Eugenics and Disability Discrimination

Abstract

Testimony presented during the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (P. L . 101-336) indicated the continued existence of discrimination based upon a disability . Many persons, including academics, do not believe that such discrimination exists nor do they believe that some of the most threatening discrimination in the US is based in state law . This paper details these state laws (past and present) in the area of domestic relations and presents the historical cause for the enactment of the discriminatory laws . The Eugenics Movement using (somewhat wrongly) Darwin's evolutionary theory was and continues to be the force behind them . Policy implications are presented in the conclusion.

Avoiding Genetic Genocide: Understanding Good Intentions and Eugenics in the Complex Dialogue Between the Medical and Disability Communities

“…28 Parenting rights of disabled people are also limited, the purported justification being the protection of the health and safety of children who perhaps would not be adequately cared for by a disabled caretaker. 27 In In re Marriage of Carney, 24 Cal.3d 725 (1979) the California Supreme Court overruled the decision of a trial judge to remove a quadriplegic person's children from his custody solely for the reason that he had a physical handicap. In that decision, the Court made reference to a previous California case, Adoption of Richardson, 251 Cal.App.2d 222 (1967), wherein the trial court denied a couple's petition to adopt a baby boy because both the prospective parents were deaf-mutes.…”

“…24 In addition to sterilization laws, many laws limit the ability of disabled individuals to marry and parent their own children, despite the recognition by the US Supreme Court that such rights are fundamental. [25][26][27] For example, in 1953, a Pennsylvania statute prohibited granting a marriage certificate to any person who had epilepsy or was "weak-minded, insane, or … of unsound mind," except under court order. 27 As of 2007, more than 30 states still had statutes that banned or restricted the right of persons with disabilities to marry.…”

“…[25][26][27] For example, in 1953, a Pennsylvania statute prohibited granting a marriage certificate to any person who had epilepsy or was "weak-minded, insane, or … of unsound mind," except under court order. 27 As of 2007, more than 30 states still had statutes that banned or restricted the right of persons with disabilities to marry. 28 Parenting rights of disabled people are also limited, the purported justification being the protection of the health and safety of children who perhaps would not be adequately cared for by a disabled caretaker.…”

Eugenomics: Eugenics and Ethics in the 21st Century

“…David Pfeiffer has written that Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' decision "was incorrect on its facts, was based on now discredited scientific theories, relied upon inaccurate analogies, applied inappropriate constitutional standards, and was in conflict with many philosophical principles of the American governmental system." 12 According to Lombardo, "legally mandated sterilization was the most radical policy supported by the American eugenics movement." 13 …”

The epistemological model of disability, and its role in understanding passive exclusion in eighteenth and nineteenth century Protestant educational asylums in the USA and Britain

“…The first form is defined as violent and aggressive physical acts. Pfeiffer (1994) and Reinders (2008) observed that waves of pernicious legislation based on the belief in the inferiority of people with impairments led to 7 eugenic health-based policies and malevolent discrimination against disabled people in US institutional settings. This legislation particularly targeted those with learning difficulties, over the last two centuries.…”