Whose Reparation Claims Count? Gender, History and (In)justice

Gerodetti, Natalia

doi:10.1080/13200968.2016.1196532

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Swedish medical profession was split on the acceptability of eugenic sterilisations [10,27]. Public opinion was alerted to the issue when the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, in 1997, and Maija Runcis, in her doctoral thesis, in 1999, revealed that thousands of Swedes had been involuntarily sterilised [28]. In response to the media frenzy this caused, with a ripple effect in other countries, the Swedish Government set up a Commission to investigate this matter.…”

Section: Swedenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legalised non-consensual sterilisation – eugenics put into practice before 1945, and the aftermath. Part 2: Europe

Amy

Rowlands

2018

The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article deals with the nine European nations which legalised non-consensual sterilisation during the interwar years, thus completing the review, the first part of which was published in an earlier issue of this Journal. Like we did for North America, Japan and Mexico, countries concerned are addressed in chronological order, as practices in one of these influenced policies in others, involved later. For each, we assess the continuum of events up to the present time. The Swiss canton of Vaud was the first political entity in Europe to introduce a law on compulsory sterilisation of people with intellectual disability, in 1928. Vaud's sterilisation Act aimed at safeguarding against the abusive performance of these procedures. The purpose of the laws enforced later in eight other European countries (all five Nordic countries; Germany and, after its annexation by the latter, Austria; Estonia) was, on the contrary, to effect the sterilisation of large numbers of people considered a burden to society. Between 1933 and 1939, from 36,000 to 400,000 residents (two-thirds of whom were women) were compulsorily sterilised in Nazi Germany. In Sweden, some 32,000 sterilisations carried out between 1935 and 1975 were involuntary. It might have been expected that after the Second World War ended and Nazi legislation was suspended in Germany and Austria, including that regulating coerced sterilisation, these inhuman practices would have been discontinued in all nations concerned; but this happened only decades later. More time still went by before the authorities in certain countries officially acknowledged the human rights violations committed, issued apologies and developed reparation schemes for the victims' benefit.

show abstract

Section: Swedenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legalised non-consensual sterilisation – eugenics put into practice before 1945, and the aftermath. Part 2: Europe

Amy

Rowlands

2018

The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Certain courts ordered that damages be paid. Later, there were moves to right historic injustices by means of recognition, acknowledgement, apologies and/or financial redress [3]. Reparations for sterilisations done before 1945 were generally made much later; some after 1997.…”

Section: From Theory To Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These apologies were accepted as accountability for past eugenic policies and measures. So far, only in North Carolina (2013) and Virginia (2015) was redress in the form of financial compensation offered [3]. North Carolina has a US$10 million fund for payments but, to qualify, individuals must have lodged an application with the State Eugenics Board (later amended to include county authorisation).…”

Section: Accountability For Past Eugenic Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legalised non-consensual sterilisation – eugenics put into practice before 1945, and the aftermath. Part 1: USA, Japan, Canada and Mexico

Amy

Rowlands

2018

The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the late 19th century, eugenics, a pseudo-scientific doctrine based on an erroneous interpretation of the laws of heredity, swept across the industrialised world. Academics and other influential figures who promoted it convinced political stakeholders to enact laws authorising the sterilisation of people seen as 'social misfits'. The earliest sterilisation Act was enforced in Indiana, in 1907; most states in the USA followed suit and so did several countries, with dissimilar political regimes. The end of the Second World War saw the suspension of Nazi legislation in Germany, including that regulating coerced sterilisation. The year 1945 should have been the endpoint of these inhuman practices but, in the early post-war period, the existing sterilisation Acts were suspended solely in Germany and Austria. Only much later did certain countries concerned - not Japan so far - officially acknowledge the human rights violations committed, issue apologies and develop reparation schemes for the victims' benefit.

show abstract

“…Although loss of the ability to bear children generally cannot be reversed (usually unfeasible in low-resource countries or many years after the event), it has become apparent that reparations not only give people restorative justice but in a small way also some peace of mind 12. However, it may be many years before admission that the injustices actually occurred is forthcoming, let alone giving survivors any redress.…”

Section: Historical Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%