34 People In Forced Sterilization Program Found

North Carolina officials have tracked down less than three dozen of the thousands of residents forced to undergo sterilizations between 1929 and 1974.

The Charlotte Observer reports Sunday that state officials believe at least 1,500 of the 7,600 people sterilized under a state program are still alive. Gov. Bev Perdue created the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation last year.

The newspaper reports only 34 files have been matched to living survivors or descendants of the dead.

North Carolina officials are considering compensating survivors. A task force Perdue created in March is supposed to figure out possible cash payments. It is expected to make its recommendation in February.

The Eugenics Board approved sterilizations for people who suffered from mental illness, epilepsy and those with low intelligence.

You must be logged in to post comments.

Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by scarlett on Nov 7, 2011 at 02:54 PM
    Forced sterilization is one matter and simple birth control is quite another. I have relatives and friends who would have fallen under that "mental illness" heading. Would you sterilize someone who is responding to medication simply because they are diagnosed as having a mental disorder? It was unethical and an american tragedy.
  • by Angie Location: Gville on Nov 7, 2011 at 12:00 PM
    People that should "not" have children do it everyday. I think the more you have the less you get in welfare benefits. I cannot believe they are trying to pass a bill to provide diapers. What's next, a free college education. Oh wait, they get that too! Ok for all the free loaders complaining on this page, say Thank You for all of us working "American" who make it possible for you to get a check for school and the other stuff you want.
    • reply
      by okay.. on Nov 7, 2011 at 03:44 PM in reply to Angie
      i agree with your point, but i think that we cannot support a program of permanently sterilizing people because it is highly unethical. i think that if a woman is on welfare, she should be subjected to a form of birth control (iud, depo, NO pills!)which can be monitored by the govt. if you are paid by the govt, you should have to answer to it too.
      • reply
        by DIXIECHICK on Nov 8, 2011 at 04:05 AM in reply to okay..
        I agree with your last point.
  • by Not A "God Given" Right on Nov 7, 2011 at 10:44 AM
    Just because you CAN have babies, doesn't mean you're right to have children. Not everyone is cut out to raise children. Not everyone has the finacial backing or business sense.
    • reply
      by so what? on Nov 7, 2011 at 06:09 PM in reply to Not A "God Given" Right
      what are the criteria for this? do you really want your scary socialist government deciding whose parts to be snipped?
  • by greenville Location: greenville on Nov 7, 2011 at 08:49 AM
    Need to reinstate this!
  • by Anonymous on Nov 7, 2011 at 08:35 AM
    If you would do a little research on this subject, you would see that this program is now what is known as "Planned Parenthood" yes the same people that did this, were also the creators of the popular "Planned Parenthood" that many of you back.
  • by J.D. Location: ENC on Nov 7, 2011 at 07:19 AM
    This country needs a program like this now. Look at all the people on welfare that a check is the only reason they have kids any way. If you are put on welfare and food stamps you should also be put on some kind of birth control and I don't mean the pill. Once you get off welfare then you can have the birth control removed. Why should I pay for and take care of someone else's kids. Most on welfare with kids get free food free medical and who knows what else. I say it is time to crack down on people working the sysytem.
    • reply
      by yuck on Nov 7, 2011 at 08:56 AM in reply to J.D.
      I totally agree!
    • reply
      by Formerly O.L.I. on Nov 7, 2011 at 01:25 PM in reply to J.D.
  • by Anonymous on Nov 7, 2011 at 07:18 AM
    Is this going to happen in 50 years with sex offenders too. You have people on that list that did NOTHING to a child but yet has to stay away from schools, can't take there own kids to a play ground. Evry time you turn around someone is calling you a pedophile. Cost the State millions of dollers.
  • by Brooke Location: Greenville on Nov 7, 2011 at 04:56 AM
    Although I think this was harsh, I think it was the right idea. Requiring women in those types of situations to get a IUD wouldn't be such a bad plan.
  • by a family member Location: enc on Nov 6, 2011 at 08:55 PM
    My aunt was one of these unfortunate ladies that had the right to have a child taken from her. She was not slow, or unfit. She did come from a financial challenge family that had lots of children. That is when after a dr visit they told her she needed to have some female surgery done to protect her and instead they sterilized her. She spent many years longing for a child and cared for everyone's children on a daily basis. Even on her dying days she would ask for a child and by bringing one of her great niece's to see her would calm her down. Now all these years later people are trying to decide to pay for their crimes. No amount of money would bring that happiness to my aunt. It sickens me to think of what these people went thru. I hope the people that came up with this scheme and the dr's that went thru with this understand what they have done. Karma's coming if it hasn't already.
    • reply
      by Anonymous 2 on Nov 8, 2011 at 01:07 AM in reply to a family member
      I am not a family member, but as a child I remember my granny talking about a woman who lived across the way from her that had had this surgery years ago because they thought this woman to be "slow" was the term she used. How odd this made me feel at the age of 10. and how scared I was of this woman who had never done anything wrong to me or anyone I know. This woman was only 16 years old when her parents decided for her to have this done.
  • by The Wise One Location: NC on Nov 6, 2011 at 07:46 PM
    I hope no conservatives supported such a measure, or it shows how hypocritical some people can be. What's the moral difference between sterilization and abortion? In essence, there's not one; both processes disrupt the natural reproductive process. Sterilization might have allowed some people to feel good about themselves knowing that they kept (or are keeping in some instances) the undesirables from giving birth, but they're no better than those who support abortion.
    • reply
      by MARILYN on Nov 7, 2011 at 09:01 AM in reply to The Wise One
      I cannot believe you just posted that comment. We are all welcome to our own opinion but your opinion is somewhat twisted. Is the man who gets treatment for cancer immoral as he is interrupting the natural process of that cancer? You need help!
      • reply
        by Anonymous on Nov 7, 2011 at 10:21 AM in reply to MARILYN
        You just compared reproductive control to cancer, and you're calling The Wise One twisted?
    • reply
      by yep on Nov 7, 2011 at 06:11 PM in reply to The Wise One
      they cant tell us what to do with our bodies or what not to do! im assuming thats why the program stopped in 74. im completely against abortion by the way, and also against people having babies that dont know how to take care of them. we cant have it both ways and i prefer my goverment not to have their hands anywhere near my body or anyone else!
  • Page:

275 E. Arlington Blvd. Greenville, NC 27858 252-439-7777
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 133329758 - witn.com/a?a=133329758
Gray Television, Inc.