Primary Source Set

The Eugenics Movement in North Carolina

Between 1929 and 1974, over 7,600 people were sterilized, or made unable to have children, in North Carolina. Sterilization was a key part of eugenics, a theory and movement that claimed it could improve humankind through selective breeding. Through sterilization, North Carolina restricted the fertility of individuals that were considered “undesirable.” Many were forced or coerced into sterilization. This primary source set uses newspaper articles, newspaper advertisements, and a bulletin to illustrate the effects of sterilization, eugenic ideas, and eugenic legislation in North Carolina.

Proceed with caution and care through these materials as the content may be disturbing or difficult to review. Many primary sources in this set use eugenicist ideas to support the discrimination of non-white people and people with mental illness or mental disability. Please read DigitalNC’s Harmful Content statement for further guidance.

Time Period

1912-2014

Grade Level

Undergraduate

Transcript

What Do You Know About – Sterilization? Is Yours One Of The Progressive States With Laws Providing For Sterilization Of The Mentally Unfit? Test Your Knowledge of this Important Health and Social Measure Answer These Questions “Yes” or “No” 1. Is it possible for a sterilized man or woman to lead a normal sex life? 2. Does your state eugenics board carefully investigate every case of insanity or feeblemindedness reported for sterilization before the operation is performed? 3. Will the state sometimes permit an insane or feebleminded person to adopt a child? 4. If a child does not inherit the mental defect of his parent can he be harmed by the parent’s mental affliction? 5. Are over half of the hospital beds in the United States occupied by mental patients? 6. Did Selective Service examinations reveal that the men of this country have exceptionally sound mental health? 7. Can some types of insanity now be cured? 8. Are new cures being found for feeblemindedness? 9. Do feebleminded persons have few children because they are less fertile than normal ones? 10. Is sterilization usually done against the wishes of the patient or of the patient’s family? 11. Does your state give its mentally defective citizens the protection of sterilization? (Correct Answers on Page 8) What Do You Know About Sterilization? Answers to questions on page3: 1. Yes A sterilzed [sic] man or woman can lead a completely normal, satisfying sex life because sterilization removes nothing from the body. The simple operation merely closes the tiny passages through which the life-producing cells must travel. The cells are absorbed by the body and the functioning of the sex organs is not affected in any way. 2. Yes State statutes provide special legal safeguards to prevent any abuse of this important law. A careful investigation is made by the State Eugenics Board of every case brought to its attention by health and welfare officials. If the Board finds that sterilization is indicated it can order the operation. 3. No Placing a helpless child in the care of mentally unbalanced or deficient persons would be grossly unfair and could result in tragedy. No conscientious judge would permit a person suffering from mental illness or deficiency to adopt a child. It is equally tragic and unfair to jermit [sic] children to be born to such parents, exposed to the double risk of questionable heredity and bad environment. 4. Yes It is possible for insane or feebleminded parents to give birth to mentally normal children, but such children are often psychologically affected for life by their home surroundings. Children reared by mentally deficient parents start life with an environmental handicap from which they may never recover. 5. Yes Mental cases occupy more than one-half of all the hospital beds in the United tSates [sic] at an annual cost to the tax-payers of about $170,000,000. There aremore [sic] persons in hospitals (207,329 at the last report) suffering from the type of insanity known as schizophrenia (dementia praeox) than any other single disease! If insanity is permanent, sterilization can be extremely valuable in protecting its victims from undesirable parenthood. 6. No Selective Service rejections because of mental disease or deficiency were high throughout the war. In 1943 they accounted for 22% and during 1944 for 42% of the men found unfit for military service. 7. Yes Insanity is mental illness, which frequently attacks persons who were entirely normal at birth. Medical science is learning more about ways to cure some types of insanity. 8. No Feeblemindedness is not a disease and therefor [sic] cannot be cured. Feebleminded patients are born with defective mental equipment which cannot be changed any more than the color of their eyes can be altered. With proper training some individuals can be taught to be reasonably self-reliant. They may even be self-supporting after marriage if protected from the responsibility and cost of rearing a family. Feebleminded girls are particularly in need of the protection of sterilization since they cannot be expected to assume adequate moral or social responsibility for their actions. 9. No Persons of low mentality are not less fertile than normally intelligent persons. Idiots and imbeciles seldom have either sexual or reproductive power, but morons, who far outnumber all other groups of mental defectives, are doubling their number with each generation. 10. No If the patient or his family feel that the operation should not be performed, appeal to the courts is possible. However, in almost all cases the operation is welcomed when it is understood that there will be no detectable physical or mental change except that children will not be produced. 11. ? If you live in one of these progressive states, your legislature has made legal provision for the sterilization of the mentally unfit. Arizona California Connecticut Delaware Georgia Idaho Indiana Iowa Kansas Maine Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Montana Nebraska N. Hampshire North Carolina North Dakota Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina South Dakota Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin For further information or additional copies of this questionnaire write to the Human Betterment League of North Carolina, Inc. P.O. Box 3036 Winston-Salem, N.C.

"What Do You Know About – Sterilization?," The Daily Tar Heel

In this second advertisement from the Human Betterment League, readers are prompted to test their knowledge about sterilization by answering eleven “yes” or “no” questions about the topic. On a later page, the League provides their correct answers to and explanations for each question. They stress that sterilization is a safe, legal, and necessary procedure to “protect” people with mental illness or “feeblemindedness” from becoming parents.

Contributed to DigitalNC by University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

View Original View Transcript

Chapel Hill, N.C. (Orange County)

The Eugenics Movement in North Carolina

Print/Download

Background

First proposed by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, eugenics claims humankind can improve through selectively breeding for traits that are considered desirable or superior. Although eugenics is scientifically incorrect and unethical, the early to mid-twentieth century saw the eugenics movement gain widespread popularity across the United States, including North Carolina. From 1929 to the late 1970s, North Carolina upheld and validated the eugenics movement through legislation and public promotion of sterilization.

Sterilization procedures allowed North Carolina to restrict or eliminate the fertility of people who were considered “undesirable.” Some examples of “undesirable” people included individuals with mental disabilities. In the articles and advertisements in this set, these individuals are often referred to as “feebleminded” and “mentally defective.” Eugenics supporters believed that the children of such people could inherit their “inferior” traits, causing a “burden” on the parents, the public, and the state. By sterilizing people, they thought the burden could be alleviated. While sterilization was aimed at people with disabilities, the procedure was also used extensively on non-white people or people whose sexual or social behavior was considered “defective.” Selective sterilization groups like the Human Betterment League claimed that the procedure was done with the consent of the patient or their family. However, many individuals were forced or coerced into sterilization.

In 1929, the General Assembly passed a law that permitted the sterilization of individuals held in any charitable or penal institutions in North Carolina when the sterilization was determined to be the best course of action for the individual or for the public good. In 1933, the General Assembly established the North Carolina Eugenics Board. Made up of five state government members, the Eugenics Board was responsible for reviewing and approving all sterilization procedures in North Carolina. In 1937, Assembly members passed another act that permitted state hospitals to temporarily admit and sterilize people who had been approved for the procedure by the Eugenics Board. While sterilization and eugenics were normalized and embraced in North Carolina during the early to mid-20th century, the 1970s saw public criticism rise. After a name change from the Eugenics Board to the Eugenics Commission in 1973, the group was abolished by the General Assembly in 1977.

In 2002, Governor Michael Easley made an official declaration to victims of forced or coerced sterilization. He apologized for the role that the North Carolina government had played in supporting and promoting selective sterilization. Easley also established a Eugenics Study Committee. In 2003, he repealed legislation that still made sterilization legal in the state. In a report made by the Eugenics Study Committee, members stated their belief that North Carolina should provide financial compensation to victims. Representative Larry Womble, who was part of the committee, later introduced a bill to give a sum of money to those affected by forced sterilization. However, it was not until 2010, when the Office of Justice for Sterilization Victims was created, that a compensation plan was put in place. By 2014, eligible individuals who made a claim to the Office received $20,000 or more as payment. Some have called the program flawed, as many victims were thought to have died by the time it was created. Moreover, only individuals whose sterilizations were approved by the Eugenics Board could file a claim; others who were sterilized under a different authority’s mandate were not able to receive compensation from the Office.

Discussion Questions

  1. Consider the first and second newspaper advertisement from the Human Betterment League. How do they describe the consequences of not sterilizing “feebleminded” and “mentally deficient” individuals? What tactics do they use to defend and justify sterilization procedures?

  2. Many of the primary sources in this set are newspaper articles or advertisements that promote selective sterilization to the public. How did mass media–like newspapers–influence the North Carolina public’s perspective on eugenics and sterilization?

  3. From the early to mid-twentieth century, selective sterilization was normalized and even encouraged in North Carolina. What factors contributed to the normalization and general support of sterilization?

  4. While the North Carolina government eventually established a compensation initiative for forced sterilization victims in 2010 and began payments in 2014, many have pointed out the flaws in the initiative. What are some of the issues in the compensation program, and what could the North Carolina government have done to better support victims of forced sterilization? Is there anything North Carolina can do today?

  5. Consider the viewpoints in The Carolina Times article, The North Carolina Catholic article, and The News-Journal article. What different perspectives do you notice in each piece? How does criticism of sterilization in The Carolina Times article differ from that in The North Carolina Catholic piece?

  6. Take a look at the article from The Smithfield Herald, making sure to notice the ways in which “better babies” are described. How does the “Better Babies Health Contest” connect to other eugenicist concepts, like selective sterilization?

This primary source set was compiled by Isabella Walker.

Updated January 2025