Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:26:22.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sterilization Policy, Economic Expediency and Fundamental Inheritance, with Especial Reference to the Inheritance of the Intelligence Quotient

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

Walter E. Southwick
Walter E. Southwick*
Affiliation:
Washington, D.C
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a social system where responsibility for the care and support of children rests with the parents, society is justified in imposing restrictions designed to prevent the births of children to a socially incompetent person who is unable to assume such responsibility. Owing to the overcrowded conditions of state institutions for the care of the mentally defective, it is certain that patients committed to such institutions are scarcely able to provide satisfactory care and support for themselves, and would not be able to provide adequately for any children that they might produce. On this basis, society is quite justified in enacting the regulation, as, according to Popenoe (1, 2), has been done in one State, that no patient who has been committed to a state institution for the care of the feeble-minded shall be allowed to leave the institution without having first been sterilized.

Type
Part II.—Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 85 , Issue 357 , July 1939 , pp. 707 - 718
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1939 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Popenoe, .—Proc. Amer. Assoc. for the Study of the Feeble-minded, 1927, xxxii, p. 86.Google Scholar
2 Idem. —Ibid., 1928, xxxiii, p. 62.Google Scholar
3 Sjögren, .—Hereditas, 1931, xiv, p. 197.Google Scholar
4 Slome, .—Journ. Genetics, 1933, xxvii, p. 363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Penrose, .—Lancet, 1935, ii, p. 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Munro.—Cited by Penrose, , Journ. Ment. Sci., 1938, lxxxiv, p. 693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Jervis, .—Arch. Neurol. and Psychiat., 1937, xxxviii, p. 944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Penrose, .—Journ. Ment. Sci., 1938, lxxxiv, p. 693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9 Popenoe, .—Journ. Soc. Hygiene, 1927, xiii, p. 321.Google Scholar
10 Idem. —Journ. Applied Psychol., 1928, xii, p. 304.Google Scholar
11 Terman, .—Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. I. Mental and Physical Traits of 1,000 Gifted Children, Stanford University, 1925.Google Scholar
12 Cox, .—Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. II. Early Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses, Stanford University, 1927.Google Scholar
13 Blackburn, .—Journ. Ment. Sci., 1938, lxxxiv, p. 1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14 Oakley, and Macrae, .—Handbook of Vocational Guidance, London, University of London Press, 1937.Google Scholar
15 Terman, and Merrill, .—-Measuring Intelligence, New York, Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1937.Google Scholar
16 Bernstein, .—Social Care of the Mentally Deficient (Problems of Mental Deficiency, No. 2), Washington, D.C., National Catholic Welfare Council, 1930.Google Scholar
17 Martz, .—Journ. of Applied Psychol., 1930, xiv, p. 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Vanuxem, .— Proc. Amer. Assoc. for the Study of the Feeble-minded, 1931, xxxvi, p. 310.Google Scholar
19 Woodall, .—Ibid., 1932, xxxvii, p. 328.Google Scholar
20 Goddard, .—Feeblemindedness, Its Causes and Consequences, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1914.Google Scholar
21 Bateson, .—Mendel's Principles of Heredity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 East, .—Amer. Nat., 1910, xliv, p. 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23 Davenport, .—Genetics, 1917, ii, p. 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.