized under the authority of North Carolina. My family actively wants to see the living victims receive overdue justice.
Those our state sterilized were targeted, violated and abused, robbed of the most basic of human rights then summarily discarded.
When an individual perpetrates crimes of this magnitude he or she can face prosecution and incarceration. Unfortunately, the victims can't incarcerate the state of North Carolina.
I, too, am a taxpayer, and I believe we must do something tangible for the victims. The crimes committed against our people were unimaginable. It is equally unimaginable that our state should, once again, turn its back on those it violated.
It's time North Carolina does right by the victims.