How the Us Government Shaped Citizenship During the 20Th

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

How the Us Government Shaped Citizenship During the 20Th University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2017 The Reproduction Of Citizenship: How The U.s. Government Shaped Citizenship During The 20th Century By Regulating Fertility, Procreation, And Birth Across Generations Elspeth M. Wilson University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Wilson, Elspeth M., "The Reproduction Of Citizenship: How The U.s. Government Shaped Citizenship During The 20th Century By Regulating Fertility, Procreation, And Birth Across Generations" (2017). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2921. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2921 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2921 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Reproduction Of Citizenship: How The U.s. Government Shaped Citizenship During The 20th Century By Regulating Fertility, Procreation, And Birth Across Generations Abstract Who qualifies, with full status, as an American citizen? Like all modern nation-states, the United States erects and maintains various types of legal and geographic boundaries to demarcate citizens from noncitizens. The literature in political science tends to focus on the ways in which immigration law structures citizenship over time, but this is only half the story. As this dissertation demonstrates, governments also regulate the birth of citizens from one generation to the next. The concept of a ‘civic lineage regime’ is introduced as the domestic counterpart to the ‘immigration regime,’ when it comes to structuring civic membership in the United States (and other nations). To bring visibility to this deeply constitutive yet largely unexamined dimension of American political development, the project engages in a close analysis of U.S. Supreme Court cases targeting civic lineage during the twentieth century. Examining eugenic sterilization laws, birth control, abortion, and welfare reform, the dissertation maintains that the federal and state governments regulate the intimate lives of Americans for many of the same reasons governments seek to control immigration. In both realms, the state makes legal distinctions between who can and cannot become a member by coercively privileging certain visions of American identity over others. This often entrenches hierarchies of citizenship based on race, gender, ethnicity, class, disability, religion, and sexuality. These state-building policies, involving the regulation of reproduction and birth, have the ability to define and redefine the meaning and scope of U.S. citizenship across time by shaping the future “face” of the American polity. Finally, although many older inegalitarian conceptions of civic membership are now discredited, the dissertation concludes with evidence that the conflictual politics involved in constructing an American civic lineage regime continue today in the form of the rise of a new ‘neoliberal ideal of citizenship.’ Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group Political Science First Advisor Rogers M. Smith Keywords American political development, citizenship, civic status, constitutional law, reproduction, right to privacy Subject Categories Political Science This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2921 THE REPRODUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP: HOW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHAPED CITIZENSHIP DURING THE 20th CENTURY BY REGULATING FERTILITY, PROCREATION, AND BIRTH ACROSS GENERATIONS Elspeth M. Wilson A DISSERTATION in Political Science Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2017 Supervisor of Dissertation Signature ______________________ Rogers M. Smith Christopher H. Brown Distinguished Professor of Political Science; Associate Dean for Social Sciences Graduate Group Chairperson Signature ______________________ Matthew Levendusky, Associate Professor of Political Science Dissertation Committee Nancy Hirschmann, Professor of Political Science Anne Norton, Professor of Political Science Adolph Reed, Professor of Political Science THE REPRODUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP: HOW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHAPED CITIZENSHIP DURING THE 20th CENTURY BY REGULATING FERTILITY, PROCREATION, AND BIRTH ACROSS GENERATIONS COPYRIGHT 2017 Elspeth Megan Wilson This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ For my grandmother and my mother, Leta and Carol iii ABSTRACT THE REPRODUCTION OF CITIZENSHIP: HOW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SHAPED CITIZENSHIP DURING THE 20th CENTURY BY REGULATING FERTILITY, PROCREATION, AND BIRTH ACROSS GENERATIONS Elspeth M. Wilson Rogers M. Smith Who qualifies, with full status, as an American citizen? Like all modern nation-states, the United States erects and maintains various types of legal and geographic boundaries to demarcate citizens from noncitizens. The literature in political science tends to focus on the ways in which immigration law structures citizenship over time, but this is only half the story. As this dissertation demonstrates, governments also regulate the birth of citizens from one generation to the next. The concept of a ‘civic lineage regime’ is introduced as the domestic counterpart to the ‘immigration regime,’ when it comes to structuring civic membership in the United States (and other nations). To bring visibility to this deeply constitutive yet largely unexamined dimension of American political development, the project engages in a close analysis of U.S. Supreme Court cases targeting civic lineage during the twentieth century. Examining eugenic sterilization laws, birth control, abortion, and welfare reform, the dissertation maintains that the federal and state governments regulate the intimate lives of Americans for many of the same reasons governments seek to control immigration. In both realms, the state makes legal distinctions between who can and cannot become a member by coercively privileging certain visions of American identity over others. This often entrenches hierarchies of citizenship based on race, gender, ethnicity, class, disability, religion, and sexuality. These state-building policies, involving the regulation of reproduction and birth, have the ability to define and redefine the meaning and scope of U.S. citizenship across time by shaping the future “face” of the American polity. Finally, although many older inegalitarian conceptions of civic membership are now discredited, the dissertation concludes with evidence that the conflictual politics involved in constructing an American civic lineage regime continue today in the form of the rise of a new ‘neoliberal ideal of citizenship.’ iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... IV CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: CITIZENS NEVER BORN ....................................................................... 32 CHAPTER 3: BIRTH CONTROL IN THE SHADE OF EUGENICS .......................... 114 CHAPTER 4: FROM GRISWOLD TO ROE ................................................................ 151 CHAPTER 5: PRIVATIZING ABORTION .................................................................. 215 CHAPTER 6: THE END OF WELFARE ...................................................................... 285 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 379 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 392 v CHAPTER 1: Introduction All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they reside.— Citizenship Clause, Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution I am speaking of the average citizens, the average men and women who make up the nation…Into the woman's keeping is committed the destiny of the generations to come after us…the foundation of all national happiness and greatness.— Theodore Roosevelt, 1905 Perhaps our brightest hope for the future lies in the lessons of the past. As each new wave of immigration has reached America it has been faced with problems…[but] Somehow, the difficult adjustments are made and people get down to the tasks of earning a living, raising a family, living with their neighbors, and, in the process, building a nation. –John F. Kennedy, 1964 Children are, after all, our country’s most precious resource and our most important responsibility.—William J. Clinton, 1996 In May 2002, Virginia’s Governor Mark Warner issued a formal apology for the more than eight thousand Virginians who were forcibly sterilized from 1924 to 1979, under a state law that permitted such treatment of individuals deemed likely to produce “socially inadequate offspring.”1 The first in a series of governors to apologize for their state’s eugenics programs during the twentieth century, Warner’s act coincided with the 75th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Buck v. Bell, which upheld Virginia's 1 William Branigin, “Virginia Apologizes to the Victims of Sterilizations,”
Recommended publications
  • Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck V. Bell Kevin E
    Georgia State University Law Review Volume 26 Article 6 Issue 4 Summer 2010 March 2012 A Review of Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell Kevin E. Grady Follow this and additional works at: https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Kevin E. Grady, A Review of Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell, 26 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. (2012). Available at: https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol26/iss4/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at Reading Room. It has been accepted for inclusion in Georgia State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Reading Room. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Grady: A Review of Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supre A REVIEW OF THREE GENERATIONS, NO IMBECILES: EUGENICS, THE SUPREME COURT, AND BUCK V.V. BELL Kevin E. Grady*Grady· Professor Paul Lombardo has been a man on a mission since 1980, and he has culminated his quest by writing a wonderfully insightful book that should be required readingreading for any attorney practicing healthcare lawlaw or any attorney interestedinterested in reproductive freedom.freedom.' I Most of us have probably not thoughtthOUght much about the Supreme Court case of Buck v. BellBeZP2 since our first year Constitutional Law class when we read Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's famous quotation: "Three generations of imbeciles are enough.,,3enough."3 In that case, the Supreme Court upheld
    [Show full text]
  • Sterilization and Abortion Policy Billing Instructions
    Sterilization and Abortion Policy Billing Instructions Table of contents Table of contents ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Hysterectomy ............................................................................................................................................ 2 Acknowledgement forms ..................................................................................................................... 2 Prior authorization requirements ......................................................................................................... 2 Covered services ................................................................................................................................... 2 Intrauterine Devices and Subdermal Implants ......................................................................................... 4 Family planning: sterilization .................................................................................................................... 4 Prior authorization requirements ......................................................................................................... 5 Covered services ................................................................................................................................... 5 Abortion .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Claim
    [Show full text]
  • From Far More Different Angles: Institutions for the Mentally Retarded in the South, 1900-1940
    "FROM FAR MORE DIFFERENT ANGLES": INSTITUTIONS FOR THE MENTALLY RETARDED IN THE SOUTH, 1900-1940 By STEVEN NOLL A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1991 To Dorothy and Fred Noll, and Tillie Braun. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In the five years this work has consumed my life, I have accumulated more debts than I care to imagine- I can never repay them; all I can do is acknowledge them with heartfelt thanks and hope I haven't left anyone out. The financial help provided by the University of Florida Department of History was essential, for without it, this project could not have even been started, much less completed. I would also like to thank the Rockefeller Archive Center, Pocantico Hills, New York and the North Caroliniana Society of Chapel Hill, North Carolina for their travel to collection grants which enabled me to conduct much of my research. My supervising committee has provided me with guidance, support, and help at every step of the process. Special thanks to Kermit Hall, my chairman, for his faith in my abilities and his knack for discovering the truly meaningful in my work. He always found time for my harried questions, even in the middle of an incredibly busy schedule. The other committee members, Robert Hatch, Michael Radelet, Bertram Wyatt-Brown, and Robert Zieger, all provided valuable intellectual advice and guidance. Michael Radelet also proved that good teaching, good research, and social 111 activism are not mutually exclusive variables.
    [Show full text]
  • September, 2013 ARTHUR GARFIELD HAYS CIVIL LIBERTIES
    New York University A private university in the public service School of Law Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program 40 Washington Square South New York, New York 10012-1099 Directors Professor Norman Dorsen Telephone: (212) 998-6233 Email: [email protected] Professor Sylvia A. Law Tel: (212) 998-6233 Email: [email protected] Professor Helen Hershkoff Tel: (212) 998-6285 Email: [email protected] September, 2013 ARTHUR GARFIELD HAYS CIVIL LIBERTIES PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT 2012-2013 As detailed below, this was another busy and productive year for the Hays Program. This year will be remembered for the Court's recognition of same-sex marriage, and for the continued vitality, even if in a weakened state, of affirmative action. Hays Fellows played an important role in these victories. Vinay Harpalani (Hays Fellow 2008-2009) brought decades of study of diversity in education to aid the team preparing the Society of American Law Teachers’ amicus brief in Fisher v. Texas. Many Fellows made important contributions to the victories in marriage equality, including Jenny Pizer (Hays Fellow 1986-1987). In other news, Tara Urs (Hays Fellow 2004-2005) joined the faculty at Seattle Law School. Chip Gray and Alan Houseman, both 1967-1968, retired. Chip headed the South Brooklyn Legal Services from 1970 to 2012 and Alan stepped down as head of the Center for Law and Social Policy. David Milton (Hays Fellow 2000-2001) made partner at Howard Freidman, CPC, a civil rights law firm in New York City. Some Former Fellows have written to tell us of important civil liberties victories in their practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Nineteenth Century Understandings of Puerperal Insanity at Dix Hospital
    UNNATURAL MOTHERS: Nineteenth Century Understandings of Puerperal Insanity at Dix Hospital Hannah Frisch A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in the Department of American Studies in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Robert Allen (Thesis Advisor) Department of American Studies Michelle Robinson Department of American Studies Tim Marr Department of American Studies Table of Contents. Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ..................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1: Statistical Understandings and Comparisons ........................................ 16 Chapter 2: Amelia B. ............................................................................................... 31 Chapter 3: Bettie J. .................................................................................................. 43 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 55 Appendix. ................................................................................................................ 58 Bibliography ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Search Titles and Presenters at Past AAHN Conferences from 1984
    American Association for the History of Nursing, Inc. 10200 W. 44th Avenue, Suite 304 Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone: (303) 422-2685 Fax: (303) 422-8894 [email protected] www.aahn.org Titles and Presenters at Past AAHN Conferences 1984 – 2010 Papers remain the intellectual property of the researchers and are not available through the AAHN. 2010 Co-sponsor: Royal Holloway, University of London, England September 14 - 16, 2010 London, England Photo Album Conference Podcasts The following podcasts are available for download by right-clicking on the talk required and selecting "Save target/link as ..." Fiona Ross: Conference Welcome [28Mb-28m31s] Mark Bostridge: A Florence Nightingale for the 21st Century [51Mb-53m29s] Lynn McDonald: The Nightingale system of training and its influence worldwide [13Mb-13m34s] Carol Helmstadter: Nightingale Training in Context [15Mb-16m42s] Judith Godden: The Power of the Ideal: How the Nightingale System shaped modern nursing [17Mb-18m14s] Barbra Mann-Wall: Nuns, Nightingale and Nursing [15Mb-15m36s] Dr Afaf Meleis: Nursing Connections Past and Present: A Global Perspective [58Mb-61m00s] 2009 Co-sponsor: School of Nursing, University of Minnesota September 24 - 27, 2009 Minneapolis, Minnesota Paper Presentations Protecting and Healing the Physical Wound: Control of Wound Infection in the First World War Christine Hallett ―A Silent but Serious Struggle Against the Sisters‖: Working-Class German Men in Nursing, 1903- 1934 Aeleah Soine, PhDc The Ties that Bind: Tale of Urban Health Work in Philadelphia‘s Black Belt, 1912-1922 J. Margo Brooks Carthon, PhD, RN, APN-BC The Cow Question: Solving the TB Problem in Chicago, 1903-1920 Wendy Burgess, PhD, RN ―Pioneers In Preventative Health‖: The Work of The Chicago Mts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sociopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America
    Voces Novae Volume 11 Article 3 2019 Engineering Mankind: The oS ciopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America Megan Lee [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/vocesnovae Part of the American Politics Commons, Bioethics and Medical Ethics Commons, Genetics and Genomics Commons, and the History Commons Recommended Citation Lee, Megan (2019) "Engineering Mankind: The ocS iopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America," Voces Novae: Vol. 11, Article 3. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Voces Novae by an authorized editor of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lee: Engineering Mankind: The Sociopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America Engineering Mankind: The Sociopolitical Impact of Eugenics in America Megan Lee “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind…Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”1 This statement was made by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. while presenting the court’s majority opinion on the sterilization of a seventeen-year old girl in 1927. The concept of forced sterilization emerged during the American Eugenics Movement of the early 20th century. In 1909, California became one of the first states to introduce eugenic laws which legalized the forced sterilization of those deemed “feeble-minded.” The victims were mentally ill patients in psychiatric state hospitals, individuals who suffered from epilepsy and autism, and prisoners with criminal convictions, all of whom were forcibly castrated.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Discursive Constructions of Motherhood and Depression in Emerging Adult Talk Surrounding Maternal Depression
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Denver University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 1-1-2015 “She Can Be a Superhero, but She Needs Her Day Off”: Exploring Discursive Constructions of Motherhood and Depression in Emerging Adult Talk Surrounding Maternal Depression Leah Seurer University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Gender, Race, Sexuality, and Ethnicity in Communication Commons, and the Social Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Seurer, Leah, "“She Can Be a Superhero, but She Needs Her Day Off”: Exploring Discursive Constructions of Motherhood and Depression in Emerging Adult Talk Surrounding Maternal Depression" (2015). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 589. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/589 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. “She can be a super hero, but she needs her day off”: Exploring Discursive Constructions of Motherhood and Depression in Emerging Adult Talk Surrounding Maternal Depression ________________ A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of Social Sciences University of Denver ________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ________________ by Leah M. Seurer June 2015 Dr. Elizabeth Suter ©Copyright by Leah M. Seurer 2015 All Rights Reserved Author: Leah M. Seurer Title: “She can be a super hero, but she needs her day off”: Exploring discursive constructions of motherhood and depression in emerging adult talk surrounding maternal depression Advisor: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • “Becoming a Mother Is Nothing Like You See on TV!”: a Reflexive Autoethnography Exploring Dominant Cultural Ideologies of Motherhood
    MORAN, EMILY JEAN, Ph.D. “Becoming a Mother is Nothing Like You See on TV!”: A Reflexive Autoethnography Exploring Dominant Cultural Ideologies of Motherhood. (2014) Directed by Dr. Leila E. Villaverde. 348 pp. Mothers in contemporary American society are bombarded with images and stereotypes about motherhood. Dominant cultural discourses of motherhood draw from essentialist and socially constructed ideologies that are oppressive to women. This study uses autoethnographic research methods to explore the author’s experiences becoming a mother. Feminist theory is utilized to analyze the themes, the silences, and the absences in the autoethnographic stories. Using a feminist theoretical lens allows the author to deconstruct the hegemonic ideologies that shape the experience becoming a mother. I examine the role of dominant ideologies of motherhood in my own life. I explore the practices of maternal gatekeeping paying particular attention to the role of attachment theory in shaping the ideology of intensive mothering. I argue that autoethnography as a research method allows writers and readers to cross borders so long as they practice deep reflexivity and allow themselves to be vulnerable. This research is similar to Van Maanen’s (1988) confessional tale, where the researcher writes about the process that takes place behind the scenes of the research project. In this project, I write an autoethnography and then I describe the process of analysis, vulnerability, and reflexivity while examining the themes and silences within the data. “BECOMING A MOTHER IS NOTHING LIKE YOU SEE ON TV!”: A REFLEXIVE AUTOETHNOGRAPHY EXPLORING DOMINANT CULTURAL IDEOLOGIES OF MOTHERHOOD by Emily Jean Moran A Dissertation Submitted to the the Faculty of The Graduate School at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Greensboro 2014 Approved by Leila E.
    [Show full text]
  • Sterilization As a Family Planning Method
    December 2018 | Fact Sheet Sterilization as a Family Planning Method Sterilization is a permanent method of contraception, and is the most commonly used form of family planning among couples both in the United States and worldwide. For men and women who no longer want to have children, sterilization offers a permanent, safe, cost-effective and efficacious way to prevent unintended pregnancy. Male sterilization is less common than female sterilization, but both are nearly 100% effective at preventing pregnancy. The Affordable Care Act’s no-cost coverage of sterilization has increased the affordability of the procedure for women, but it is still unclear the overall effect this will have on future utilization rates. Recent changes to insurance coverage policy, broader availability of long- acting contraceptives, as well as changes in the health care delivery system may reshape the choices that men and women make regarding the use of sterilization as a contraceptive method. This fact sheet explains the types of sterilization procedures available to women and men, reviews private insurance and Medicaid coverage policy, and discusses issues that affect availability in the U.S. Female Sterilization Female sterilization is an Figure 1 outpatient surgical Prevalence of Sterilization Among Women 15 to 44 Who procedure. The procedure Report Using a Reversible or Permanent Contraceptive blocks the fallopian tubes, Method, 2013-2015, by Selected Characteristics preventing eggs from All women, ages 15-44 22% travelling down the tubes to the uterus and blocking Ages 25-34 19% sperm from fertilizing the Ages 35-44 39% egg. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Black 26% Hispanic 25% Prevention (CDC) show that White 21% among women ages 15 to 44 who use a contraceptive ≥ 200% FPL 16% method, one in five used ≤ 200% FPL 29% tubal ligation as their method 1 of contraception.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Boundary Increase Nomination
    Nrlj Form 10-000 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Rev, Aug 2002) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGjSTRATION FORM '',:.I 'i~rrn1s lor rlst: 111 nnn:lnsllrlg or rccluesling deterr~~inalionsfor individual properks and dislrrcts. See rfis:ruct~onsIn biow?~COIH#/CIB ltle Idat~ot~alRo~!sfe~-uf +:,<'o:I:: (':,?srs~~?~I:.I!JIIOR FO~II?(Natlonol Register Bulletiri 16A) Cornplele each rlern by rnarking 'x" tn Ihe appropriatr: !%x cr !:v enlcrlng the ~nfom~alron I If al::? !!em doas no! apply lo !he properly being docurnen?ed.enter "MIA" for "not applrcaSle." For furlctigns, architectt~ralclass~fication. nlarer~als, and ,!1(:;1?:)! :.!yln:l!ci7l1ce. rrller only calegor!es and subcate~oriesfrom the instruclions. Place atcdit~onalentr~es and natralrue ~lenison conl!nualdcn sheers (NF'S +:!IT:'!! '.l'l?:? t (.Is? 8 \yl)e:vrl!er. twrr! :>rocessor, or cornpuler. 10 complete 311 rtenis -----------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------*------------ ----------------------------------- 1. Name of Property -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- h~stor~cname Western State Hospital, Boundaw Increase 2007 other nzmes/srte number Western State Hospital Steam Generatinq Plant, VDHR File No. 132-0009-0027 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Sterilization of the Developmentally Disabled: Shedding Some Myth-Conceptions
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 9 Issue 4 Article 3 Fall 1981 Sterilization of the Developmentally Disabled: Shedding Some Myth-Conceptions Deborah Hardin Ross Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Disability Law Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Recommended Citation Deborah H. Ross, Sterilization of the Developmentally Disabled: Shedding Some Myth-Conceptions, 9 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 599 (1981) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol9/iss4/3 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STERILIZATION OF THE DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED:* SHEDDING SOME MYTH-CONCEPTIONS DEBORAH HARDIN Ross I. Introduction ..................................... 600 II. Non-Consensual Sterilization Under Statutory Au- thority .......................................... 602 A. Sociological, Legislative, and Judicial Back- ground ..................................... 602 B. Analysis of Present Statutes .................. 606 1. To Whom Applied ...................... 607 2. Procedure .............................. 607 3. Justification for Sterilization ............. 608 4. Standards .............................. 609 C. Substantive Due Process ..................... 609 1. No Compelling State Interest ............ 611 a. Justifications and False Assumptions
    [Show full text]