Thursday, July 3, 2014

Eugenics Is Alive And Threatening

Since Charles Murray is raising his neo-eugenicist, racist head again,  I'm going to repost a few of the things I wrote about this time last year.   Here's one that shows that eugenics was racist to the core and that it wasn't only used in Hitler's Reich and against black people and poor whites in the Jim Crow areas of the country. New England has its own record of shame, as do many other places.

Friday, July 5, 2013

I Am Not A Mayflower Descendant

It was rather odd for me to find Dr. Henry Farnham Perkins was involved in the eugenics decimation of the Abenakis of Vermont and the scientific destruction of their culture.  In my family, one of the few non-Irish ancestors is my great-great grandmother who was born a Perkins, only I don't think she was one of the Mayflower descendant Perkins as Henry Farnham was.  Family lore said she, and even more obviously her mother, were Penobscot, probably from around the Old Town Maine area, where the Penobscot Nation is today.  I've got two photographs of her, one taken in about 1940 with her daughter and granddaughter.  She was near 90 at the time, her daughter and granddaughter have snow-white hair, hers is decidedly dark brown or black (it's a black and white photo, of course) and she was definitely not the kind of woman who would have colored her hair.  The other picture is from far earlier, I'd guess in the 1870s, with her first, Irish, husband.  She looks decidedly not European in that photograph.  Some of my quite distant relations, who I gave copies of the pictures to, said that they have a family letter in which her mother is said to be "full-blood Indian".   Her father is known to have originally had the name Dana which is a Penobscot name.  We figure that they changed their name when they moved to New Hampshire in the early 19th century to try to blend in, though other family members who follow these things have been unable to trace the family in records from before my great-great-great grandfather in New Hampshire.  We know where they are buried but the stones are too eroded to supply any information.   My "Perkins" ancestors may have been trying to hide from discrimination and genocide of a different kind than the one, that, a hundred years later another Perkins would be committing against native people in the neighboring state in the last century.

It's chilling to find out people in quaint,  rural 1920s and early 30s New England, social workers, nurses, doctors.... practicing medical genocide against the native people.   Thinking of what they were doing as progressive and scientific.  And, as Edwin Black says, reporting what they were doing to the Nazis who kept the records that were obscured by small government bureaucratic inefficiency here.  It put a pall over the holiday, what with that lie from the Declaration I noted in my morning post.

Update:  Some of the documents around Dr. Perkins' eugenics activity are available online from the University of Vermont.  Of course the name C.B. Davenport shouts out, from what would become infamous, his support of and from Nazis, his extreme racism and eugenics, would stain anyone who had extensive associations with him.  Harry Laughlin is in the database, as well.   Unfortunate, but also there, are Perkins' letters from and to Margaret Sanger, from the period in which she was active in eugenics, unfortunately associating birth control during that period, with eugenics and implications of racism.  Birth control activism in the modern period certainly has left that association promoting personal choice on the basis of individual autonomy, especially that of women.  It would be a disaster to fall for the attempt to turn Margaret Sanger into a millstone for the right to birth control as Darwin has become for today's evolutionary science.  Both should be left to the dead past.

Update 2:   Here is a May 28, 1926 letter from Perkins to Davenport that is certainly relevant to the targeting of Abenakis and other racial minorities in the Vermont eugenics program.   I'm sure my great-great grandmother would have fallen under the eye of Perkins' staff on the basis of her "skin color valuation".

EUGENICS SURVEY OF VERMONT UNDER AUSPICES OF UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY DIR ECTOR, H. F. PERKINS IN CHARGE OF FIELD RESEARCH, 489 MAIN STREET HARRIETT E. ABBOTT BURLINGTON. VT. TELEPHONE 1083 May 28, 1926. Professor Charles B. Davenport, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, N. Y.
My dear Sir:

I am writing to inquire whether you have any references on negro‐white matings and skin color valuations in addition to your own paper on the subject. In case you happen to have a reprint of any of your own work on this matter, I should greatly appreciate your kindness in sending me copies, and I should like to get hold of any comments, criticisms, or amplifications upon or of your work.

The Eugenics Survey of Vermont which has been under way since last September is progressing satisfactorily, and we are now very eagerly searching for some possible source of additional funds. It has been impossible for the donor of the $7500 which is supporting the work this year to continue her generous help, although she assures us that it is not for lack of interest that she is obliged to decline. I have visited the Commonwealth Fund office and those of the National Committee of Mental Hygiene, the Russell Sage Foundation, Laura Spelman Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. In all cases, while the officials visited expressed genuine interest, they could not give me much assurance of assistance. It may be that you will be able to suggest some further possibilities, for we desire to leave no stone unturned to accomplish the continuance of our work. I have just had the address of the Milbank Foundation, and am going to write to them.

In addition to the above, I had hoped that we might draw on the Federal Experiment Station Fund given to the states through the Purnell Measure for rural investigation. We had thought of conducting a study on rural subnormalcy with especial reference to its hearing upon agriculture. We find that the Vermont funds are so nearly all allotted for next year that even if the project should be approved there would be an entirely inadequate sum available. We are not giving up our effort to get even a thousand dollars from that source, and I hope that I am not too optimistic in my expectation that the Mental Hygiene people will let us have two field workers, a psychologist, and a psychiatrist for a short term of service which will follow up the preliminary work that a field worker can do.

A phase of our investigation which promises fruitful results from further work is the study of the better branches of the more deficient families that have constituted the bulk of our year's investigation. There are various other aspects of subnormalcy in Vermont that I am very hopeful of going into at some future date, and it may be possible later to interest one of the big foundations in a rather wholesale project in this state. I am working upon a plan for such a composite investigation at the recommendation of Dr. Embree of the Rockefeller Foundation.

Our present Survey has included the study of the twenty most typical deficient families that we could find in Vermont. One or two of these tribes number up to three hundred individuals. There is therefore a rather formidable array of data in our files and in pedigree chart form available for further study. Our Field Worker and Clerk are proving so highly efficient that I particularly dislike the notion of having to give up our study at the end of the present summer, at which time the $7500 will be used up.

Any help that you can give us in the way of suggestions of possible sources of additional financial help will be very highly appreciated.

With very kind personal regards, I am 
Faithfully yours,


[H. F. Perkins]


Thursday, July 4, 2013

"... It's Not Even Past" Excerpts On The 4th of July

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

The Declaration of Independence

Because the German and American wings collaborated so closely, the German archives clearly traced the development of German race hygiene as it emulated the American program. More importantly, because the American and German movements functioned as a binary, their leaders bragged to one another and exchanged information constantly. Therefore I learned much about America’s record by examining Reich-era files. For instance, although the number of individuals sterilized in Vermont has eluded researchers in that state, the information is readily available in the files of Nazi organizations. Moreover, obscure Nazi medical literature reveals the Nazis’ understanding of their American partners. Probing the prodigious files of Nazi eugenics took my project to the Bundesarchiv in Berlin and Koblenz, the Max Planck Institute in Berlin, Heidelberg University and many other repositories in Germany.

When it was finished, the journey to discover America’s eugenic history had taken me from an austere highway warehouse in Vermont, where the state’s official files are stacked right next to automotive supplies and retrieved by forklift, to the architectonic British Library, to the massive Bundesarchiv in Berlin—and every type of research environment in between. Sometimes I sat on a chair in a reading room. Sometimes I poked through boxes in a basement.

Edwin Black:  War Against The Weak:  Eugenics And America's Campaign To Create A Master Race

Dr. Perkins drafted a new research plan for his advisory committee's approval. The Eugenics Survey would document demographic and economic trends and select representative towns in the state for a more detailed study. That the towns "in decline" selected for the study were ones inhabited by some of the "degenerate" families in the Eugenics Survey files comes as no surprise. From 1925-1928 Perkins "conducted extensive investigations on selected kinship groups in Vermont to develop ‘pedigrees of degeneracy’ among Vermont’s rural poor". Perkins released five reports during his studies of eugenics and Vermonters. Here, the term "survey" refers to a concentrated campaign of isolation, stereotyping, segregation, and sterilization. The committees of the VCCL completed their final reports in January 1931 and compiled their findings in Rural Vermont: A Program for the Future. Every chapter addressed the specific means by which the state could restore the land, culture and values to the kind of people who had colonized the state and who were most deserving of the title "Vermonter." Perkins focus fell on the 3 D's that were beginning to show up in higher numbers late in the 19th century- delinquency, dependency and mental defect. During the first three years of Perkins's project, evidence was gathered through town records, social workers, government officials, policemen, and other various informants. Significant information was gathered about families who were found to have these defects. It became clear that many were extended families and tribes.

Of all the people affected by the eugenics movement in Vermont, the people who suffered the most were the Abenaki. It was during this time period that the Abenaki were left with little choice but to go underground. The Abenaki were out in the open and the obvious targets. Many Abenaki were forced to assume other identities or hide their heritage. "It is my opinion that the "new racism" of Vermont's elite eventually permeated Abenaki society, leading to shame at being different or fear that we or our children would be "discovered" by the state of Vermont and have evil things done to them. " (The Voice of the Dawn: An Autohistory of the Abenaki Nation, pp. 147-49). The easiest route for the Abenaki to take was to fit in with the French-Canadians of Vermont. Many of the Abenaki families investigated by Perkins' social workers were institutionalized and sterilized. Eugenics measures in Vermont followed the lead of other states in providing institutions for segregation of socially or mentally handicapped persons, followed by laws permitting sexual sterilization and denial of marriage licenses to those deemed "mentally unfit" for parenthood. As progressive reformers routinely attributed social welfare problems to "feebleminded women of child bearing age," poor women, particularly unwed mothers, became the primary targets of such measures. This went on for years and was backed by the Vermont Sterilization Laws passed in 1931. There are still Abenaki women today who were sterilized by the midwives that delivered their babies. It is estimated that nearly 300 Abenaki people were sterilized.


The history of Eugenics is a sad and damaging one. What it left behind is a loss of culture and a trail of broken families. The Abenaki of Vermont were the hardest hit. Although they took personal pride in their heritage, Abenakis had been discriminated against during much of the previous two centuries and many wanted their children to grow up free from the pain of prejudice. They believed that the only way for their children to get ahead in the white man's world was to act white. They maintained traditional Indian family structures and value systems but many of the outward manifestations of Abenaki culture nearly disappeared from Vermont in the past century. To this day in Vermont, the Abenaki are suffering the effects of the Eugenics Program. When the Abenaki went into hiding, they broke their historical trail. Because the tribe has not been a continuous entity, and many show up with the ethnicity of French-Canadian, it is difficult to decipher who belongs to the tribe

From: Abenakis and Eugenics A Culture Torn Away


A young Indian woman entered Dr. Connie Pinkerton-Uri's Los Angeles office on a November day in 1972. The twenty-six-year-old woman asked Dr. Pinkerton-Uri for a "womb transplant" because she and her husband wished to start a family. An Indian Health Service (IHS) physician had given the woman a complete hysterectomy when she was having problems with alcoholism six years earlier. Dr. Pinkerton-Uri had to tell the young woman that there was no such thing as a "womb transplant" despite the IHS physician having told her that the surgery was reversible. The woman left Dr. Pinkerton-Uri's office in tears.

Two young women entered an IHS hospital in Montana to undergo appendectomies and received tubal ligations, a form of sterilization, as an added benefit. Bertha Medicine Bull, a member of the Northern Cheyenne tribe, related how the "two girls had been sterilized at age fifteen before they had any children. Both were having appendectomies when the doctors sterilized them without their knowledge or consent." Their parents were not informed either. Two fifteen-year-old girls would never be able to have children of their own.

What happened to these three females was a common occurrence during the 1960s and 1970s. Native Americans accused the Indian Health Service of sterilizing at least 25 percent of Native American women who were between the ages of fifteen and forty-four during the 1970s. The allegations included: failure to provide women with necessary information regarding sterilization; use of coercion to get signatures on the consent forms; improper consent forms; and lack of an appropriate waiting period (at least seventy-two hours) between the signing of a consent form and the surgical procedure. This paper investigates the historical relationship between the IHS and Indian tribes; the right of the United States government to sterilize women; the government regulations pertaining to sterilization; the efforts of the IHS to sterilize American Indian women; physicians' reasons for sterilizing American Indian women; and the consequences the sterilizations had on the lives of a few of those women and their families.

The Indian Health Service and the Sterilization of Native American Women
Jane Lawrence

On November 6, 1976, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) released the results of its investigation into similar events at four of twelve IHS areas (Albuquerque, Aberdeen, Oklahoma City, and Phoenix). Records verified that the IHS performed 3,406 sterilizations between 1973 and 1976.[iv] “Tip of the iceberg” is indeed an appropriate metaphor. Per capita, this figure would be equivalent to sterilizing 452,000 non-Native American women.[v]Albuquerque contracted out their sterilizations to local, non-IHS physicians; therefore their region inaccurately added zero procedures to the government count. Independent research estimated that as many as 25-50% of Native American women were sterilized between 1970 and 1976.[vi]Independent verifications were critical. The GAO did not interview a single women subjected to sterilization. The GAO also admitted that “contract” physicians were not required to comply with any federal regulations (including informed consent) in the context of these surgical procedures. Study of consent forms utilized revealed that three different forms were in use. It also appeared the “consent,” in many instances, was obtained through coercion.

What may be the most disturbing aspect of the investigations followed: it was physicians and healthcare professionals in the IHS who coerced these women. It was they who abandoned their professional responsibility to protect the vulnerable through appropriate, non-eugenic indications for surgery and informed consent prior to the procedures. On a Navaho reservation alone, from 1972-1978, there was a 130% increase in abortions (a ratio of abortions per 1000 deliveries increasing from 34 to 77).[vii] The same study demonstrated that between 1972 and 1978, sterilization procedures went from 15.1% to 30.7% of total female surgeries on that one reservation. Healthcare professionals’ coercive tactics included the threat of withdrawing future healthcare provisions or custody of Native American children already born—if consent for sterilization was withheld.[viii] The scandal of this replay of earlier twentieth century eugenic programs and genocidal tactics led to a congressional hearing (Senator James Abourzek, Democrat, South Dakota), but little else in terms of publicity, justice, or public outcry. It has also not been scrutinized from a careful bioethical perspective.

Forced Sterilization of Native Americans: Late Twentieth Century Physician Cooperation with National Eugenic Policies

5 comments:

  1. And it would have worked, too, if not for those meddling Nazis!


    Sadly, most of eugenics was based on racism and class. Holmes famous dicta about three generations of imbeciles was in the case of a poor woman, not a woman with a demonstrably impaired ability to reason or function in society.

    Her family was poor. That was enough of an excuse of the State to invade her organs and perform surgery without her consent.

    The difference today is, we don't do the surgery. We don't care about the poor anymore than we did then.

    Progress! Enlightenment! Let's argue about evolution!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It would help if I read the post, wouldn't it?

    1972? The 1960's and '70's? 1978?

    Nothing really changed, did it?

    I think, these days, of the number of people on the streets who should be in institutions, but we did such a brute job of that we went the other way and won't detain anyone (well, hardly anyone; and that's not entirely a bad thing at all; as I say, we went to such a cruel extreme, would we even spend money on such institutions today?). This is the "brute job" end of that attitude, persisting into the late '70's as it did in other state agencies aimed at dealing with people.

    Our inhumanity is sometimes simply astonishing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I decided to post this again when I read through some of the pro-Murray comments at Salon and other places, pure unreformed racist eugenics such as you can read from the 1870s through the 1940s on full display in 2014. And this we know for "genetic science" tells us so. As I said there the Sociobiology Study Group was warning everyone that eugenics was making a comeback back in 1976, only, in my research, reading the correspondence of scientists as worshiped as Francis Crick, who was an unreformed eugenics-racist all along, it never went away and was always in the background. He was lobbying among his fellow elite scientists in support of Jensen, the guy whose mantle of scientific racism Herrenstein and Murray took up to a far more receptive audience during the Reagan era. And it's never been unfashionable, except in name, in the media which has quite a long history of promoting scientific racism, itself. You can hear veiled eugenics arguments even on NPR.

    It's gotten so I can't hear any assertions about "DNA" or "genes" in the media without being on the lookout for some kind of social stigmatizing. And, when you realize what you're hearing, quite often they use the same lines to excuse behavior, quite often on pure class or gender lines.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is it any coincidence that Dawkins, of "selfish gene" fame, has said the superior "race" is indicated by the number of Nobel prizes awarded to England, v. those awarded to India or other non-European countries?

    No, I don't think so, either.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You can contrast that attitude to that of Rupert Sheldrake who worked in India for a number of years, improving food crops and other useful science, based on experimentation and physical evidence, as opposed to Dawkin's making up Just-so stories, plausible to those already ideologically and attitudinaly predisposed. Not to mention class based.

    I read Chesterton on the subject of eugenics and, though I find his style hard to take, he made some sense on the topic. I've read that, oddly enough, it was Chesterton and other Catholics that kept Britain from overtly adopting eugenics laws, to the great consternation of people like Galton and Leonard Darwin.

    As Marx said, natural selection imposes on nature the British class system - and he had originally been quite enthusiastic for Darwin's theory, seeing it it the same potential to support materialist monism that Haeckel immediately saw in it. Only, as he considered it more, I believe he saw it was more ideological and class based than science is supposed to be.

    ReplyDelete