Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Compulsory sterilization
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== India === [[The Emergency (India)|The Emergency]] in India from 1975 and 1977 resulted from internal and external conflict for the country, and resulted in misuse of power and human rights violations from the government.<ref name=":03">{{Cite news|date=11 May 2001|title=The Indira enigma|publisher=[[Frontline (US TV series)|Frontline]]|url=http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1809/18090740.htm|url-status=usurped|access-date=28 July 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061110074114/http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1809/18090740.htm|archive-date=10 November 2006}}</ref> On 6 August 1976, the state of [[Maharashtra]] became the first governmental unit to enact legislation mandating compulsory sterilization of men and women after the birth of a third child, passing the Family (Restrictions on Size) Bill on its third reading and sending it to the President of India for the required assent. The President reacted favorably and sent the bill back to the Maharashtra government with suggested amendments that would be necessary for an enactment, but before the measure could be passed, new elections were called and the legislation was not passed.<ref>Leela Visaria and Rajani R. Ved, ''India's Family Planning Programme Policies, Practices and Challenges'' (Taylor & Francis, 2016) pp. 28-29</ref> Stopping short of forced sterilization, the national government enacted an incentive program for a family planning initiative that began in 1976 in an attempt to lower the exponentially increasing population. This program focused on male citizens and used propaganda and monetary incentives to impoverished citizens to get sterilized.<ref>{{cite news|title=A generation of lost manhood|website=[[The Times of India]]|date=26 June 2015 |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/A-generation-of-lost-manhood/articleshow/47824811.cms|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160107221309/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/A-generation-of-lost-manhood/articleshow/47824811.cms|archive-date=2016-01-07}}</ref> People who agreed to get sterilized would receive land, housing, and money or loans.<ref name="Relyingonhardandsoftsells2">''Relying on Hard and Soft Sells India Pushes Sterilization'', New York Times, 22 June 2011.</ref> This program led millions of men to receive vasectomies, and an undetermined amount of these were coerced. There were reports of officials blocking off villages and dragging men to surgical centers for vasectomies.<ref name=":17">{{Cite news|date=2014-11-14|title=India's dark history of sterilisation|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-30040790|access-date=2021-04-08}}</ref> However, after much protest and opposition, the country switched to targeting women through coercion, withholding welfare or ration card benefits, and bribing women with food and money.<ref name=":622">{{Cite journal|last=Wilson|first=Kalpana|date=2017-04-01|title=In the name of reproductive rights: race, neoliberalism and the embodied violence of population policies|url=https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/20444/1/Kalpana%20Wilson%20New%20Formations%202017.pdf|url-status=live|journal=New Formations|volume=91|issue=91|pages=50β68|doi=10.3898/newf:91.03.2017|issn=0950-2378|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190428234457/http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/20444/1/Kalpana%20Wilson%20New%20Formations%202017.pdf|archive-date=2019-04-28|access-date=2019-12-16|s2cid=148987919}}</ref> This switch was theorized to be based on the principle women are less likely to protest for their own rights.<ref name=":17" /> Many deaths occurred as a result of both the male and the female sterilization programs.<ref name=":17" /> These deaths were likely attributed to poor sanitation standards and quality standards in the Indian sterilization camps. [[Sanjay Gandhi]], son of the then-Prime Minister [[Indira Gandhi]], was largely responsible for what turned out to be a failed program.<ref name=":03" /> A strong mistrust against family planning initiatives followed the highly controversial program, the effect of which continues into the 21st century.<ref>{{Cite news|date=September 1996|title=Male involvement and contraceptive methods for men|publisher=[[Frontline (US TV series)|Frontline]]|url=http://www.malecontraceptives.org/articles/ringheim_article.php|url-status=live|access-date=28 July 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060811233229/http://www.malecontraceptives.org/articles/ringheim_article.php|archive-date=11 August 2006}}</ref> Sterilization policies are still enforced in India, targeting mostly indigenous and lower-class women who are herded into the sterilization camps.<ref name=":622" /> The most recent abuse of family planning systems was highlighted by the death of 15 lower-class women in a sterilization center in [[Chhattisgarh]] in 2014.<ref name=":622" /> Despite these deaths, sterilization is still the highest used method of birth control with 39% of women in India turning to sterilization in 2015.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Sterilization: The Standard Choice in India|url=https://www.globalhealthnow.org/2018-09/sterilization-standard-choice-india|access-date=2021-04-08|website=Global Health NOW|language=en|archive-date=15 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210615071848/https://www.globalhealthnow.org/2018-09/sterilization-standard-choice-india|url-status=dead}}</ref> According to [[Human Rights Law Network]]:{{blockquote|In September 2016, the Supreme Court of India directed the Union Government to ensure the discontinuation of 'sterilization camps' within the following three years and to induce the state governments to follow suit. It also charged the government to ensure proper monitoring of the programme, investigate sterilization failures, complications or deaths, and increase the compensation amount in these cases. It further ordered the implementation of established legal, medical and technical standards for sterilization [...] Women were made to lay on bare mattresses for the surgeries, with no post-surgery recuperation facilities. Often the women were made to wait up to five hours after registering, and by the time they reached the operating table their an aesthetic would have worn off. In places like Bhubaneshwar, Odisha and Ferozpur, Uttar Pradesh, the doctors conducting surgeries would use bicycle pumps instead of an insufflator, to introduce air into the women's abdomens (as reported by Shreelatha Menon). The doctor in Bhubaneshwar stated that he had done over 60,000 tubectomies and many of them with bicycle pumps. In Kaparfora, Bihar, a woman was operated upon, even though she was pregnant, and suffered a miscarriage as a result. [...] Today, while laws may not announce eugenic aims, hidden agenda to dispose of "undesirables" in society can still be discovered by looking beyond the face of the law. While many population control policies may appear benign on their face, upon further investigation the stated medical reasons for sterilization and the identification of groups to which the law applies are revealed to be morally and legally suspect. For example, compulsory sterilization law laws often target LGBT+ people, especially transgender people.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Mistreatment and Coercion: Unethical Sterilization in India|url=https://hrln.org/uploads/2018/10/Mistreatment-and-Coercion-Unethical-Sterilization-in-India.pdf|website=Human Rights Law Network|access-date=4 January 2022|archive-date=2 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210802061259/https://hrln.org/uploads/2018/10/Mistreatment-and-Coercion-Unethical-Sterilization-in-India.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{long quote|date=October 2023}}}}Forced sterilization has been an issue that has also affected the disabled population of women in [[India]]. In 2016, the Right to Persons with Disabilities Act (RPWD) was introduced to legally address the problems faced by the disabled community and ensure equitable access to justice for all members of society:<ref name=":43">{{Cite journal |last=Goswami Vernal |first=Triveni |date=2023-02-28 |title=Rights of Persons with Disabilities in India: Provisions, Promises and Reality |url=https://digitalcommons.bau.edu.lb/schbjournal/vol4/iss2/4 |journal=BAU Journal - Society, Culture and Human Behavior |volume=4 |issue=2 |doi=10.54729/2789-8296.1069 |issn=2789-8296}}</ref><blockquote>"While the RPWD Act took a step towards recognizing the issue of forced abortions under Section 92(f)[1] which states that any medical procedure performed on a disabled woman without her express consent that leads to the termination of pregnancy is punishable with an imprisonment term, there is still no specific mention of forced sterilization as a problem."<ref name=":23">{{Cite news |last=Singh |first=Shivalika |date=March 20, 2023 |title=Forced Sterilization of Disabled Women in India: A Tale of Lost Autonomy |url=https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2023/03/20/forced-sterilization-of-disabled-women-in-india-a-tale-of-lost-autonomy/#:~:text=Women%20with%20disabilities%20in%20India,sterilization%20to%20regulate%20their%20fertility. |access-date=April 3, 2024 |website=LSE Human Rights}}</ref></blockquote>There is no clause in the RPWD that addresses the notion of "expressed consent."<ref name=":43" /> Consent in relation to family planning and sterilization practices has been a point of contention in India's history of reproductive justice of disabled individuals.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)