California female inmates sterilized illegally

www.desertsun.com...

The California State Auditor on Thursday blasted federal and state oversight of sterilization surgeries for female prison inmates, finding numerous illegal surgeries and violations of the state's informed consent law.

Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, and Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, of the California Legislative Women's Caucus had requested the audit in August in response to an investigation by The Center for Investigative Reporting.

Of the 144 inmates who underwent tubal ligations from fiscal years 2005-06 to 2012-13, auditors found nearly one-third were performed without lawful consent, according to the report released Thursday.

Federal officials said none of the tubal ligations performed since 2006 received signoff by a state-level committee of medical professionals. State prison data indicates that more than half of the surgeries requested during that time period — 74 — came from Valley State. More than two-thirds of those came from Dr. James Heinrich, Valley State's OB-GYN, or a nurse on his staff, according to the prison's medical service request records.

Heinrich previously told CIR that the money spent sterilizing inmates was minimal "compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children — as they procreated more."

Pretty shocking this happening in these times...

Tip of an Iceberg?

a reply to: Plugin


This has been going on for years now, there have been many threads on ATS about it previously.

I think that those involved should be sterilized honestly.

I hate to get all "an eye for an eye" here, but honestly you just denied them the ability to propagate their families genes, I think it only equal, since you know, the one sterilized against their will doesnt obviously possess the eveil gene and those doing it do.

Seems only right IMHO.

originally posted by: oblvion
a reply to: Plugin


This has been going on for years now, there have been many threads on ATS about it previously.

I think that those involved should be sterilized honestly.

I hate to get all "an eye for an eye" here, but honestly you just denied them the ability to propagate their families genes, I think it only equal, since you know, the one sterilized against their will doesnt obviously possess the eveil gene and those doing it do.

Seems only right IMHO.

yea somehow when you are in prison or have no job, homeless and such you are considered not worthy to have the same basic rights, seen as not important.. you are like dirt...

Perhaps some who are really really dangerous and have done horrible things maybe it's not such a bad thing but what about those banksters or political figures who robbed people and started wars, now such people should deserve a castration perhaps... but if that would happen it would be the end of the world, the world in shock! No they even get rewarded.. living like kings.

These ''unworthy'' people, nobody cares about.. what if this happened in Iran, the media would show it everywhere I bet..

Well with all those women smuggling in semen to get pregnant to get separated.....


Wait is that a thing or did i make that up?

They should consider doing the same to the male prisoners as well.

a reply to: Plugin

Tip of an Iceberg?

Sure is awfully embarrassing when your prisoners in solitary get pregnant.
No proof of a crime, no crime.


(Edit)
I guess the real question is still, "Who benefits"?

originally posted by: g146541
a reply to: Plugin

Tip of an Iceberg?

Sure is awfully embarrassing when your prisoners in solitary get pregnant.
No proof of a crime, no crime.


(Edit)
I guess the real question is still, "Who benefits"?

Im a world of exponential population grow, less people isnt actually bad news, its just the fact they dont get to decide.

originally posted by: thesaneone
They should consider doing the same to the male prisoners as well.

That's the very least then yea.. but hey those woman naked.. must be a nicer watch?

originally posted by: Biigs

originally posted by: g146541
a reply to: Plugin

Tip of an Iceberg?

Sure is awfully embarrassing when your prisoners in solitary get pregnant.
No proof of a crime, no crime.


(Edit)
I guess the real question is still, "Who benefits"?

Im a world of exponential population grow, less people isnt actually bad news, its just the fact they dont get to decide.

Yes we need less people maybe make it economical, still free choice but you get something in return.. still not sure if that would work out, kinda hard to come up with a good sollution.
Basicly governments wants more people to support the economy.

a reply to: Biigs
This isn't about stemming overpopulation at all.
Overpopulation is a lie anyway.
Besides, we use war when we feel there are to many eaters.

originally posted by: g146541
a reply to: Biigs
This isn't about stemming overpopulation at all.
Overpopulation is a lie anyway.
Besides, we use war when we feel there are to many eaters.

its not a lie, sure there is enough space, more then enough!

But its rather the footprint, everything you eat/consume takes acres of space and much pollution and the planet is getting in a rather unhealthy condition.
Doesn't look that bad maybe today but just remember today and you will be shocked how things are in 2040-2050.

- global warming and this will cost trillions of money in damage, food shortages, water shortages, floodings etc etc etc.
- extinction of most animal/fish

And later even our own survival comes in Question, so yea we will solve this overpopulation most likely but in a horrible way.

But I guess this would be a bit OT, getting too deeply into this.

I'm all for it. Tie it into the 3 strike law and make it mandatory. Not only women but men! If you are idiotic enough to get caught doing the same serious crime 3 times, you lose the chance to continue your gene-line.

Is it too much to ask our species to be decent human beings who, while fallible, should realize their lesson after the first or second time? I don't think so.

And what if they are wrong? Mistakes happen within the justice system as it isn't perfect. So what if you take a woman and sterilize her without consent when she was guilty of no crime? What if a woman made a mistake at 18 and got caught a drug possession charge is sterilized? Is it okay to penalize someone for the rest of their lives because of a mistake?

If the women consent, then fine. No consent = no tubal ligation. That's my thought on it. There is no "criminal gene" that I'm aware of. Most the causes of criminal behavior have socioeconomic roots. It's not eliminating "bad genes" from the gene pool.

As far as overpopulation goes, I'm tending to think that society will check itself. Japan, with its densely populated cities, would be an example of that in action. About a quarter of Japan's youth population are eschewing both relationships and reproduction. That quarter potentially knocks out about 50% of the youth due to the loss of potential mates. Furthermore, considering that birth rates tend to decline during economic downturns and all the projections for the employment market of the future are showing massive job losses, pretty certain that many will opt to not have children because they simply cannot afford them. Society is likely to curb its own population.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
I'm all for it. Tie it into the 3 strike law and make it mandatory. Not only women but men! If you are idiotic enough to get caught doing the same serious crime 3 times, you lose the chance to continue your gene-line.

Is it too much to ask our species to be decent human beings who, while fallible, should realize their lesson after the first or second time? I don't think so.

You do realize these serious crimes are things like being homeless?

So now it's not enough that if you're poor in the US you'll be arrested, thrown in jail, beaten by the police, and lose any future prospect of a job but now the state gets to perform whatever medical procedures they want on you? Are you insane?

a reply to: Aazadan

No, but you're being called out as a liar:

Twenty-four states have some form of three-strikes law. A person accused under such laws is referred to in a few states (notably Connecticut and Kansas) as a "persistent offender," while Missouri uses the unique term "prior and persistent offender." In most jurisdictions, only crimes at the felony level qualify as serious offenses; however, notably among jurisdictions where misdemeanor offenses can qualify for application of the three-strikes law is California, whose application has been the subject of controversy as noted below.

Link

Most states require one or more of the three felony convictions to be for violent crimes in order for the mandatory sentence to be pronounced. Crimes that fall under the category of “violent” include: murder, kidnapping, sexual abuse, rape, aggravated robbery, and aggravated assault. Some states include additional, lesser offenses that one would not normally see as violent.[16] California mandated a minimum sentence of 25-to-life so long as the first two felonies were deemed to be either "serious" or "violent". For example, California did not require the third “strike” to be serious or violent to qualify for a life sentence, and 2-strike felons could easily be given this enhanced sentence for minor third strike lawbreaking. In addition, the list of crimes that count as serious or violent in the state of California is much longer than that of other states, and consists of many lesser offenses that include: firearm violations, burglary, simple robbery, arson, and providing hard drugs to a minor, and drug possession.[17] As another example, Texas does not require any of the three felony convictions to be violent, but specifically excludes certain "state jail felonies" from being counted for enhancement purposes.

Please try to be honest when you post on ATS. Thanks.

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
Is it okay to penalize someone for the rest of their lives because of a mistake?

Men are penalized for the rest of their lives for 'mistakes'. It's called child support


I find it difficult to care about sterilizing undesirables, seeing as how there is a direct correlations found between poverty, criminality and government subsidies and number of children bore.

Please enlighten me as to why the dregs of society should be the driving force of population growth? To me it seems counterproductive and counter-intuitive to our species as a whole to allow lesser specimens to breed in the first place.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Read your links, they specifically mention three strikes laws. Guess what happens when you're homeless? You don't suddenly come out of jail and stop being homeless.

originally posted by: Lipton

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
Is it okay to penalize someone for the rest of their lives because of a mistake?

Men are penalized for the rest of their lives for 'mistakes'. It's called child support

I find it difficult to care about sterilizing undesirables, seeing as how there is a direct correlations found between poverty, criminality and government subsidies and number of children bore.

Please enlighten me as to why the dregs of society should be the driving force of population growth? To me it seems counterproductive and counter-intuitive to our species as a whole to allow lesser specimens to breed in the first place

Yea they did that to native indians as well, you don't want them to reproduce.. do you?

There are many reasons people can get poor and when poor it's just more likely you will do a crime.. you need money to survive and when you can't get a job and you must still eat, some must steal something perhaps.. You can't even grow your own food these days, all land is owned by someone.

What if tomorrow there would be a economical meltdown, just watch how many people do crimes then.

a reply to: Plugin

WOW, I'm not sure which to be shocked more about, that people let it happen, or that this doctor "Himmler wannabe" actually responds to this like he is making it sound like a good thing because he thinks he is saving tax dollars by doing it. His sense of patriotism sure is quite twisted and perverted.
Maybe he ought to consent to having himself castrated, or using his own method, skip the consent part and just do it.

American life is becoming more barbaric by the day.

a reply to: Aazadan

I provided one link in this thread. It IS the wiki for 3 strike laws. It SPECIFICALLY STATES that this law is in effect for SERIOUS and FELONY crimes. Don't weasel out of this one. You're either ignorant, or a liar.