{"id":{"repo_id":"oxford-brookes","oai_identifier":"tle:1f881fbb-d34a-47b4-8e3e-e21c380adf84:d6bd9758-527a-46cd-bfe2-c433766e8fca:1"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/oxford-brookes/tle:1f881fbb-d34a-47b4-8e3e-e21c380adf84:d6bd9758-527a-46cd-bfe2-c433766e8fca:1","repository":{"repo_id":"oxford-brookes","name":"Oxford Brookes University","base_url":"https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/oai"},"display":{"title":"From Prevention to Protection: Policy, Practice and Pitfalls of Surgical Sterilization in California, 1910–Present","abstract":"In the history of involuntary sterilization in the United States, California stands out. Under the Asexualization Act (1909), a law which permitted the surgical sterilization of certain “defectives,” over 20,000 developmentally disabled and mentally ill people were forcibly sterilized. Although legal changes in 1951 all but halted the practice, the issue of the use and misuse of sterilization did not disappear. Subsequent policies concerning voluntary contraceptive sterilization (1969), and the sterilization of the developmentally disabled (1980), saw flagrant abuses of reproductive freedom capture public and political attention in the state. Traditionally, scholarly accounts advancing ideological justifications for how and why involuntary sterilization occurred in California have dominated the historiography. This dissertation contends, however, that this intellectual-cultural approach fails to fully explain the complexities of how legislation was developed and practiced. Instead, this dissertation explores the process through which eugenics, population control, racism, sexism, and other similar ideas, found expression through political, legal, and clinical institutions. By examining the inner workings of these various state and sub-state institutions, the dissertation develops a more nuanced approach, highlighting the continuities and discontinuities in the way that these ideas were incorporated into policy aims; and how policy, in turn, was translated into sterilization practice at the institutional level. In doing so, this dissertation presents novel findings about both the functional development and practice of sterilization in California, as well as extending the temporal focus traditionally applied to the state's history of sterilization policy. In particular, important new contributions about disability and the practice of sterilization by substitute consent in the 1970s and 1980s are presented. These findings are directly connected to important ongoing debates about the legacies of eugenics, reproductive technologies and practices, the reproductive rights of the developmentally disabled, and the limits of state intervention in reproductive matters.","abstract_html":"In the history of involuntary sterilization in the United States, California stands out. Under the Asexualization Act (1909), a law which permitted the surgical sterilization of certain “defectives,” over 20,000 developmentally disabled and mentally ill people were forcibly sterilized. Although legal changes in 1951 all but halted the practice, the issue of the use and misuse of sterilization did not disappear. Subsequent policies concerning voluntary contraceptive sterilization (1969), and the sterilization of the developmentally disabled (1980), saw flagrant abuses of reproductive freedom capture public and political attention in the state. Traditionally, scholarly accounts advancing ideological justifications for how and why involuntary sterilization occurred in California have dominated the historiography. This dissertation contends, however, that this intellectual-cultural approach fails to fully explain the complexities of how legislation was developed and practiced. Instead, this dissertation explores the process through which eugenics, population control, racism, sexism, and other similar ideas, found expression through political, legal, and clinical institutions. By examining the inner workings of these various state and sub-state institutions, the dissertation develops a more nuanced approach, highlighting the continuities and discontinuities in the way that these ideas were incorporated into policy aims; and how policy, in turn, was translated into sterilization practice at the institutional level. In doing so, this dissertation presents novel findings about both the functional development and practice of sterilization in California, as well as extending the temporal focus traditionally applied to the state's history of sterilization policy. In particular, important new contributions about disability and the practice of sterilization by substitute consent in the 1970s and 1980s are presented. These findings are directly connected to important ongoing debates about the legacies of eugenics, reproductive technologies and practices, the reproductive rights of the developmentally disabled, and the limits of state intervention in reproductive matters.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Galt, Mark"],"institution":"Oxford Brookes University","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Turda, Marius"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019","date_published":"2019","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:43:22Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":["All rights reserved"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.24384/n7qy-he44","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Galt, Mark","Turda, Marius"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Galt, Mark"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2019"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Oxford Brookes University"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["thesis"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["All rights reserved"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://doi.org/10.24384/n7qy-he44","https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/file/1f881fbb-d34a-47b4-8e3e-e21c380adf84/1/Galt2019Prevention.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["In the history of involuntary sterilization in the United States, California stands out. Under the Asexualization Act (1909), a law which permitted the surgical sterilization of certain “defectives,” over 20,000 developmentally disabled and mentally ill people were forcibly sterilized. Although legal changes in 1951 all but halted the practice, the issue of the use and misuse of sterilization did not disappear. Subsequent policies concerning voluntary contraceptive sterilization (1969), and the sterilization of the developmentally disabled (1980), saw flagrant abuses of reproductive freedom capture public and political attention in the state. Traditionally, scholarly accounts advancing ideological justifications for how and why involuntary sterilization occurred in California have dominated the historiography. This dissertation contends, however, that this intellectual-cultural approach fails to fully explain the complexities of how legislation was developed and practiced. Instead, this dissertation explores the process through which eugenics, population control, racism, sexism, and other similar ideas, found expression through political, legal, and clinical institutions. By examining the inner workings of these various state and sub-state institutions, the dissertation develops a more nuanced approach, highlighting the continuities and discontinuities in the way that these ideas were incorporated into policy aims; and how policy, in turn, was translated into sterilization practice at the institutional level. In doing so, this dissertation presents novel findings about both the functional development and practice of sterilization in California, as well as extending the temporal focus traditionally applied to the state's history of sterilization policy. In particular, important new contributions about disability and the practice of sterilization by substitute consent in the 1970s and 1980s are presented. These findings are directly connected to important ongoing debates about the legacies of eugenics, reproductive technologies and practices, the reproductive rights of the developmentally disabled, and the limits of state intervention in reproductive matters."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["From Prevention to Protection: Policy, Practice and Pitfalls of Surgical Sterilization in California, 1910–Present"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Galt, Mark","Turda, Marius"],"dc:creator":["Galt, Mark"],"dc:date":["2019"],"dc:description":["In the history of involuntary sterilization in the United States, California stands out. Under the Asexualization Act (1909), a law which permitted the surgical sterilization of certain “defectives,” over 20,000 developmentally disabled and mentally ill people were forcibly sterilized. Although legal changes in 1951 all but halted the practice, the issue of the use and misuse of sterilization did not disappear. Subsequent policies concerning voluntary contraceptive sterilization (1969), and the sterilization of the developmentally disabled (1980), saw flagrant abuses of reproductive freedom capture public and political attention in the state. Traditionally, scholarly accounts advancing ideological justifications for how and why involuntary sterilization occurred in California have dominated the historiography. This dissertation contends, however, that this intellectual-cultural approach fails to fully explain the complexities of how legislation was developed and practiced. Instead, this dissertation explores the process through which eugenics, population control, racism, sexism, and other similar ideas, found expression through political, legal, and clinical institutions. By examining the inner workings of these various state and sub-state institutions, the dissertation develops a more nuanced approach, highlighting the continuities and discontinuities in the way that these ideas were incorporated into policy aims; and how policy, in turn, was translated into sterilization practice at the institutional level. In doing so, this dissertation presents novel findings about both the functional development and practice of sterilization in California, as well as extending the temporal focus traditionally applied to the state's history of sterilization policy. In particular, important new contributions about disability and the practice of sterilization by substitute consent in the 1970s and 1980s are presented. These findings are directly connected to important ongoing debates about the legacies of eugenics, reproductive technologies and practices, the reproductive rights of the developmentally disabled, and the limits of state intervention in reproductive matters."],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["https://doi.org/10.24384/n7qy-he44","https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/file/1f881fbb-d34a-47b4-8e3e-e21c380adf84/1/Galt2019Prevention.pdf"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Oxford Brookes University"],"dc:rights":["All rights reserved"],"dc:title":["From Prevention to Protection: Policy, Practice and Pitfalls of Surgical Sterilization in California, 1910–Present"],"dc:type":["thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:43:22Z"}