Kentucky Irish American. (Louisville, Ky.) 1898-1968, 1919-01-25
A Dangerous Extension of Eugenist
Propaganda Advocated
by DIR. Slopes.
Menace TO Both Society and Nor
aliV Involved in New
Plans.
The Weak Basis of the Sterilization
Demands and Vicious
Proposals.
THE PERvERsITY OF POSITION.

The Eugenist propaganda has
found an exponent who is much
more frank than were many others
who have advocated the eugenistic
measure termed sterilization by the
operation of vasectomy, to be ap-
piled to criminals and detectives
who are wards of the State.
Hitherto the purpose pursued by the
prophets Of sterilization was nom-
inally the prevention of procreation
by criminals and interned de-
fectives. Now comes DR.. Marie
Slopes, who advocates 1.-THE steriliza-
ton of all potential parents who
are bodily or morally hopelessly and
irremediably diseased and unfit"
This request represents an extension
of the demands of eugenists, reach
Ing out beyond the bounds of their
earlier programme, but in addition
to this extension DR.. Slopes submits
the startling frank avowal that her
ultimate design is not to benefit the
race, but to facilitate deliberately
childless marriages. every adult"
writes DR.. Slopes, "has a right to
marriage; no individual has the
right. to tax the community with
diseased children" Once this prin-
ciple is admitted in the sense in
which it is advocated by DR.. Slopes
the validity of her plan of steriliza-
ton would have to be recognized,
and the barrier standing between
the individual and the attainment of
his improper desires would be
broken down.
The ethical perversity of such q
position is apparent to all readers
of Catholic journal. 1t Is inter-
esting to note, however, that even
the legal status of sterilization is
far from being firmly established,
that it's position is highly question
able, and that in spite OF the fact
that the law has had to deal with
this problem only in one of its
phases, the application to criminals
and interned lunatics. An excellent
treatise on the subject of "Sterili-
cation of Criminals" was con-
tributed by w. A. S. to Law Notes
some months ago and printed in the
July issue of that journal. The
author, who rightly maintains that
the theory of heredity, upon which
the application of sterilization is
based, is but a theory, and that one
barren of satisfactory proof, states
that the legal standing OF the mat
ter is less doubtful and shaky< than
the theory. By way of information
he tells us that claws authorizing
the sterilization of lunatics or
criminals, or both, have been
passed in some twelve or more
States. In California. in 1916, 635
operations had actually been per-
formed under the laval but one
on inmates of State institutions for
the insane. The subjects for treat
ment being selected from among the
helpless, there have been but four
cases reported dealing with the
validity of such a law, and in three
of them the law was declared to be
invalid"
Thus even the legal status of the
measure advocated so ardenly by
the Eugensts is, to put 1t mildly,
highly questionable. Besides w. A.
s. quotes extensively from reports
of Investigations into this matter
conducted under the auspices of the
American Institute of Criminal
Law and Criminology, which in
1913 appointed committee of we'll
known lawyers and alienists, known
as COMMITTEE F." The committee
reported in 1914, 1915, 1916 and
1917, the sum total of their find
ings being that "the doctors stick
firmly to their a priori theories
while the lawyers investigate the
evidence, find it wanting and de-
mand further evidence before they
will pronounce a judgment" The
outcome of the investigation is a
defeat for the advocates of steriliza-
tion, who could not prove their
case. One member of the commit
tee Says that he has no faith in
sterilization as a remedy In dealing
with the problem of the criminal"
Another member, going back to
first principles, declares that it is
first necessary to discover whether
criminal tendencies are inherited
directly or not" Still another
frankly states: 1.-THE more 1 find
out about 1t the stronger my feel
ings become against the sterilization
OF criminals as such" And the
consensus OF the committee was that
IL could not formulate a satisfactory
report until "a sufficient basis Of
facts" had been established upon
which some definite action may be
erected" With this conclusion the
committee asked to be discharged.
So flimsy and hypothetical is the
basis on which eugenists strive to
rest their immoral demands. The
writer from whose article we have
quoted advances a number of facts
and casts interesting side-lights on
the legal phase of the measure. He
calls attention to the sacramental
character of marriage. and In an
other paragraph to the relation IF
environment to criminality--that
mcmentous factor which the advo-
Gates of sterilization think so little
of in practice. On the whole he
quite properly characterizes the
coming of this dangerous fad"