MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2903044295 · doi:10.1353/his.2018.0041

Fixing the Poor: Eugenic Sterilization and Child Welfare in the Twentieth Century by Molly Ladd-Taylor

2018· article· en· W2903044295 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jon Wlasiuk

Notice bibliographique

RevueHistoire sociale · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedical History and Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEugenicsSterilization (economics)LawSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Fixing the Poor: Eugenic Sterilization and Child Welfare in the Twentieth Century by Molly Ladd-Taylor Jon Wlasiuk Ladd-Taylor, Molly – Fixing the Poor: Eugenic Sterilization and Child Welfare in the Twentieth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2017. Pp. 275. The state of Indiana passed the first eugenic sterilization law in 1907, and over the next eighty years thirty-two states sterilized more than 63,000 Americans often without prior consent and at times without the patient's knowledge. For historians, eugenic sterilization has become a set-piece illustrating the hubris of the high-modernist faith in medical authority with sinister echoes of the Nazi quest for racial purity. In this poignant study of the state of Minnesota's eugenic sterilization program, Molly Ladd-Taylor provides a sobering reassessment anchored to evidence that gives voice to the heartbreaking experience of the men and women who became the subjects of Minnesota's sterilization program. Ladd-Taylor argues that so much scholarly attention has focused on outliers, such as states with high-sterilization rates or zealous eugenicists, that valuable narratives about the average experience has been overlooked. Minnesota provides an ideal case study because it sterilized a modest number of people (2,350) more or less on a voluntary basis with few active partnerships between the program and the eugenics movement. As Ladd-Taylor argues, this book is a social history focused on the routine "social welfare policies that aimed to solve the problems of poverty, sex, and single motherhood by 'fixing' the poor" (p. 2). As such, Ladd-Taylor's research is part of a revision among scholars to highlight how American understandings of the connections between poverty, behavior, and reproduction have changed and persisted into the present. Eugenic sterilization was born out of the crises of the Gilded Age, when growing urban populations composed of ethnically diverse immigrants stretched social support systems to the breaking point during the boom and bust cycles that characterized the time period. Ladd-Taylor argues that two Gilded Age ideas would inform eugenic policies throughout the twentieth century. The first was the identification of a two-tiered understanding of poverty and an impulse to distinguish between the "deserving" and "undeserving" poor through "scientific charity" (p. 27). The second was the invention of childhood as a distinct and fragile stage of development necessary to producing fully realized citizens and workers. Scientific charity gained coherence in the 1870s and 1880s with the publication of Richard Dugdale's 1877 eugenic study of the Jukes family and Frederick Wine's demographic analysis of "defective" classes for the 1880 census. These two studies confidently tied poverty to genetics and attempted to quantify the economic and social costs of, in Wine's phrasing, the "morphology of evil" (p. 29). In creating its first poor law in 1864, the state of Minnesota recognized a public responsibility for addressing poverty that blossomed into a flirtation with socialism during the People's Party movement of the 1890s, which advocated systemic reform of society to uplift the deserving poor. By the Progressive Era, scientific charity had merged with eugenics to focus on the childhood environment. For Ladd-Taylor, the passage of Minnesota's Children's Code in 1917 served as "the foundation of its eugenic sterilization law" because it encoded these earlier understandings [End Page 435] into law and empowered the state to "impose certain behavioral and economic standards on the poor" (pp. 26, 56). As the Children's Code swamped Minnesota's aging institutions, Ladd-Taylor details how welfare officials viewed sterilization as a solution to poverty. Ladd-Taylor is at her best when situating Minnesota's experience in the larger context of American history, such as the Progressive Era imperative to quantify and categorize every facet of economic and social life. As Victorian social norms of female behavior clashed with the ascendant dance hall culture of the Jazz Age, the more traditional social welfare agents at the Minnesota Board of Control came into conflict with such hardcore eugenicists as Guy C. Hanna, the superintendent at the Faribault School for the Feebleminded. Ladd-Taylor reconstructs these battles by mining rich local collections. While Hanna believed that feeblemindedness was a...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,831
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,234
Écart entre enseignants0,213 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHistoire socialeMême sujetMedical History and ResearchTravaux en français237 207