Cultural Separation from Parents

Things that are not part of politics happening presently and how we approach or address it as Anabaptists.
Ken
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Ken »

Here you go...
https://time.com/5737080/native-america ... n-history/

A 1970 Law Led to the Mass Sterilization of Native American Women. That History Still Matters

Marie Sanchez, chief tribal judge on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation, arrived in Geneva in 1977 with a clear message to deliver to the United Nations Convention on Indigenous Rights. American Indian women, she argued, were targets of the “modern form” of genocide—sterilization.

Over the six-year period that had followed the passage of the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970, physicians sterilized perhaps 25% of Native American women of childbearing age, and there is evidence suggesting that the numbers were actually even higher. Some of these procedures were performed under pressure or duress, or without the women’s knowledge or understanding. The law subsidized sterilizations for patients who received their health care through the Indian Health Service and for Medicaid patients, and black and Latina women were also targets of coercive sterilization in these years.

But while Sanchez and the Native women with whom she organized responded to the results of that 1970 law, they also recognized that the fight against involuntary sterilization was one of many intertwined injustices rooted—as was their resistance—in a much longer history of U.S. colonialism. And that history continues to this day.

When the federal government forced Native peoples onto reservations in the 19th century, the situation produced a cascade of public-health disasters. By 1900, the American Indian population had reached its nadir of less than a quarter million. Infants and children proved particularly vulnerable to illness and death. One government official estimated in 1916 that approximately three-fifths of Indian infants died before age 5. On many reservations, women responded by bearing more children despite their compromised health. The historian Frederick Hoxie has argued that “only the maintenance of extraordinarily high birth rates” saved one nation from “dropping into oblivion.”

https://daily.jstor.org/the-little-know ... can-women/

The Little-Known History of the Forced Sterilization of Native American Women

Two fifteen-year-old Native American women went into the hospital for tonsillectomies and came out with tubal ligations. Another Native American woman requested a “womb transplant,” only to reveal that she had been told that was an option after her uterus had been removed against her will. Cheyenne women had their Fallopian tubes severed, sometimes after being told that they could be “untied” again.

For many, America’s history of brutal experimentation on people of color is perhaps best summed up by the Tuskegee Experiment, in which doctors let African-American men suffer from syphilis over a period of 40 years. But another medical outrage is less well-known. Jane Lawrence documents the forced sterilization of thousands of Native American women by the Indian Health Service in the 1960s and 1970s—procedures thought to have been performed on one out of every four Native American women at the time, against their knowledge or consent.

Both the IHS and its dark history of forced sterilization were the result of longstanding, often ham-fisted attempts to address American Indians’ health care needs, writes Lawrence. Medical services were part of U.S. agreements with sovereign tribes from as early as 1832, when a treaty with the Ho-Chunk, then often called the Winnebago, included the services of a physician in exchange for land in what is now Wisconsin. With the arrival of the Progressive Era, health interventions became even more of a priority and the Department of the Interior and later the newly-formed Indian Health Service devoted resources to education and medical care for American Indians on reservations.

The results of forced sterilization performed by the Indian Health Service in the 60s and 70s are still felt within tribes today.
Though the IHS did deliver better health care, it operated under historical assumptions that native people and people of color were morally, mentally, and socially defective long after it was founded in 1955. “Some of [the IHS doctors] did not believe that American Indian and other minority women had the intelligence to use other methods of birth control effectively and that there were already too many minority individuals causing problems in the nation,” writes Lawrence.

Assisted by government assumptions that high Native American birth rates should be stemmed, and bolstered by lax law enforcement and inaccurate descriptions of medical procedures provided to women who thought they were being treated for things like appendicitis, a rash of forced sterilizations began in the 1960s. Even after legislation designed to protect women from forced sterilization was passed in 1974, the abusive sterilizations continued. Between 1970 and 1976 alone, between 25 and 50 percent of Native American women were sterilized.

The results are still felt within tribes today. Lawrence documents everything from divorce to depression, but writes that perhaps the most dramatic effect to Native Americans at large was tribes’ loss of political power due to their dwindling numbers. Combined with the forced assimilation of Native American children of earlier generations in compulsory boarding schools and modern-day failures of social services to place Native American children in foster care with Native parents in accordance to modern child welfare laws, the forced sterilization of Native American women is another page in the long book of abuse wrought upon Native peoples by the United States.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
User avatar
ohio jones
Posts: 5305
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: undisclosed
Affiliation: Rosedale Network

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by ohio jones »

Ken wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 9:12 pm
ohio jones wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 8:25 pm
Ken wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 2:57 pm But if the student is truly trans then the school may change the listed gender on the school record and even on the birth certificate.
If schools are actually changing birth certificates, that's going way too far.
I didn't mean to say that schools are changing birth certificates. They aren't. I meant to say that parents of truly trans kids are changing their birth certificates and also reporting a different gender on school records.
Still ambiguous, but I think you mean that the parents are not changing their own birth certificates but those of their trans kids.

In that case there's no "cultural separation from parents." The parents are consenting, supporting, and facilitating, exactly the opposite of the thread topic.

From the OP:
...how is this [cultural genocide] different than what is happening in some school districts today where gender indoctrination is being coerced on children and in some cases without parental consent?
1 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins

I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
Ken
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Ken »

ohio jones wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 2:51 am
Ken wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 9:12 pm
ohio jones wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 8:25 pm
If schools are actually changing birth certificates, that's going way too far.
I didn't mean to say that schools are changing birth certificates. They aren't. I meant to say that parents of truly trans kids are changing their birth certificates and also reporting a different gender on school records.
Still ambiguous, but I think you mean that the parents are not changing their own birth certificates but those of their trans kids.

In that case there's no "cultural separation from parents." The parents are consenting, supporting, and facilitating, exactly the opposite of the thread topic.

From the OP:
...how is this [cultural genocide] different than what is happening in some school districts today where gender indoctrination is being coerced on children and in some cases without parental consent?
Well yes, it would be the parents who would be getting birth certificates modified to reflect gender change, or at least consenting to it. For example, here is the law in Washington. It requires parental consent for children under 18 unless the child is an emancipated minor: https://doh.wa.gov/licenses-permits-and ... ertificate

I would suggest that the number of transgender youth who have received medical interventions without their parents consent or knowledge is infinitesimally small. In fact I'm not aware of any documented cases of this at all. And if there are any, I expect it would be emancipated minors and therefore not under parent care anyway.

When you dig down into these stories it always ends up being some teen who is using a different pronoun or name in school that the parent isn't aware of and the story blows up into some breathless report about children being 'transitioned" without parental knowledge or consent. News flash. Trying on a different nickname or pronoun doesn't mean you have actually "transitioned" even one tiny bit. Words have meaning. It is funny how some people claim on the one hand that gender is fixed and cannot be changed, even with intrusive medical intervention and surgery. Then those same people turn around and claim on the other hand that a teen messing around with a different name or pronoun has been "transitioned." Which is it? And I expect that near 100% of teens in this country do things without their parents knowledge and consent. I'm sure mine do.
1 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
User avatar
ohio jones
Posts: 5305
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: undisclosed
Affiliation: Rosedale Network

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by ohio jones »

Ken wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 3:06 am I would suggest that the number of transgender youth who have received medical interventions without their parents consent or knowledge is infinitesimally small.
StrawMan.jpg
StrawMan.jpg (22.21 KiB) Viewed 177 times

Nobody in this thread has mentioned medical interventions. The thread is about culture.
1 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins

I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
Falco Knotwise
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:42 pm
Affiliation: Roman Catholic

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Falco Knotwise »

Ken wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 2:43 am Here you go...
https://time.com/5737080/native-america ... n-history/

A 1970 Law Led to the Mass Sterilization of Native American Women. That History Still Matters

Marie Sanchez, chief tribal judge on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation, arrived in Geneva in 1977 with a clear message to deliver to the United Nations Convention on Indigenous Rights. American Indian women, she argued, were targets of the “modern form” of genocide—sterilization.

Over the six-year period that had followed the passage of the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970, physicians sterilized perhaps 25% of Native American women of childbearing age, and there is evidence suggesting that the numbers were actually even higher. Some of these procedures were performed under pressure or duress, or without the women’s knowledge or understanding. The law subsidized sterilizations for patients who received their health care through the Indian Health Service and for Medicaid patients, and black and Latina women were also targets of coercive sterilization in these years.

But while Sanchez and the Native women with whom she organized responded to the results of that 1970 law, they also recognized that the fight against involuntary sterilization was one of many intertwined injustices rooted—as was their resistance—in a much longer history of U.S. colonialism. And that history continues to this day.

When the federal government forced Native peoples onto reservations in the 19th century, the situation produced a cascade of public-health disasters. By 1900, the American Indian population had reached its nadir of less than a quarter million. Infants and children proved particularly vulnerable to illness and death. One government official estimated in 1916 that approximately three-fifths of Indian infants died before age 5. On many reservations, women responded by bearing more children despite their compromised health. The historian Frederick Hoxie has argued that “only the maintenance of extraordinarily high birth rates” saved one nation from “dropping into oblivion.”

https://daily.jstor.org/the-little-know ... can-women/

The Little-Known History of the Forced Sterilization of Native American Women

Two fifteen-year-old Native American women went into the hospital for tonsillectomies and came out with tubal ligations. Another Native American woman requested a “womb transplant,” only to reveal that she had been told that was an option after her uterus had been removed against her will. Cheyenne women had their Fallopian tubes severed, sometimes after being told that they could be “untied” again.

For many, America’s history of brutal experimentation on people of color is perhaps best summed up by the Tuskegee Experiment, in which doctors let African-American men suffer from syphilis over a period of 40 years. But another medical outrage is less well-known. Jane Lawrence documents the forced sterilization of thousands of Native American women by the Indian Health Service in the 1960s and 1970s—procedures thought to have been performed on one out of every four Native American women at the time, against their knowledge or consent.

Both the IHS and its dark history of forced sterilization were the result of longstanding, often ham-fisted attempts to address American Indians’ health care needs, writes Lawrence. Medical services were part of U.S. agreements with sovereign tribes from as early as 1832, when a treaty with the Ho-Chunk, then often called the Winnebago, included the services of a physician in exchange for land in what is now Wisconsin. With the arrival of the Progressive Era, health interventions became even more of a priority and the Department of the Interior and later the newly-formed Indian Health Service devoted resources to education and medical care for American Indians on reservations.

The results of forced sterilization performed by the Indian Health Service in the 60s and 70s are still felt within tribes today.
Though the IHS did deliver better health care, it operated under historical assumptions that native people and people of color were morally, mentally, and socially defective long after it was founded in 1955. “Some of [the IHS doctors] did not believe that American Indian and other minority women had the intelligence to use other methods of birth control effectively and that there were already too many minority individuals causing problems in the nation,” writes Lawrence.

Assisted by government assumptions that high Native American birth rates should be stemmed, and bolstered by lax law enforcement and inaccurate descriptions of medical procedures provided to women who thought they were being treated for things like appendicitis, a rash of forced sterilizations began in the 1960s. Even after legislation designed to protect women from forced sterilization was passed in 1974, the abusive sterilizations continued. Between 1970 and 1976 alone, between 25 and 50 percent of Native American women were sterilized.

The results are still felt within tribes today. Lawrence documents everything from divorce to depression, but writes that perhaps the most dramatic effect to Native Americans at large was tribes’ loss of political power due to their dwindling numbers. Combined with the forced assimilation of Native American children of earlier generations in compulsory boarding schools and modern-day failures of social services to place Native American children in foster care with Native parents in accordance to modern child welfare laws, the forced sterilization of Native American women is another page in the long book of abuse wrought upon Native peoples by the United States.
This raises a hundred questions and answers none, and I have little time.

Primarily, with respect to the topic of residential schools, I doubt you can establish any direct relevance beyond speculations.

Were there forced sterilizations in the schools maybe with the willing "complicity" of religious staff members?

I don't see how educating students could be part of a sterilization program unless your answer to that question is "yes."

You can claim this was part of some big "whole" but you also haven't established that either.

You are still doing a lot of reaching, Ken.
Last edited by Falco Knotwise on Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16441
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by temporal1 »

Reference: Margaret Sanger
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/librar ... nger-12137
Mrs. Sanger, who did not have faith in God, and detested all those who did, wrote:
"I never liked to look at Jesus on the Cross. I could not see any good it did to keep looking at him. We could not help him, as he had been crucified long ago."[3]
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Falco Knotwise
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:42 pm
Affiliation: Roman Catholic

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Falco Knotwise »

temporal1 wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:08 am Reference: Margaret Sanger
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/librar ... nger-12137
Mrs. Sanger, who did not have faith in God, and detested all those who did, wrote:
"I never liked to look at Jesus on the Cross. I could not see any good it did to keep looking at him. We could not help him, as he had been crucified long ago."[3]
That too. This seems to have more in common with Planned Parenthood and globalism rather than with any old "colonial government."
1 x
Falco Knotwise
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:42 pm
Affiliation: Roman Catholic

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Falco Knotwise »

I think one reason they get so far is who wants to go following all this "research" they do just to keep up with all the lies, half-truths, strawmen, etc?

Most people can think of better things to do with their lives.
1 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 24202
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Josh »

Falco Knotwise wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:46 pm "Forcible transfer of children to other groups" became defined as "cultural genocide" in Canada in 2009.
By that definition, Canada engaged in genocide against Mennonites in 1926 when it refused to let them have their own German language schools and required them to go to public schools instead.
1 x
Szdfan
Posts: 4292
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:34 am
Location: The flat part of Colorado
Affiliation: MCUSA

Re: Cultural Separation from Parents

Post by Szdfan »

ohio jones wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 3:21 am
Ken wrote: Thu Sep 14, 2023 3:06 am I would suggest that the number of transgender youth who have received medical interventions without their parents consent or knowledge is infinitesimally small.
StrawMan.jpg

Nobody in this thread has mentioned medical interventions. The thread is about culture.
Then maybe y'all could define what "promoting transgenderism" means because Ken and I were accused of trying to change the topic by talking about how we refer to students by names and nicknames that aren't on their birth certificate because the real topic of this thread is how awful it is when schools call their students by names that aren't on their birth certificate.
1 x
“It’s easy to make everything a conspiracy when you don’t know how anything works.” — Brandon L. Bradford
Post Reply