Judge arranges sterilization as part of Charleston woman's probation

Originally posted by Fremd
It's the same thing as saying "if you want out of jail, you'll have to be visited weekly by a parole officer and pee in this cup"

Originally posted by eradown
You will find there are not that many people who want to sterilize themselves ,so the eugenicists are turning to the court system to carry out their wishes. The court system is not set up to do sterilize people the creepy eugenicists do not want as neighbors. If the eugenicists can make a case for sterilizing some woman for selling weed, they will sterilize a poor bar keep who mistakenly sold some spoiled brats armed with fake I.D.'s achohol.

In pursuit of love
By Vincent J. Genovesi

According to the 1995 report published by the National Center for Health Statistics, sterilization is now the most common recourse of Americans who wish either to limit the size of their families or to avoid procreation altogether. Using data from 1990, the last year for which figures were available, the report shows that of the Americans wishing to avoid parenthood or an increase in family size, about 42% get sterilized(29.5% of the women and 12.6% of the men; it is also estimated that 2/3rds of all married couples practicing contraception opt for sterilization within 15 years after marrying) . . .

Hardly, whatever idiot doctor does the deed will be touching a woman in the private parts without her consent. That is rape. The result will be infertility. Forced sterility is as bad if not worse as forcing a woman through rape to bear children. The act is brutal and non consensual: the definition of rape.

Originally posted by eradown

 

You have got to be kidding! Read what some of the women who were forcibly sterilized by self righteous eugenecists have to say before you make such a presumption.

Originally posted by eradown
reply to post by Kailassa

 

I don't know you well enough to judge you one way or the other ,but you are wrong that forced sterilization is not as terrible as a rape which results in an unwanted child. . . .

I doubt many women who have been brutally raped and forced to bear children would agree that being given the option of a tubal ligation is in anyway comparable.
I certainly don't.

"As the procedure was something that my client had expressed interest in in both the past and present, as well as the fact that Judge Egnor was not ordering her to get the procedure done as a condition of probation, I did not feel that my client's rights were being violated," Payne said.

Granted, I didn't read more than the first page of responses but I've got to ask the question... Did anyone even READ the article?

It was not forced nor coerced. This seriously looks like the judge was trying to help AND the system.

"Discussing sterilization with a defendant is coercive," he said. "It interferes with a fundamental right, the right to procreate, the right to bodily integrity."

"There's no way that the defendant won't be worried about the consequences if she changes her mind. There's no way that her response to the judge is an independent decision," he said. "There are many, many cases that say that judges cannot coerce, suggest, or enforce sterilization on criminal defendants. It's simply beyond the reach of the criminal law."

Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who heads the Center for Ethical Advocacy and teaches law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said Egnor's suggestion was "inherently coercive."

"It's very hard for her to say no to somebody in black robes who holds the key to her prison cell," she said. "This would be one thing if this was her pastor or her counselor, but this is someone who has the power to send her to prison."

Originally posted by eradown
reply to post by Kailassa

 

Kailissa, I don't care if you respect me and you did not win me over to the pro/forced tubal crowd, so I owe you no apology; I still disagree with you. I always will disagree with you on the merits of tubal ligation. Your glowing endorsment of tubal ligation did not move me at all. I just thought you were trying to con me . I also thought the pro tubal ligation rant did not have much to do with an obvious civil rights violation.You need to reexamine how you treat people you consider less important than yourself. My conscience is clear.

"[Butterworth] recognizes the need to make changes in her life in order to provide for herself and her family," Egnor's order reads. "After inquiring of the defendant, the Court further recognizes [her] desire to have a tubal ligation and has located a provider who will do it free of costs, with arrangements to be made in the next 30 days."

Defense attorney Michael Payne said his client, who has three children and is not married, was enthusiastic about the idea when the judge brought it up.

"As the procedure was something that my client had expressed interest in in both the past and present, as well as the fact that Judge Egnor was not ordering her to get the procedure done as a condition of probation, I did not feel that my client's rights were being violated," Payne said.
wvgazette.com...