Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your email address or mobile phone number.
Fit to Be Tied: Sterilization and Reproductive Rights in America, 1950-1980 (Critical Issues in Health and Medicine) Paperback – February 11, 2011
See the Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
More About the Author
Top Customer Reviews
The foundation of this book is on the eugenic and what the author calls the neo-eugenic movements in the US during the early to mid-20th century and it's impact on permanent sterilization, both forced and voluntary. She covers how these movements influenced the medical, welfare, and social services sectors of communities and their personal impact on the reproductively "fit" and "unfit". Cases studies are presented which illustrate how the "unfit" were typically forced into sterilization, or even sterilized without consent or knowledge and other cases in which other women (typically white, middle or upper class) were denied access to sterilization. Major organizations involved in either promoting access or assisting those affected by sterilization are significant aspects of each chapter.
The author weaves in other movements that occurred during this time in the US, such as the feminist, civil rights, and other minority rights and their impacts on access to sterilization. The majority of the book focuses on tubal ligations, however vasectomy is also discussed.Read more ›
Readers who want to have an accurate understanding of the antecedents of Roe v. Wade and the restricting decisions that followed it should read Riva Siegel & Linda Greenhouse's book (the title is something like 'The Roots of Roe').
The same at-a-distance sloppy use of sources also mars the chapter on eugenics. That was enough for me. If the chapters on areas I know well are poor, then how can I trust the author's assertions on areas I don't know as well?