By Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson.

Refuting an op-ed in support of the use of the word “retard,” Gerson says what is worst about the current public conversation is “a dismissive attitude toward the struggles of the disabled.”

People who wish to understand the context of the current debate, Gerson says, would do well to study a prominent 20th century American movement that sought to direct human evolution by eliminating the supply of people with developmental and physical disabilities in the population. Called the eugenics movement, it targeted for elimination a number of groups identified as “socially unfit,” including the “feebleminded,” “epileptics,” the “insane,” the “deformed,” and the “deaf.” Forced sterilization of the “unfit” was endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court and did not end in the United States until the 1970s.

An excerpt:

Given this history, the r-word does not seem so innocuous. And defending it does not seem so heroic. [Christopher M.] Fairman can have his cherished f-word, which merely soils and trivializes the sex act. But defending the r-word is not the protection of free expression; it is the defense of bullies.

… There is not an exact correlation between vileness of speech and vileness of character, but there is a rough correlation. Words such as the r-word and the n-word often reveal aggression, contempt and hatred. They are a form of verbal violence. In these cases, what Fairman calls “self-censorship” is really kindness and moral judgment. And what he regards as free expression is just rude, abusive and cruel.

… Yes, government involvement in the censorship of words is dangerous. But what the Special Olympics is proposing –- encouraging people to take a personal pledge against the derogatory use of the r-word –- is not government censorship, it is social stigma. In this case, such stigma is a sign of moral maturity.

I have signed the pledge at www.r-word.org. I hope you do as well.

Related columns by Michael Gerson.

Advocates equate ‘retarded’ with hate speech

Rahm Emanuel’s criticism of some liberal Democrats as “f — ing retarded” is “shining a spotlight on just how pervasive the R-word is in American conversation and how offensive it can be for millions of Americans,” reports Devin Dwyer on ABC News. Dwyer describes Emanuel’s comment as a “verbal indiscretion.”

Advocates say the furor over Emanuel’s remark demonstrates the need for a change in social sensitivities. An estimated 35 states have enacted or introduced legislation to remove the word “retardation” from government agencies and programs.

An excerpt:

Several advocates for the disabled noted that just as derogatory terms for African Americans, Jews and gays are often associated with periods of oppression and prejudice in the country’s history, the word ‘retarded’ can elicit an equally emotional and visceral response.

“It’s a reminder to [intellectually and developmentally disabled persons] of all the suffering they’ve experienced and all the ways they’ve been excluded from society,” said Peter Berns, CEO of the advocacy group, The Arc of the United States, who is attending [today's] meeting with Emanuel. “Every time they hear the word all these images flood back to them about how they’ve been laughed at, pointed at, made fun of, sterilized.”

From the BBC, Agence France Presse:

An international rights advocacy group Wednesday urged Rwanda to revise a draft law that it said would require the sterilization of all people with intellectual disabilities.

Human Rights Watch health and human rights director Joe Amon also charged that the measure would introduce compulsory HIV testing.

“Provisions in the current bill that increase stigma, rely on coercion, and deny individuals their reproductive rights should be removed,” he said.

Forced sterilisation is regarded as a crime against humanity by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Rwanda strongly denied that the parliament is considering forcible sterilization, and said plans for HIV testing before marriage are strictly voluntary, not compulsory.

An editorial in the Asheville [NC] Citizen-Times says it’s time for North Carolina to compensate victims of a historic state-sponsored eugenics programs. The program sterilized some 7,600 people with disabilities and others who were deemed “unfit” to reproduce.

A push to compensate eugenics victims began earlier this decade, and a bill in the N.C. House calls for giving them $20,000 each. The bill total is $18.6 million, and it’s considered dead on arrival this session, given the state’s financial woes.

… The state can’t excuse away compensation for those it deemed unfit to have a chance to reproduce.

Before all the victims pass away, such compensation needs to be put on a fast track.

Earlier posts here.

Paul Lombardo, author of “Three Generations, No Imbeciles,” has spent almost three decades uncovering the full story of the 1927 Buck v. Bell Supreme Court decision, writes USA Today.

In 20th-century America, more than 30 states passed legislation supporting forced sterilization as part of a program of eugenics, the “science” of human improvement through controlled breeding. Official tallies say more than 65,000 Americans were sterilized against their will.

Buck. v. Bell upheld the right of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-minded to sterilize a “defective” woman named Carrie Buck. The decision has never been overturned.

Lombardo has no plans to abandon his fight to publicize the terrible history of eugenics. With genetics playing an increasingly important role in science, Lombardo and other bioethicists fear the lessons of the eugenics debacle matter more than ever.

University of Maryland historian Steven Selden worries about how we will handle the ethical questions of possible genetic “improvements” to humanity. “We’re going to revisit all the ethical conundrums that were inherent in the eugenics movement as we move forward.”

Related posts here, here and here.

(USA Today photo)

From the Associated Press, [Raleigh] News & Observer:

North Carolina unveiled a roadside marker yesterday documenting the state’s decades-long eugenics program, which was  intended to keep thousands of people considered mentally disabled or otherwise genetically inferior from having children.

“This does represent one of the ugly chapters in North Carolina’s history,” said the Rev. William Barber, president of the state chapter of the NAACP. “We have to deal with our past in order to have a better present and a stronger future.”

Elaine Riddick, 55, (above) was among 7,600 people involuntarily sterilized by the state between 1933 and 1973. “The sign means a lot,” she said after a drape was pulled down to reveal the aluminum monument, “because it shows that someone recognizes the wrong.”

The text of the historic marker is here.

Earlier posts start here.

UPDATE:

See also: ‘Sigificant, bizarre, shameful’ — [Raleigh] News & Observer

From the Winston-Salem Journal:

North Carolina will unveil a historical marker on Monday to remember one of the state’s darkest chapters during the 20th century: the forced sterilization of more than 7,600 people under a state-sponsored eugenics program.

Justified by junk science and enshrined in state law, the program mainly targeted poor people and residents of public institutions. The victims were usually accused of being mentally ill, mentally disabled or a danger to society, and they were medically sterilized after approval from a panel known as the Eugenics Board.

The ceremony will be attended by state leaders and several living sterilization victims. A measure in the North Carolina legislature that would grant reparations to eugenics victims is believed to be dead because of lack of funding.

Earlier posts here.

See also: Against Their Will: A five-part series in the Winston-Salem Journal