Female inmates sterilized in California prisons without approval

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mumei

Member
The Center for Investigative Reporting said:
Published Sunday, Jul. 07, 2013

Doctors under contract with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sterilized nearly 150 female inmates from 2006 to 2010 without required state approvals, the Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

At least 148 women received tubal ligations in violation of prison rules during those five years – and there are perhaps 100 more dating back to the late 1990s, according to state documents and interviews.

From 1997 to 2010, the state paid doctors $147,460 to perform the procedure, according to a database of contracted medical services for state prisoners.

The women were signed up for the surgery while they were pregnant and housed at either the California Institution for Women in Corona or Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla, which is now a men's prison.

Former inmates and prisoner advocates maintain that prison medical staff coerced the women, targeting those deemed likely to return to prison in the future.

Crystal Nguyen, a former Valley State Prison inmate who worked in the prison's infirmary during 2007, said she often overheard medical staff asking inmates who had served multiple prison terms to agree to be sterilized.

"I was like, 'Oh my God, that's not right,' " said Nguyen, 28. "Do they think they're animals, and they don't want them to breed anymore?"

One former Valley State inmate who gave birth to a son in October 2006 said the institution's OB-GYN, Dr. James Heinrich, repeatedly pressured her to agree to a tubal ligation.

"As soon as he found out that I had five kids, he suggested that I look into getting it done. The closer I got to my due date, the more he talked about it," said Christina Cordero, 34, who spent two years in prison for auto theft. "He made me feel like a bad mother if I didn't do it."

Cordero, released in 2008 and now living in Upland, agreed to the procedure. "Today," she said, "I wish I would have never had it done."

The allegations echo those made nearly a half-century ago, when forced sterilizations of prisoners, the mentally ill and the poor were commonplace in California. State lawmakers officially banned such practices in 1979.

In an interview with CIR, Heinrich said he provided an important service to poor women who faced health risks in future pregnancies because of past Caesarean sections. The 69-year-old Bay Area physician denied pressuring anyone and expressed surprise that local contract doctors had charged for the surgeries. He described the $147,460 total as minimal.

"Over a 10-year period, that isn't a huge amount of money," Heinrich said, "compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more."

The top medical manager at Valley State Prison from 2005 to 2008 characterized the surgeries as an empowerment issue for female inmates, providing them the same options as women on the outside. Daun Martin, a licensed psychologist, also claimed that some pregnant women, particularly those on drugs or who were homeless, would commit crimes so they could return to prison for better health care.

"Do I criticize those women for manipulating the system because they're pregnant? Absolutely not," said Martin, 73. "But I don't think it should happen. And I'd like to find ways to decrease that."

Martin denied approving the surgeries, but at least 60 tubal ligations were done at Valley State while Martin was in charge, according to the state contracts database.

Federal and state laws ban inmate sterilizations if federal funds are used, reflecting concerns that prisoners might feel pressured to comply. California used state funds instead, but since 1994 the procedure has required approval from top medical officials in Sacramento on a case-by-case basis.

Yet no tubal ligation requests have come before the health care committee responsible for approving such restricted surgeries, said Dr. Ricki Barnett, who tracks medical services and costs for the California Prison Health Care Receivership Corp.

The receiver has overseen medical care in all 33 of the state's prisons since 2006, when U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson ruled that the system's health care violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The receiver's office was aware that sterilizations were happening, records show.

In September 2008, the prisoner rights group Justice Now received a written response to questions about the treatment of pregnant inmates from Tim Rougeux, then the receiver's chief operating officer. The letter acknowledged that the two prisons offered sterilization surgery to women.

But nothing changed until 2010, after the Oakland-based organization filed a public records request and complained to the office of state Sen. Carol Liu, D-La Cañada Flintridge. Liu was the chairwoman of the Select Committee on Women and Children in the Criminal Justice System.

Prompted by a phone call from Liu's staff, Barnett said the receiver's top medical officer asked her to research the matter. After analyzing medical and cost records, Barnett met in 2010 with officials at both women's prisons and contract health professionals affiliated with nearby hospitals.

The 16-year-old restriction on tubal ligations seemed to be news to them, Barnett recalled. And, she said, none of the doctors thought they needed permission to perform the surgery on inmates.

"Everybody was operating on the fact that this was a perfectly reasonable thing to do," she said.

Martin, the Valley State Prison medical manager, said she and her staff had discovered the procedure was restricted five years earlier. Someone had complained about the sterilization of an inmate, Martin recalled. That prompted Martin to research the prison's medical rules.

Martin told CIR that she and Heinrich began to look for ways around the restrictions. Both believed the rules were unfair to women, she said.

"I'm sure that on a couple of occasions, (Heinrich) brought an issue to me saying, 'Mary Smith is having a medical emergency' kind of thing, "and we ought to have a tubal ligation. She's got six kids. Can we do it?'" Martin said. "And I said, 'Well, if you document it as a medical emergency, perhaps.' "

Heinrich said he offered tubal ligations only to pregnant inmates with a history of at least three C-sections. Additional pregnancies would be dangerous for these women, Heinrich said, because scar tissue inside the uterus could tear.

Former inmates tell a different story.

Link for the rest.

Who is surprised by the eugenics-tinged arguments? Anyone?
 

NoRéN

Member
"I'm sure that on a couple of occasions, (Heinrich) brought an issue to me saying, 'Mary Smith is having a medical emergency' kind of thing, "and we ought to have a tubal ligation. She's got six kids. Can we do it?'" Martin said. "And I said, 'Well, if you document it as a medical emergency, perhaps.' "

Heinrich said he offered tubal ligations only to pregnant inmates with a history of at least three C-sections. Additional pregnancies would be dangerous for these women, Heinrich said, because scar tissue inside the uterus could tear.

Former inmates tell a different story.

Damn.
 
One former Valley State inmate who gave birth to a son in October 2006 said the institution's OB-GYN, Dr. James Heinrich, repeatedly pressured her to agree to a tubal ligation.

"As soon as he found out that I had five kids, he suggested that I look into getting it done. The closer I got to my due date, the more he talked about it," said Christina Cordero, 34, who spent two years in prison for auto theft. "He made me feel like a bad mother if I didn't do it."

Cordero, released in 2008 and now living in Upland, agreed to the procedure. "Today," she said, "I wish I would have never had it done."

It is fucked up that they pressured her into it, but does she really think that having a seventh kid would help her other six kids?
Especially if she happens to be poor (considering the theft, I guess that's probable).

Regardless, I hope everyone involved is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
 

Eidan

Member
Christ. I just showed my girlfriend The House I Live In yesterday. The chains of destruction are indeed real.
 
I suppose we're as bad as Israel at this point, in regards to forced sterilization.

The prison population in the U.S. really are treated like subhumans. Not enough just to lock them up.

Add to that the fact that ~75% of them are there on light drug charges and probably never belonged there in the first place. Distressing.
 

Jackson

Member
The prison population in the U.S. really are treated like subhumans. Not enough just to lock them up.

This is ridiculous and awful, but there are far worse prisons in the world that you don't want to go to.

Humans are treated as subhuman regardless of culture/era, that's the problem. You screw up, you're not "worthwhile" as a human.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
I don't think having the biological ability to have children should necessarily mean one has the right to have as many kids as possible, there are far too many people on this planet already. But attempting to set aside my personal biases:

One former Valley State inmate who gave birth to a son in October 2006 said the institution's OB-GYN, Dr. James Heinrich, repeatedly pressured her to agree to a tubal ligation.

"As soon as he found out that I had five kids, he suggested that I look into getting it done. The closer I got to my due date, the more he talked about it," said Christina Cordero, 34, who spent two years in prison for auto theft. "He made me feel like a bad mother if I didn't do it."

Cordero, released in 2008 and now living in Upland, agreed to the procedure. "Today," she said, "I wish I would have never had it done."

I wouldn't call that "forced sterilization" or "without approval"...
She may wish she had not had the procedure done today, but in her own words he "suggested" and "talked about it". As far as making her feel like a bad mother is concerned, if she was in and out of prisons and had FIVE KIDS already, she probably was a pretty bad mother. And California taxpayers are probably better off not having her pump out any more babies. Or maybe she's cleaned up her act and has a nice job and is taking care of her kids just fine. It would have been interesting to see the article go into that...
 
I used to work in a prison healthcare unit (for men) but the topic of sterilization never came up. I wonder how commonplace this is. Were the surgeries done without their permission or just under coercion? I can understand the logic behind it, but it is a human rights violation. There are people out there who just keep having kids with no way to care for them, especially when drugs are involved. I can see how sterilization might benefit the woman and her children in that situation. Perhaps if the procedure was done with permission as a part of a program which helped them care for their current children, reduce sentence time, and offer financial assistance after they get out? It's a slippery topic, for sure.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
There are people out there who just keep having kids with no way to care for them, especially when drugs are involved. I can see how sterilization might benefit the woman and her children in that situation. Perhaps if the procedure was done with permission as a part of a program which helped them care for their current children, reduce sentence time, and offer financial assistance after they get out? It's a slippery topic, for sure.

I think some sort of an incentive system may make sense for repeat offenders with multiple kids, unfortunately I doubt people could even have a rational discussion about it...
 

daviyoung

Banned
I don't think having the biological ability to have children should necessarily mean one has the right to have as many kids as possible, there are far too many people on this planet already. But attempting to set aside my personal biases:



I wouldn't call that "forced sterilization" or "without approval"...
She may wish she had not had the procedure done today, but in her own words he "suggested" and "talked about it". As far as making her feel like a bad mother is concerned, if she was in and out of prisons and had FIVE KIDS already, she probably was a pretty bad mother. And California taxpayers are probably better off not having her pump out any more babies. Or maybe she's cleaned up her act and has a nice job and is taking care of her kids just fine. It would have been interesting to see the article go into that...

are you from California?
 

xbhaskarx

Member
are you from California?

Yes, I'm from California. And I don't have any kids myself, and don't plan on having any, before anyone asks. And I'm vegan.

ta2BR0T.png
 

Irnbru

Member
"Over a 10-year period, that isn't a huge amount of money," Heinrich said, "compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more."

This shit is just dark on so many levels.
 

soepje

Member
I don't think having the biological ability to have children should necessarily mean one has the right to have as many kids as possible, there are far too many people on this planet already. But attempting to set aside my personal biases:



I wouldn't call that "forced sterilization" or "without approval"...
She may wish she had not had the procedure done today, but in her own words he "suggested" and "talked about it". As far as making her feel like a bad mother is concerned, if she was in and out of prisons and had FIVE KIDS already, she probably was a pretty bad mother. And California taxpayers are probably better off not having her pump out any more babies. Or maybe she's cleaned up her act and has a nice job and is taking care of her kids just fine. It would have been interesting to see the article go into that...

How old are you?
 

Bombadil

Banned
Yes, I'm from California. And I don't have any kids myself, and don't plan on having any, before anyone asks. And I'm vegan.

ta2BR0T.png

Being vegan must be tough. All those vitamin deficiencies are going to catch up with you.

On topic, I disagree with the forced sterlizations, but I also disagree with people having 5 kids.
 

pants

Member
Was anyone actually forced/operated on against their will here or was this done after doctor-patient counselling? I've read the article as posted in the OP and the only thing pointing to a crime being committed is the vague statement at the end saying

Former inmates tell a different story.

and then there is no elaboration. It's normal to feel 'guilted' into doing something when the differing opinion comes from a figure of respect/authority like a policeman/doctor. Nothing here seems malicious apart from the ending vague sentence.
 

soepje

Member
Was anyone actually forced/operated on against their will here or was this done after doctor-patient counselling? I've read the article as posted in the OP and the only thing pointing to a crime being committed is the vague statement at the end saying



and then there is no elaboration. It's normal to feel 'guilted' into doing something when the differing opinion comes from a figure of respect/authority like a policeman/doctor. Nothing here seems malicious apart from the ending vague sentence.

It was ''without required state approvals''.

It´s easy to persuade already vulnerable individuals into getting them to do things. This was wrong.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
Being vegan must be tough. All those vitamin deficiencies are going to catch up with you.

That's funny, my doctor performs blood tests and seems to think I'm fine.

Speaking of health, is your avatar meant to honor some 300 pound dude who just died in his early 30s?
 
I don't know where to draw the line but if you are in prison and the state ends up paying much of the bill to raise your kids, I think the state should eventually get to tie your tubes.

That's not eugenics, that is just fiscal responsibility and punishment.

And the same should be done for male prisoners. Don't like it? Then don't commit crimes and have lots of children that the state has to pay for and it will never happen to you.
 

ronito

Member
after all the anti-kid/anti-big family rhetoric on GAF I'm interested to see how this thread plays out.

Personally I'm appalled. That being said I think tubal ligation for ANY woman that WANTS it should be free. But this is just terrible. Terrible. Terrible.
 

Eidan

Member
I don't know where to draw the line but if you are in prison and the state ends up paying much of the bill to raise your kids, I think the state should eventually get to tie your tubes.

That's not eugenics, that is just fiscal responsibility and punishment.

And the same should be done for male prisoners. Don't like it? Then don't commit crimes and have lots of children that the state has to pay for and it will never happen to you.

Jesus. You're out of your damn mind.
 

daviyoung

Banned
I don't know where to draw the line but if you are in prison and the state ends up paying much of the bill to raise your kids, I think the state should eventually get to tie your tubes.

That's not eugenics, that is just fiscal responsibility and punishment.

And the same should be done for male prisoners. Don't like it? Then don't commit crimes and have lots of children that the state has to pay for and it will never happen to you.

Have you lost your will to fight for basic human rights?
 
Jesus. You're out of your damn mind.

Why? Because I think prisoners who pump out kids that the state has to pay for should not be allowed to keep pumping out more kids?

Yeah, that's just crazy of me.

How many unwanted kids have you adopted?
 

Irnbru

Member
I don't know where to draw the line but if you are in prison and the state ends up paying much of the bill to raise your kids, I think the state should eventually get to tie your tubes.

That's not eugenics, that is just fiscal responsibility and punishment.

And the same should be done for male prisoners. Don't like it? Then don't commit crimes and have lots of children that the state has to pay for and it will never happen to you.

So if you end in jail one day,lets say for an a car accident ( something that could happen to an otherwise innocent person), you should be sterilized too? Are you alright with that?
 

pj

Banned
That's funny, my doctor performs blood tests and seems to think I'm fine.

Speaking of health, is your avatar meant to honor some 300 pound dude who just died in his early 30s?

This is so good it seems like Bombadil was setting you up for it
 

xbhaskarx

Member
Not cool.
Damn bro.
Fuck you too dude. Poor taste

His post
Being vegan must be tough. All those vitamin deficiencies are going to catch up with you.
was okay though, right?

Have you lost your will to fight for basic human rights?

Why should having as many kids as biologically possible be a "basic human right"?
People don't even have the right to drive a car, but taking care of another human life should be available to everyone, regardless of their ability to do so responsibly?
 
Have you lost your will to fight for basic human rights?
I'm fighting for the basic human rights of everyone else. Why should the rest of the population who act with some restraint be forced to pay for the uncontrolled behavior of a few people that feel they have the right to shove their own responsibilities on the rest of society?


Infinite food & shelter is not a 'basic human right'
 

Eidan

Member
Why? Because I think prisoners who pump out kids that the state has to pay for should not be allowed to keep pumping out more kids?

Yeah, that's just crazy of me.

How many unwanted kids have you adopted?

Considering the nature of incarceration in this country (disproportionate emphasis on minorities, and an over abundance of non-violent drug offenders clogging prisons), and how policies in place continue to incentivize recidivism (no access to most public aid to help one rebuild their life), the idea that repeat offenders should lose their ability to procreate is nothing short of fucking barbaric.
 

pants

Member
It was ''without required state approvals''.

It´s easy to persuade already vulnerable individuals into getting them to do things. This was wrong.
Couple of questions

Is it illegal ? (''without required state approvals'' doesn't really clarify this point enough I don't know how your laws work) Sounds dodgy as hell but the impression I get from the article is no one really knew about this law/clause/mandate/guideline

Is it immoral? (You're going to be hard pressed to convince me of this, unless the doctor(s) were feeding them a bunch of porkies or false information to further his/her mad scientist ambitions, I cannot see why in specific cases counseling a patient about the potential pitfalls of 5+ pregnancies is anything but responsible doctoring. Especially seeing as the choice is the patient's and knowing doctors, they would have explained the risks then given options not said "hey you gotta do this")

I'm struggling to see the vile intent you all are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom