To the Editor:
Re: Margaret Aune’s Letter, 9-15-21
I believe Ms. Aune’s solution to child poverty (forced sterilization) is offered with the best of intentions, but unfortunately some of history’s worst atrocities were committed with the best of intentions. The only way to avoid repetition of history’s mistakes is not to forget them. And this is a mistake that has been tried and that led to disaster, i.e. the eugenics movement of the first half of the 20th century. Subsequent attempts to distance this “solution” from the Nazi horrors cannot erase its tragic history. It turns out that “unfit to breed” is just one short step from “unfit to live.” (See Harry Bruinis, Better for All the World, for a history of eugenics and Steffen Kuhl, The Nazi Connection, for a grasp of its consequences.)
It began in America. Inspired by the success of animal breeding, early 20th century reformers determined that humans could deliberately create an improved species through selective breeding. All that was required was preventing the weak specimens from reproducing. To this end, they developed tubal ligations and vasectomies, and empowered governments to make the selections. Untold thousands of specimens were sterilized against their will, all to the betterment of society.
I think you can see the problem with the language I just used to describe the process; it reduces human beings to “breeds” and “specimens.” Once the public has accepted these descriptions and once they have given government the power to make the selections, they see little harm in speeding up the process. Just as animal breeders must eliminate the weaker specimens, eugenicists eliminated “unfit” humans. Early on, Hitler gave American eugenicists credit for the origins of his program, while they took pride in his “successful” application of their theories.
Without intending to, Ms. Aune makes similar assumptions about the “unfitness” of babies born to mothers who need government assistance. As a solution, she would empower government agents to take their mothers out of the gene pool with sterilization. Since over half of the babies in Texas are born on Medicaid, her solution would reduce our population considerably. (Tubal ligation reversal is far from 98% effective, and its cost ranges from $5,000 to $21,000.)
I would argue that she would also be preemptively eliminating some of our most valued citizens. My husband’s own family would have fit the profile she offers for sterilization. His father was disabled so the family was poor, criteria for sterilization under both the American and German programs. Nevertheless, their three children all earned college degrees and became productive citizens. His brother became a military pilot, his sister was a teacher, and he was a college teacher and a lawyer. Instead of turning them to a life of crime, their poverty committed them to a life of service to others. For example, his sister continues to tutor the children and grandchildren of her math students even after retiring, and my husband was committed to helping as many young people attend college as he could. Scholarships he established at NCTC attest to the commitment inspired by his own family’s struggles.
(Please note: I am NOT accusing Ms. Aune of being a Nazi, only of being unaware of the history of her idea.)
