Children can now be sterilized in Oregon as young as 12!

[Emma]

You people are hilarious.

 

[Emma]

The article says that Oregon revised their statutes, but Emma's right..... I don;t see any amendments after 2005

"Oregon Revised Statutes" simply means the most current codified laws of the state.

The point of the article linked in the OP was to blame 'Obamacare':

There is a shocking development in the new Obamacare Contraception Mandate that went into effect in Oregon on August 1. Your 15-year-old (as young as 12 in some cases) child can be sterilized for free, without your consent.

Which is, of course, utter bullshit. Those statutes date back to 1983.

 

[Emma]

Anywho, the point of the law is to prevent indiscriminate, forced, or coerced sterilization and to protect those who are vulnerable and incapable of giving informed consent. It does not, as the op/article suggests, give free reign for minors to obtain sterilization procedures as a means of birth control.

The key phrase in the statute: [FONT=&quot]436.215 Legislative finding.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] The Legislative Assembly finds and declares that sterilization procedures are highly intrusive, generally irreversible and represent potentially permanent and highly significant consequences for individuals incapable of giving informed consent. The Legislative Assembly recognizes that certain legal safeguards are required to prevent indiscriminate and unnecessary sterilization of such individuals, and to assure equal access to desired medical procedures for these Oregon citizens. [1983 c.460 §4]


[/FONT]It then goes on to describe the multitude of legal hurdles one must clear in order to proceed with a sterilization procedure, particular to those who are permanently mentally and/or physically incapable of caring for a child even with assistance. IF the person is over 15 years of age and IF the person can understand the procedure and its consequences, then the person can consent to the sterilization for those reasons. IF the person is incapable of making informed consent, then the law sets out specific requirements that must be 'clear and convincing evidence' that the procedure is justified, otherwise it cannot be done. This law was enacted to repeal Oregon law providing for compulsory and coerced sterilization.



Eugenics: Compulsory Sterilization in 50 American States

Oregon

Number of Victims

2,341 sterilizations are recorded to have occurred in the state of Oregon from 1921 until 1983 (Lombardo, p. 293). However, in governor John Kitzhaber's 2002 “Human Rights Day” apology on behalf of the state, it is noted that 2,648 people were sterilized (Josefson, p. 1). Of the 2,648 people accounted for, 1,713 (65%) were women and 935 (35%) were men. Victims, drawn mainly from state institutions like mental hospitals, facilities housing developmentally disabled persons, and prisons, were deemed mentally ill (about one third) or deficient, or in earlier time periods, “feeble-minded” (almost 60%).

Period During Which Sterilizations Occurred

The first Oregon Eugenics law was signed into law in 1917 and was utilized within the year (Eccleston, p. 2). No sterilizations were reported in 1922 because the 1917 law was nullified by the Marion County Circuit Court and the 1923 law had not yet been passed (Largent, p. 200). The rate of sterilizations was greatest during the 1920s and 1930s, yet substantial number of sterilizations did occur after the end of World War II (Paul, p. 460). The Oregon eugenics program continued to sterilize patients until the 1960s and the law continued to be used sparing after the 1960s until its repeal in 1983. Two hundred and seventeen patients were sterilized after 1967 (Largent, p. 206).

Groups Targeted and Victimized

Oregon’s laws targeted three main groups:

The first group, the mental and physcially disabled, were generally clumped under the title of "insane" (Largent, p. 203). They were individuals that were considered to the lack intelligence or means to rear children in a modern society. Such people were deemed simple or feebleminded and drawn mainly from state hospitals and small towns. Many of these individuals were housed in the Oregon State Hospital in Salem or the Eastern Oregon State Hospital in Pendleton (Largent, p. 203).


The second group, "habitual criminals", were people convicted of three or more felonies, drawn mainly from state prisons (Largent, p. 203). Sometimes habitual sexual offenders used sterilization as an avenue to again gain parole (Largent, p. 205). They were seen as too risky for society in that they would undoubtedly raise families of ill and criminal regard. Prisoners were subjected to castration because of their sexual behavior inside prison; in order to solve the problem of sodomy within prisons men were recommended for surgery (Largent, p. 205).


The third and final group, were “sexual perverts and moral degenerates,” and came from both state prisons and hospitals (Largent, p. 195). The real distinguishing feature of Oregon's sterilization compared to other states was its especially virulent targeting of "sexual deviants." Although this included women at the margins of society, rapists and child molesters (Boag, p. 208), homosexual men were prosecuted and persecuted at higher rates (Owens-Adair, pp. 110, 183). Homosexual political and cultural scandals in Portland incited widespread outrage to homosexuality (Largent, p. 195), and as seen as a mental illness in the United States until the 1960s, was included under the charge of eugenics proponents. This led to a greater use of castration in Oregon as opposed to vasectomy, which is a much less invasive surgery, rather than just wanting to prevent the spread of unfavorable traits "authorities wanted to unsex them" (Largent, p. 205).


Other Restrictions Placed on Disabled People
In Oregon, like other states with eugenics laws, sterilization was often a precondition of being released from prison or from a state mental institution (Paul, p. 458). It was often individuals at the margins of society who were targeted as feeble-minded or perverseand they often had little choice but to consented to sterilization in order to regain their freedom. Even after release there was certainly a stigma associated with having been targeted by the Oregon Eugenics Board, based on the public characterizations made by eugenics proponents like Bethenia Owens-Adair. This stigma was often intense because the individuals targeted, such as homosexuals or the mentally ill, would have naturally already been at the far periphery of societal approval.

 

[Emma]

So there ya go.

The examiner "reporter" needs to learn to read, use Teh Google, print a retraction, and shut the hell up. Any or all of the above.

 

[Politico]

Get em' early I always say.