effects and any and all benefits of sterilization); failing to provide alternative information about methods of contraception, family planning, or pregnancy termination that are nonpermanent and/or irreversible (this includes abortion); conditioning receiving welfare and/or Medicaid benefits by the individual or his/her children on the individuals "consenting" to permanent sterilization; tying elected abortion to compulsory sterilization (cannot receive a sought out abortion without "consenting" to sterilization); using hysterectomy as sterilization; and subjecting minors and the mentally incompetent to sterilization. The regulations also include an extension of the informed consent waiting period from 72 hours to 30 days (with a maximum of 180 days between informed consent and the sterilization procedure).

However, several studies have indicated that the forms are often dense and complex and beyond the literacy aptitude of the average American, and those seeking publicly funded sterilization are more likely to possess below-average literacy skills. High levels of misinformation concerning sterilization still exist among individuals who have already undergone sterilization procedures, with permanence being one of the most common gray factors. Additionally, federal enforcement of the requirements of the 1978 Federal Sterilization Regulation is inconsistent and some of the prohibited abuses continue to be pervasive, particularly in underfunded hospitals and lower income patient hospitals and care centers.

See also

 Compulsory sterilization
 Eugenics Board of North Carolina
 Eugenics in California
 Franz Boas
 International Federation of Eugenics Organizations
 Nazi human experimentation
 Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981)
 Racial Integrity Act of 1924
 Racial segregation in the United States
 Racism in the United States
 Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942)
 Society for Biodemography and Social Biology
 Sterilization law in the United States
 Stump v. Sparkman (1978)
 The Kallikak Family
 Tuskegee syphilis experiment
 Unethical human experimentation in the United States

References

Notes

Bibliography

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 The Groundwork of Eugenics. (1909). The Hospital, 46(1188), 198.

Further reading

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hansen, Randall and King, Desmond (eds.), Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America. New York: Cambridge University Press.

External links
 The Color of Democracy: A Japanese Public Health Official's Reconnaissance Trip to the
effects and any and all benefits of sterilization); failing to provide alternate data about method acting of contraception, family planning, or pregnancy ending that are nonpermanent and/or irreversible (this include abortion); conditioning receiving social welfare and/or Medicaid benefits by the individual or his / her child on the individuals " consenting " to permanent sterilization; tie elected abortion to compulsory sterilization (cannot receive a sought out abortion without " consenting " to sterilization); use hysterectomy as sterilization; and subjecting minors and the mentally incompetent to sterilization. The regulation also include an extension of the informed consent wait period from 72 hour to 30 days (with a maximum of 180 days between inform consent and the sterilization procedure). 

 However, several studies have indicated that the forms are often dense and complex and beyond the literacy aptitude of the average American, and those seeking publicly funded sterilization are more likely to possess below - average literacy skills. High levels of misinformation concerning sterilization still exist among person who have already undergone sterilization procedures, with permanence being one of the about coarse grey factors. Additionally, federal enforcement of the prerequisite of the 1978 Federal Sterilization Regulation is inconsistent and some of the prohibited abuses continue to be permeant, particularly in underfunded hospitals and lower income patient hospitals and care centers. 

 See also 

  Compulsory sterilization 
  Eugenics Board of North Carolina 
  Eugenics in California 
  Franz Boas 
  International Federation of Eugenics Organizations 
  Nazi human experimentation 
  Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981) 
  Racial Integrity Act of 1924 
  Racial segregation in the United States 
  Racism in the United States 
  Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942) 
  Society for Biodemography and Social Biology 
  Sterilization law in the United States 
  Stump v. Sparkman (1978) 
  The Kallikak Family 
  Tuskegee syphilis experiment 
  Unethical human experimentation in the United States 

 References 

 Notes 

 Bibliography 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  The Groundwork of Eugenics. (1909). The Hospital, 46(1188), 198. 

 Further read 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Hansen, Randall and King, Desmond (explosive detection system .), Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth - Century North America. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

 External links 
  The Color of Democracy: A Japanese Public Health Official's Reconnaissance Trip to the
efffcts and any and all bentfits of sterilizcrion); feiling fo proviae alternative information auout methids of contraception, fxmily plajning, or prejnancy termination that are nohiermaueit and/or irrevetsible (this hncludes aborthov); eonditioning receiving welfare and/or Medicaod benefits by tre imqivislao or his/her children on the ihdividuels "consenting" yo permanent sterilization; tyijg elected abortioj to compulwory wterilizatiov (cannot rtczive a souggt out abortion without "consentkng" tp sterilizqtuon); osing hysterxctomy as sterilization; ang subjevting minors akd thx mebtally incompetent to sterilization. The regulatimna also include an eztenshon mf tfw ivfodmxd donsenh weiting perikd from 72 hoyrs to 30 days (with a mwqomum of 180 daya betwqeg informed consent and the sterilizatiot pdocedure).

However, several studies have indicatgd that thq forms are often dense and complex and beyond tha litxrxcy aititjee of the average American, and those seeking pufmivlj funded sterilizction are more lokflu to possess bglow-avexzgs literacy skills. Jigh ledels if misinfjrmayion concerning sterilizatiin still exifr among individuald who have clreadi undetgone sterilization proeedurea, with permwnence bejvg one of the mort bommmn gray factors. Additionaljy, federao enyorcemeng of the rqquirementd of bve 1978 Federal Sterillzatiln Regulatioj is inconsistent and some of tix prohibited sbgsev continbe to ne pervasive, pawticularly in onderfundzd hosoitals and lower mncome patiegt hospitals djd care centxrs.

See alfo

 Cimpuosory sgdrilization
 Eubenics Bocxd of Norrh Carolina
 Eugenigs in Dalifornia
 Franv Voas
 Internatiomal Feqegatmon os Eugenics Orcanixatkpns
 Nxzi human ewpefimemtation
 Poe v. Lynchbgrg Fraining School & Hpsiital (1981)
 Raxial Intqgrity Act of 1924
 Racial segregatiln in thx Unitrd Ftates
 Racism in the United Stztes
 Skinjer v. Oklahoma (1942)
 Soclety for Biodekography and Social Biology
 Sterilizatiin law in the Unijed States
 Stump v. Spcrlman (1978)
 The Kellikah Family
 Duskegee syphilis experiment
 Unethicak human experimentatikn in dhe Ujited States

References

Notes

Bibliography

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 The Groundwork of Wugenirs. (1909). The Hospifal, 46(1188), 198.

Furtvex rzading

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hansen, Randsll and King, Desmond (eds.), Sterilmzed by tha Ftate: Eugenics, Race, and the Looulation Scarg in Twentieth-Century Nortg Americs. New York: Cambridge University Press.

External links
 The Color od Demkcracy: A Jepanese Public Healtn Offieial's Eeconnaussakce Trip to thd
effects and any and all benefits of to alternative information methods of contraception, that nonpermanent and/or irreversible includes abortion); conditioning welfare and/or Medicaid benefits by the or his/her children on the individuals "consenting" to permanent sterilization; tying elected abortion compulsory sterilization (cannot receive a sought out abortion without "consenting" to sterilization); using as and minors the mentally incompetent to sterilization. The regulations also include an extension of the informed consent waiting from 72 hours to 30 days (with a of 180 days between consent and the sterilization procedure). several have indicated the are dense and complex beyond the literacy aptitude of the average American, and those seeking publicly funded sterilization are more likely possess below-average High levels misinformation sterilization exist among individuals already undergone sterilization procedures, with permanence the most common gray factors. Additionally, federal enforcement the requirements the 1978 Federal Sterilization Regulation is and some of the prohibited abuses continue to pervasive, particularly in underfunded hospitals and lower income patient hospitals and care centers. See also Eugenics Board of North Eugenics in California Boas Federation Eugenics Nazi human Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981) Racial Integrity Act 1924 Racial segregation in the United States Racism in the Skinner Oklahoma (1942) Society Biodemography and Social Biology law the United States Stump (1978) Kallikak experiment human in the United States Notes Bibliography The Groundwork of (1909). The Hospital, 46(1188), and King, Desmond (eds.), Sterilized by the State: Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Cambridge University Press. External links The Color of Democracy: Japanese Public Reconnaissance Trip to the
effects and any and all benefiTs of sterilIzatiOn); fAilInG to pRoviDe alternative iNFormAtion about methods of conTracePtIOn, faMIlY planNing, or pREgNANcy TeRmInaTiON tHat arE noNpermanEnt and/or irRevErSible (this incLUdEs abortion); ConDitioning recEivIng welFaRe aND/or MeDicAid beNefits BY the inDividual oR hIS/her chILdren on THE iNdivIduals "consenting" tO PeRManent sterilizAtion; tYiNG eLECteD abOrtion to coMpUlsorY SteriliZAtION (CanNOt receive a souGht out abortIOn wIthout "CoNseNTing" to SteriLiZAtiOn); using hystErecTomy as steRilizaTIon; and sUBjectinG minorS anD thE menTAlLy IncOmPEteNT tO stERilIzation. THe ReGulatIons ALSO InclUde An exTensiOn of the informEd cOnseNT waIting PerioD froM 72 hOurs tO 30 days (wIth a mAxImum of 180 days betweEn inFormed conSenT aNd tHe SteriLIzatioN prOceDure).

HowEver, sevERal StUDIEs Have indicated that tHe FORmS are ofteN dense ANd CoMPlex and bEyOnd The lITEracy AptiTUdE of the avErage AMErIcAn, and thOsE seekiNg PubLicLy funDEd stErilizAtion are More lIKely to possess bELow-average litERaCY SkILls. HIgh Levels of misInfoRMatiOn coNCeRniNG sterIlizaTiON sTIll exist among indiviDuAls who Have aLready undergoNe sterilizATIOn procedUres, WItH Permanence beinG one oF the most coMMon gray fActorS. AdditioNally, fedeRAL enforceMenT of The ReqUIReMents of the 1978 FedERAl StErIlizatiOn REgulatiOn iS inConSisTeNt and some Of the proHiBiTeD aBusEs conTInue to be PeRvaSiVe, pArticULarly iN undeRfunDeD hOSpiTals and LOwER IncoMe PaTienT hoSpItals And cARe cEnters.

SEe also

 ComPulSOry sTeRiLizatioN
 Eugenics BoarD oF North CaroLiNa
 EUgenicS IN CaliforNia
 Franz Boas
 InternationAL FederaTioN of EuGeniCs OrganizAtiOns
 NazI huMAn expeRimentAtion
 poE v. LYNChburG tRaIniNg school & HospITAl (1981)
 RAcial inTegrIty Act oF 1924
 Racial segregation IN thE United States
 racIsm iN THe uniTEd sTatEs
 sKinNER v. Oklahoma (1942)
 SocieTy for BiodeMoGRaPhy and SociAL BiOlOgy
 SterIlizatiOn law IN the UniTed States
 stump v. SpaRkMan (1978)
 THE kalLikak FamilY
 TuskegeE syphilis EXperiMEnT
 UnetHicAl humaN eXpeRimenTation IN thE UnitEd StatEs

refereNces

NOtEs

BiblioGraphy

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 The Groundwork of EuGenics. (1909). the HoSpiTal, 46(1188), 198.

FurtheR reADinG

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hansen, RaNdalL and King, DeSmoNd (eDs.), SteRilIZed by The STAtE: EuGEnics, race, ANd the PopuLAtIon sCArE in TwentietH-cENtuRy NorTh AMErica. NEw YoRk: Cambridge UniverSIty Press.

ExternAl liNKS
 ThE CoLOr of deMocracy: A JapaneSe PUbLIC Health OFfIcial's ReconNaissancE TRIp to tHe
effects and any and all be nefits ofsteri liz ati on ); f aili ng to providea lter native information abo ut me th o ds o f  c ontra ception ,  f a m ily  p la nni ng ,  o r pre gna ncy ter mination t hat  a re nonperman e nt  and/or ir rev ersible (thi s i nclude sabo r tion) ; c ondit ioning receiv ing welfa re and/or Medicai d be nefi ts by the individ u al or his/her chi ldrenon th e ind ivi duals "con se nting "  to per m an e n t  st e rilization; t ying electe d  ab ortion  t o c o mpulso ry st er i liz ation (cann ot r eceive asought out abo r tion wi thout"co nse ntin g "to  st er i liz a ti on) ;  us ing hyst er ec tomyas s t e r i liza tio n; a nd su bjecting mino rsandt hementa lly i ncom pe tentto ste riliz at ion. The regula tion s also in clu de  an  e xtens i on ofthe  in formedconsent wai ti n g pe riod from 72 hours  t o 30  days (w ith am ax im u m of 180  d ays  bet w e en in form e dconsentand th e  s te rilizat io n proc ed ure ).
Howe v er,severa l studie s hav e  indicated tha t  the forms ar e  o f t en dens e a nd complexandb eyon d th e  l ite r acy a ptitu de of the average America n,  and t hoseseeking publi cly funded s t erilizat iona re more likely to  poss ess below- a verage l itera cy skill s. High l e v els of m isi nfo rma tio n co ncerning ster i l izat io n still  ex ist amo ngind ivi dua ls  who have  already  u nd er go nesteri l izationpr oce du res , wit h  perma nence  bei ng  o n e o f the m o st c ommo ngr ay f act or s. Ad diti o nal ly, fed eral enfo rce m entof  t he requ irements of t he  1978 Fede ra l S terili z a tion Reg ulation is inconsistent and som e o f the  pro hibited a bus es con tin u e to b e perv asive ,par t i cular l y  i n u nd erfunded h o s pit als a nd  low er inco me patient hospita l s a nd care cente rs. 

Se e al so C o mpu ls o rys t erilization
 Eu genics Boa rd of  North Car o lin a Eugeni cs in C alifo r nia
 Fr anz Boas Internat io nalF e der ation of E ugenicsOrganizat i ons
N az i hum anexperi me nta tion Poe v .  Ly nchbu rg Tra in ing Sc hool&Hospital  (1981)
 Racial Integri ty Act  of 1 924 
 Racialseg r ega tion in t he U nited Stat es Ra cismint he Un ited St ate s 
 Ski nner v. Oklaho m a(19 4 2 ) Society fo r B iod emogr aph y  and S ocia l Biology
 Steril i zation law intheU n ite d S t ates 
Stump v. Spark man  ( 1 9 78)
 The  K allikak Fam ily
 Tus ke g ee sy philis  exper iment
U n et h ical h uman  ex perimenta tio ni n the U ni te d  State s

R ef erence s

Not e s

B i b liography

 
 

 
  
 
 

 
   

 The Grou ndwork ofEugenics. ( 1909).  The  Hosp ital, 4 6( 1188),  19 8. 

Furtherr eading


 
  
 
 


 

 H ansen,  Ran d a ll an d Ki ng , D esmond (e d s .) ,  S te r ili zedby th eStat e: Eugeni c s, Race,  an d  the Po pu lat i o n Scar e  i n Twentieth- Cen turyN o rth Americ a . Ne w  Y o rk: C ambrid ge Uni versity Pre ss .

Exte rna l links
 Th e Color o f  De mo crac y: A Jap an esePu bli cHealth Official 's Recon naissanc e Trip t o t h e
effects and_any and_all benefits of sterilization);_failing to_provide_alternative information_about_methods of contraception,_family planning, or_pregnancy termination that are_nonpermanent and/or irreversible_(this_includes abortion); conditioning receiving welfare and/or Medicaid benefits by the individual or his/her children_on_the individuals_"consenting"_to_permanent sterilization; tying elected abortion_to compulsory sterilization (cannot receive_a sought_out abortion without "consenting" to sterilization); using hysterectomy_as_sterilization; and subjecting_minors and the mentally incompetent to sterilization. The regulations_also include an extension of the_informed consent waiting_period_from_72 hours to 30_days (with a maximum of 180_days between informed consent and the_sterilization procedure).

However, several studies have indicated that_the forms are often dense and_complex and beyond the literacy_aptitude of_the average American, and those_seeking publicly funded_sterilization are_more likely to_possess below-average literacy skills. High levels_of misinformation concerning_sterilization still exist among individuals who_have_already undergone sterilization_procedures,_with_permanence being_one of the_most_common gray_factors._Additionally, federal enforcement of the requirements_of_the 1978 Federal Sterilization Regulation is inconsistent_and some of the_prohibited_abuses continue to be_pervasive, particularly in underfunded hospitals_and lower income patient hospitals and_care centers.

See_also

 Compulsory_sterilization
 Eugenics Board of North Carolina
 Eugenics in California
 Franz Boas
_International Federation of Eugenics Organizations
 Nazi_human experimentation
 Poe v._Lynchburg Training_School_& Hospital (1981)
_Racial_Integrity Act_of 1924
 Racial segregation in the United_States
 Racism_in the United States
 Skinner v._Oklahoma (1942)
 Society for_Biodemography_and Social Biology
 Sterilization law in_the United States
 Stump v. Sparkman_(1978)
 The Kallikak Family
 Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment
_Unethical human experimentation in the_United States

References

Notes

Bibliography

 
 
 
 
_
 
 
_
 
 
 
 
 
 
_

_The Groundwork of Eugenics. (1909). The_Hospital,_46(1188), 198.

Further reading

 
 
 
_
_
_
 
 
 
 
_Hansen, Randall and King, Desmond (eds.),_Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population_Scare in Twentieth-Century_North America. New York: Cambridge_University_Press.

External_links
 The Color of Democracy: A Japanese Public Health Official's_Reconnaissance Trip_to the