Great Wall Institute: The Process of the Great Wall of Los AngelesMain MenuResearch of the DecadesResearch1960s Illustration DevelopmentIllustration DevelopmentPlaylists of the DecadesPlaylistssparcinla.org185fc5b2219f38c7b63f42d87efaf997127ba4fcGreat Wall Institute - Social and Public Art Resource Center (SPARC)
60s Forced Sterilizations
12023-05-08T05:47:14+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49171960s Focused Researchgallery2023-09-20T19:35:50+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49*Select the content pages below for more on information on the images above included in the media gallery.
This page has paths:
1media/Screen Shot 2023-03-09 at 5.12.11 PM.png2023-07-19T19:29:37+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s Research Timelinesparcinla.org681960s Focused Researchtimeline18402024-03-27T23:36:21+00:00sparcinla.org185fc5b2219f38c7b63f42d87efaf997127ba4fc
Contents of this path:
12023-03-21T19:19:28+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s and 70s - No Más Bebés: Forced Sterilization2They came to have their babies. They went home sterilized. The story of immigrant mothers who sued county doctors, the state, and the U.S. government after they were pushed into sterilizations while giving birth at the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center during the 1960s and 70s. Led by an intrepid, 26-year-old Chicana lawyer and armed with hospital records secretly gathered by a whistle-blowing young doctor, the mothers faced public exposure and stood up to powerful institutions in the name of justice.plain2023-10-16T20:37:04+00:001978Latinx Movements and ActivismGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
12022-07-28T22:57:50+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s Puerto Rican Women Sterilized as a "solution to poverty"3Many of the women, such as the one featured above, did not know what they were getting themselves into. The operation was marketed as a solution to poverty and many women thought that once their tubes were tied, they could be “untied”. This was not the case and they ended up losing their reproductive rights to give birth to more children.plain2023-10-16T20:39:44+00:001960sLatinx Movements and ActivismWomens Liberation/ Reproductive RightsGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
12022-07-26T23:35:47+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s Reproductive Justice for Latinas: Coerced, Forced, and Involuntary Sterilization2By 1934, there were 67 birth control clinics operating under federal funding through Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Puerto Rican Relief Administration; in 1936, the Maternal and Childcare Health Association, a private entity, opened 23 more. A law passed the following year—Law 116—made sterilization legal and free for Puerto Rican women. Family planning clinics offering free sterilization were installed in the new factories of the industrial wave; women were encouraged to work in needlework and textile industries there, and were shown favoritism for sterilization compliance. Health officials campaigned door-to-door for sterilization throughout rural communities, too. In a dire economic situation and with few affordable alternative contraceptive methods available, the operation—or la operacion, as it was referred to locally—became commonplace. By the 1960s, about one-third of the female population had been sterilized—and many of those women hadn’t been educated about the permanency of tubal ligation.plain2023-10-16T20:41:39+00:001960Latinx Movements and ActivismWomens Liberation/ Reproductive RightsGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
1media/Sterilization in East LA_thumb.png2022-07-27T23:31:18+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s - 1970s Uninformed Consent to Sterilization - Latina Women in targeted in East LA1Similar to the sterilization that occurred in Puerto Rico to address a seeming overpopulation on the island, women in East LA experienced sterilization in the form of uninformed consent, where they were unable to either understand what they were signing due to it being written in English, or they did not remember signing it in the first place due to being in labor.media/Sterilization in East LA.pngplain2022-07-27T23:31:18+00:00Dolores Madrigal (l) and attorney Antonia Hernández (r) at a press conference announcing the 1975 lawsuit Madrigal v. Quilligan. Madrigal, along with ten other women, sued the head of obstetrics at the USC Medical Center for forced sterilization.1960sGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
1media/Forced Sterilization _thumb.png2022-07-27T23:33:15+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491960s A doctor at Los Angeles Community Hospital during the 1970s contested the notion that they targeted the Mexican community for sterilizations.2Maria Figueroa returns to the maternity ward at Los Angeles county hospital. Her story is part of the PBS documentary “No Más Bebés.”Kevin Castro/In this case, the lack of similar efforts to conduct sterilizations in other hospitals underlines the racist sentiments in these forced surgeries. Specifically, in the Los Angeles region, only east LA and LA Community Hospital performed these operations and received such pushback. In other words, the only community that suffered due to uninformed and nonconsensual sterilization was east LA, a predominantly Mexican community. Furthermore, the tactic of asking non-English speakers to sign a form in English in most cases applied to the Mexican community in Los Angeles.media/Forced Sterilization .pngplain2022-07-27T23:36:06+00:00A common argument given by doctors is that nothing they did shows they specifically targeted the Mexican community. Nevertheless, the standard operating procedures implemented at the hospital included asking patients to sign forms while under labor, not translating forms into Spanish for Spanish speakers, and overall not ensuring the informed consent at the time of signage. Combined, the doctors’ lack of concern for their patients and systematic targeting of patients while under labor and with English forms is understood to be forced sterilization. Regardless of original intention, be it money due to extra surgeries or increased prestige due to more successful surgeries completed, these doctors ultimately forcibly sterilized hundreds of women from a minority group, terminating their chances for reproduction and raising a family; they were able to do so primarily due to the race of their victims.1960sGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
12022-07-28T22:52:14+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49La Operación - The Subversion and Portrayal of Female Agency in Latinx Reproductive Rights6Widespread sterilization operation led by the United States during the 1950s and 60s in Puerto Rico. La Operación is a documentary from 1982 that shows the widespread sterilization operation led by the United States during the 1950s and 60s in Puerto Rico. Ana María García directed the film which highlights how the United States pushed for increased female sterilization in Puerto Rico. She mixes in the documentary a blend of interviews with women from different socioeconomic and racial backgrounds but the interviews are not the only focus of her work; she also incorporates scenes showing a sterilization procedure in addition to other historical and contextual parts.plain2023-08-12T01:21:28+00:001960account from the documentary displays the same message as the propaganda above, that there are prosperity and good living associated with sterilization, based on the belief that too many kids lead to a perpetual state of destitution. These false beliefs led many women to give up their agency over their bodies and cave into getting sterilized—except they did not know all the time what they were signing up for.sparcinla.org185fc5b2219f38c7b63f42d87efaf997127ba4fc
1media/Screen Shot 2022-07-27 at 5.43.05 PM_thumb.png2022-07-28T00:49:37+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491964 Forced sterilization policies in the US targeted minorities and those with disabilities – and lasted into the 21st century3In August 1964, the North Carolina Eugenics Board met to decide if a 20-year-old Black woman should be sterilized. Because her name was redacted from the records, we call her Bertha. She was a single mother with one child who lived at the segregated O'Berry Center for African American adults with intellectual disabilities in Goldsboro. According to the North Carolina Eugenics Board, Bertha had an IQ of 62 and exhibited “aggressive behavior and sexual promiscuity.” She had been orphaned as a child and had a limited education. Likely because of her “low IQ score,” the board determined she was not capable of rehabilitation. Instead the board recommended the “protection of sterilization” for Bertha, because she was “feebleminded” and deemed unable to “assume responsibility for herself” or her child. Without her input, Bertha’s guardian signed the sterilization form.media/Screen Shot 2022-07-27 at 5.43.05 PM.pngplain2023-10-16T16:24:17+00:00August 1964Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
1media/Screen Shot 2023-03-21 at 12.13.37 PM_thumb.png2023-03-21T19:14:57+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a491970s L.A. Mexican Moms' Involuntary Sterilizations1Maria Figueroa returns to the maternity ward at Los Angeles county hospital. Her story is part of the PBS documentary “No Más Bebés.”Kevin Castro -"During the late 1960s and early 1970s, some Mexican and Mexican-American women who were admitted to Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center for an emergency caesarian faced an agonizing choice. If they wanted painkillers, or if they wanted to proceed with their operations, then they had to sign a piece of paper that a nurse or doctor thrust into their hands. “You better sign those papers, or your baby probably could die,” one woman recalls being told in Spanish. Many women gave their signature, on what they believed to be standard paperwork, despite feeling bewildered or disoriented, being in severe pain, or not understanding English. Only later did they learn that they had consented to a tubal ligation – sterilization – more commonly known as having their “tubes tied.” Those children that they had delivered at the hospital would be their last. For them, there would be no more babies, or as one woman put it in Spanish, No Más Bebés. Under California eugenics laws that were in place between 1909 and 1979, about 20,000 women — mostly Black, Latinx and Indigenous women who were incarcerated or in state institutions for disabilities — were forcibly sterilized or coerced into sterilization."media/Screen Shot 2023-03-21 at 12.13.37 PM.pngplain2023-03-21T19:14:57+00:001970sGina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49
12023-03-16T06:49:08+00:00Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49Panel Discussion of "No Más Bebés" Documentary4No Más Bebés tells the story of a little-known but landmark event in reproductive justice, when a small group of Mexican immigrant women sued county doctors, the state, and the U.S. government after they were sterilized while giving birth at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Marginalized and fearful, many of these mothers spoke no English, and charged that they had been coerced into tubal ligation — having their tubes tied — by doctors during the late stages of labor. Often the procedure was performed after asking the mothers under duress.plain2023-03-16T06:52:20+00:001978Gina Leonf0ac362b4453e23ee8a94b1a49fbeeafde2a0a49