1. 1927 U.S. Supreme Court Case of Buck V. Bell
1927 U.S. Supreme Court Case of Buck V. BellThe theory of eugenics was brought to light in
1883 by a European scientist and it spread from Europe to the United States of America by
the end of the century. Following to legal flaws, a remedy to the situation was created by
designing a model of eugenic law that underwent review by professional legal experts. In an
effort to find out if the law would surpass a legal challenge if faced with one, Dr. Priddy filed
a petition in which Carrie Buck was to be sterilized. She was 18 years of age at his
institution and according to his claims, she was mentally aged 9 and she was a genetic
representation of threat to the entire society. Results of his research on the family of Buck
were that her mother aged 52 years and mentally aged 8 had recorded cases of prostitution
and immoral behavior during her lifetime. Amongst three other children birthed without
proper knowledge of how to parent them, Carrie Buck was adopted and after being school
for a period of five years she was proven to be habitual. She later on gave birth to an illicit
child. When her adopted family felt incapable of taking care of her any more, they
committed her as feeble minded to the state colony. Later on it was recognized that her
pregnancy was not a result of her own immoral behavior but rape by a nephew related to
the adoptive mother.After Priddy’ s death, he was succeeded by Dr. John Hendren Bell on
the case. When the case was moved to the Supreme Court of the United States it was argued
that the petition to sterilize Buck violated the right of all adults to procreate. In addition,
they argued that the petition was violating the clause of equal protection since this would
be treating a person in a different situation in a way not justifying equal treatment. These
arguments were based on the fact that the now passed sterilization law was for the
supposedly feeble minded admitted in certain mentioned institutions in the state. This
relieved generalization of all the institutions in the state as well as the patients who were
not in any institution in the state. The Supreme Court of the United States later on accepted
that Buck, her mother and her then born baby were promiscuous as well as feeble minded
and therefore it was in the best interests of the state to sterilize her.The decision of the
Supreme Court on the Buck v. Bell case was written by Justice Holmes, Oliver W. Jr. whereby
the court made a ruling that the state permitted obligatory sterilization of unfit people
including those with mental illnesses. This was meant to be a measure protecting the health
of the state however it was highly perceived as a backing of unenthusiastic eugenics. An
operation procedure was conducted Carrie Buck subjecting her to a salpingectomy and later
on she was released from the institution on parole.Eugenics is the attempt, in the scientific
field, to try and advance the human race through elimination of supposedly defective genes
2. from the gene pool as well as improving the population’ s genetic composition. It is also a
social philosophy that acts as a promoter of improving hereditary traits in humans through
upholding the reproduction of more desirable traits and people too. Eugenic movements
have spread fast worldwide since their discovery through promotions by governments as
well as institutions and individuals who have influence over people. With the adoption of
various policies of eugenics, programs like birth control, segregation and sterilization were
made possible. However much the discovery turned over and carried the scientific field a
step forward, it was also a way used to discriminate those individuals that the court might
have deemed feeble minded. For instance, in the case in focus eugenics theories were used
to forcefully subject Carrie Buck into a compulsory sterilization procedure that denied her
any more ability to procreate. As mentioned earlier, it would not only strip her of her citizen
right to procreate as an adult but also the state would not be treating her fairly. As a matter
of fact, Buck was the victim of immoral behavior when she was raped in summer by a
related nephew to the mother who had adopted her. After the occurrence she committed
herself in an attempt to save her adoptive family’ s reputation. This would have given the
Supreme Court of the United States more reason for the benefit of the doubt on whether to
allow for the petition to push through or not. It would have given them more reason to
consider the decision they made because even based on the accusations made on Buck and
the research conducted on her family, there was no enough proof to pass the petition.
Therefore it is clear that eugenics theories and policies were used in this case to implicate a
woman who did not really deserve the verdict she received.As Oliver Wendell Holmes
delivered the court’ s ruling he stated that it was preferably better for the world to prevent
the unfit from continuing those of their kind by use of appropriate means rather than wait
and later on execute the offspring. This was meant to bring out the clear meaning that it was
comparatively better to sterilize those proven to be feeble-minded to stop the genetic
continuity to the next generation and then sterilize them as well. Since it was medically
proven that these specific genes were transferred to off springs birthed by people with the
condition, it would mean that an entire lineage of people with mental illnesses and
supposedly feeble minds would be created. That is why Oliver Wendell was advocating for
sterilization of the individuals as soon as they were proven to be feeble minded so as to stop
the lineage from continuing through genetic transfer during procreation.Soon after the case
of Buck v. Bell eugenic sterilization laws started being legitimized in the United States of
America as was the intention. Many other states including those that already had
sterilization laws being enforced started adopting and implementing the law or improving
their constitutions to better detail this law. Due to the massive adoption of the sterilization
law, research was conducted on its enforcement especially in the United States. Following to
this it was concluded that the key reason why the sterilization was not practiced as much
even with legal enforcement was because the physicians ordering the sterilization
procedures were in fear of prosecution by the patients they would advocate for their
operation. This in turn reduced the intensity of the sterilization law as physicians would not
want to be the ones giving the green light for performance of the sterilization procedures.
Creation of new model laws with the ability of withstanding public and constitutional
analysis was also attempted with the aim of further enforcing sterilization. As a result of the
3. Skinner v. Oklahoma case that created enough public scandal and legal dilemma with the
intent of discouraging the implementation of sterilization laws, they were almost fully
wiped off the constitution.As of early 2011, discussions of compensating the many victims
of sterilization in the United States are underway. The 75th anniversary of the unlawful
Buck v. Bell decision dates back to May 2, 2002 as the case has not yet been overruled.
Almost 65,000 Americans had been forcefully sterilized by the year 1979 and a public
apology was recently passed in the state of Virginia stating that the eugenics movement was
a shameful effort in which state government never should have been involved (Head, 2008).
The study of genetics and especially in the field of heredity should not be used as a sufficient
reason to predict or rather justify decisions made and imposed on victims like Carrie Buck.
People should very well understand that as much as science serves a major role in overall
development it also has its flaws. The assumption that results of scientific experiments are
100 percent true should be curbed as well. These beliefs other than advancing development
also propel unjust decisions on victims like Buck. In the courts, facts should be used to judge
an individual and not scientific tests performed on them. This is because it is beyond
doubtful doubt that not every trait in an individual is passed on to the next generation.
Therefore genetics should not be used as the grounds for legal decisions and especially not
legal decisions that advocate for practices that involve tampering with the biological set up
individuals.ReferencesFSWP. (2012). Challenging West Virginia’ s Forced Sterilization Law.
Justice for SterilizationVictims Project. http://www.forcedsterilization.orgHead, T. (2008).
Forced Sterilization in the United States. Civil Liberties.http://www.
civilliberty.about.comKevles, D. (1998). In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of
Human Heredity. HavardUniversity Press.Lombardo, P. A. (2010). Three Generations, No
Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, andBuck v. Bell. The Johns Hopkins University
Press.Rhapsodyinbooks. (2011). May 2, 1927 – The U.S. Supreme Court Decided Buck v.
Bell. LegalLegacy. http://legallegacy.wordpress.com
