Former drug users speak out against sterilization agenda
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sbnDjj7WbU[/youtube]
I’m glad that I was never approached to be sterilized, because if I was, I wouldn’t feel the self-worth and the self-value that I feel today.
~ Recovering drug addict Devikah, countering the claims of Barbara Harris, founder of Project Prevention, “a program that offers $300 for current and former drug users to get sterilized or to use certain long-acting birth control methods,” via RH Reality Check, June 7
Jun.08, 2012 6:00 am |
Contraception, Eugenics |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Wow. Sterilize, sterilize, sterilize.
Margaret Sanger would be so proud.
Project Prevention makes me uncomfortable. Drug abuse may be a temporary condition. Sterilization is permanent. I was sterilized because I was absolutely positive I didn’t want children. A woman who isn’t positive could be sterilized under this program and yearn for a baby after she has rehabilitated herself.
However, Project Prevention might also be seen as anti-abortion. These women might be especially likely to abort if impregnated.
Three hundred dollars? That’s sick. It plays to the vulnerability of drug users and their need for money.
Why would former drug users consider this?
Well, you know, you’re only supposed to have babies under ideal conditions. Only if you’re under 35. Only if you have college savings in hand. Only if you have a Honda Odyssey paid for. For heaven’s sakes, if you have a past of any kind, you have written yourself out of one of life’s greatest blessings! Here, take $300 and go to Vegas and make yourself feel better. You bum.
Couldn’t this be seen as an anti-abortion measure?
It makes me uncomfortable but the fact is that I was sterilized when I was 24 and a technical virgin. I’ve never had an abortion.
Drug addicts may be likely to abort so if they are sterilized or on long-term contraception, that could decrease abortions.
Margret Sangers vision at work…along with an extremely high abortion rate among blacks.
Large families are no longer the norm. The Duggars get a great deal of attention as does Nadya (“Octomom”) Suleman and it is partly gawking at something strange. Many people associate large families with irresponsibility.
I’m curious if this program only targets women. Or do they offer the same 300 to male drug addicts for sterilization? I mean, it does take two…
Wow, this is just sad.
ACF says:
June 8, 2012 at 11:24 am
I’m curious if this program only targets women. Or do they offer the same 300 to male drug addicts for sterilization? I mean, it does take two…
(Denise) Since the woman carries and what she takes in goes to the fetus, there might be a special concern with females.
I think that Project Prevention is getting a bad rap. Some of the women who sign up and use the long term birth control do it because they have already given birth to a severely handicapped baby because they were addicted while they were pregnant. If they can’t get off drugs, at least they can not get pregnant while they are still addicted. Look at Project Prevention’s website and at least read about what they are doing. The women they are working with are seriously addicted. They really should be patients in drug rehab, but that is expensive. The program is voluntary and ethically imperfect just like pretty much any other thing that would actually work to reduce the damage these women are doing to themselves and their kids.
“the addicts” … really respect her mother, who is trying to deprive them of the motherhood that strangely motivates this “project.” (check out the Project Prevention website, not a coincidence that it is a PP abbreviated too) Destiny Harris’ birthmom was a drug-user so now her adoptive mom wants to prevent, not drug use, but the ability to have children, “long-term or permanent birth student’scontrol.”
Aaaw, what a nice lady. Now they can do drugs and have sex to their hearts’ content. Another frightening instantiation of a god-complex.
Project prevention is not funding abortions, just long term and permanent birth control.
And still not addressing the issue. Sterilizing them helps them with their drug addiction how exactly??
Why not empower them by helping them clean up? Maybe they would make wonderful mothers and fathers but need help in doing just that?
Carla says:
June 8, 2012 at 6:49 pm
And still not addressing the issue. Sterilizing them helps them with their drug addiction how exactly??
Why not empower them by helping them clean up? Maybe they would make wonderful mothers and fathers but need help in doing just that?
(Denise) Carla, I think the problem is that there are women who are addicted to and/or abusing illegal drugs and — if they get pregnant — can deliver babies that are damaged or must suffer the pains of withdrawal.
I wonder if this program includes alcoholic women who often deliver babies with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.
This program DOES NOT help them clean up. It really doesn’t help the women much. It is helpful in the sense that it may prevent them from becoming pregnant and having babies who will be harmed because of the actions of a mother who ingested extremely harmful substances during her pregnancy.
Carla, surely you don’t want drug addicted and abusing women to BECOME pregnant, do you?
I know you want them to deliver if they ARE pregnant but that is another subject.
Long term contraception is not doing anything to help them prevent damage to themselves. I believe it is miring them in the drug lifestyle by reaffirming their impotence to change. Maybe if they were made aware of Christ’s love for them, they could set out on the road to total healing. Sterilizing them, or even making them infertile for a stretch of time, sets them out on the road to what?
I get that the aim of this program is “Stop people who are hurting those around them from hurting their children.” And that is a laudable goal, and one I can agree with as far as it goes. But by implementing it in this particular way, what these people are saying to these addicts is “You can’t stop hurting the people around you. You aren’t going to get better, ever, and so the best you can hope to do is minimize the damage you do.”
To be blunt, that kind of thinking is why people commit suicide. So…yeah, I’m not feeling the good vibes for this program.
I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s better to have them get sterilized now and then years down the road when they actually have it together and are able to have children without hurting them, they can always have their procedures reversed. Nothing in this world is absolute. Not even medical sterilization (unless they are paying these women to have their ovaries and uteri removed, which would be pretty screwed-up).
xalisae says:
June 8, 2012 at 9:40 pm
I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s better to have them get sterilized now and then years down the road when they actually have it together and are able to have children without hurting them, they can always have their procedures reversed. Nothing in this world is absolute. Not even medical sterilization (unless they are paying these women to have their ovaries and uteri removed, which would be pretty screwed-up).
(Denise) Sterilization isn’t reversible. Therefore, it IS a big deal. Yes, it CAN sometimes be reversed but no one should be sterilized with the intention of reversing it at some future point.
Long-term contraception IS reversible so a commitment to no (more) children is not required.
I understand reservations and however strongly you believe pregnancies must be carried to term, it is legitimate to want to PREVENT pregnancies about drug abusers.
Are heavy drinkers included? Fetal Alcohol Syndrome has caused many innocent children to come into the world permanently and irreversibly damaged because of their mothers’ heavy drinking.
In the video Nisa, the daughter of Mary, said something I thought was interesting:
“I just think that there needs to be more people trying to keep families together instead of taking them apart.”
Not to be a smart #@@, but hopefully, someone will introduce these aspiring individuals to the Church so that they see that there are people and organizations who want to see them succeed and do not want to write them, Mother and family, off.
I wonder what Jack B. would have to say about this program?
The tubal reversal success rate can be as high as 80% for women who are under the age of 30 and also for women who have had tubal clip or tubal ring type tubal ligations.
It certainly IS reversible, and when it comes down to either having a child who you’ve damaged irreparably for life or possibly paying money to have a child further down the line when you’ve gotten yourself together, I think the latter is the most reasonable option. I don’t think there is anything wrong with sterilizations as long as they use the type that are the easiest to reverse with the most successful reversal results. And yes, I agree that goes for alcoholics, too.
You called, Tyler? :)
I honestly don’t know what to think about programs like this. I dislike sterilizations programs for disadvantaged groups on principle, it feels uncomfortably like eugenics to me. Honestly, if they had a program like this in my state when I was using I would have taken advantage of it and now I wouldn’t have my children. And that would suck, because my kids rock. I would honestly rather see rehab programs made more available, and mental health services more available, more help for at risk youth, etc. Cleaning up the aftermath of addiction, like the disabled and abandoned babies, is a heck of a lot more expensive and heart breaking than working on the causes of addiction and attacking the issue that way.
And thank yall for the lack of addict bashing on this post, lolol. I didn’t want to read it because I didn’t want to be all mad.
Alice had a good point. You give someone money to get sterilized because they are an addict, you are telling them they are never going to be any better. I wouldn’t have cleaned up if it weren’t for my now-wife. You need a reason to get clean and this might take away some reasons and leave people feeling hopeless about their addiction.
Denise Noe-
What you say is true, however it is MUCH cheaper for a man to get a vasectomy. And easier on him. A tubal for women, you still run the risk of ectopic pregnancy, heavier menstrual bleeds, etc. And a reversal for a man has a high success rate also. My husband just had a vasectomy reversal and we got pregnant a few weeks later. I just think that, to be fair, if you have this type of program you should target both the men and women. Because the men will go out, have sex with these women and not be able to support their offspring. And these babies will never really be able to find out who their father is most of the time…
ACF: I am for vasectomies but again, the man has to be CERTAIN he doesn’t want to sire children or doesn’t want to sire more children.
Let me reiterate my point about heavy drinking. In many ways, alcohol is the most dangerous drug of all. Of course, Prohibition failed because its use is deeply ingrained into our culture. It is also true that the MODERATE use of alcohol is not harmful and may even be a bit beneficial for people who drink moderately.
The problem is that many people drink too much. When those people are pregnant girls or women, they can give birth to babies who will suffer all their lives from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. FAS is a severe lifelong handicap.
We often focus just on drugs that are illegal. If this program is valid, it should include heavy drinkers and alcoholics!
Where do they get the $300.00 amount? Is that a price of some street drug? Sounds like they are bribing them with drugs to get sterilized. Why don’t they treat them for their addiction instead?
Valerie Lewis says:
June 11, 2012 at 12:19 am
Where do they get the $300.00 amount? Is that a price of some street drug? Sounds like they are bribing them with drugs to get sterilized. Why don’t they treat them for their addiction instead?
(Denise) What about in the meantime? Do you WANT addicts to get pregnant?
Do you WANT alcoholics to get pregnant?
“Where do they get the $300.00 amount? Is that a price of some street drug? Sounds like they are bribing them with drugs to get sterilized. Why don’t they treat them for their addiction instead?”
LOL, no, not the price of a street drug, though cocaine and prescription pain meds are very expensive. Honestly, the cynical part of me thinks that they chose the amount that isn’t too expensive for them, but they know few addicts can pass up. Three hundred bucks would have kept me in heroin for a little while, I did much more unsavory things than get sterilized for that kind of money. Regardless, this is a bribe, which is part of the reason I am so uncomfortable with it. It’s kinda like an offer that not many can refuse. :/
Jack, insightful comments. The reason I called was because, given the subject matter, I thought you would provide an interesting perspective on this issue - it seems to have worked out! Thanks for posting.
In the 80’s there was a woman in Portland, Oregon who had over 10 kids all born addicted to drugs. How many kids had to suffer because we wanted to preserve her right to ruin as many lives as she eventually did. I have knew a couple who adopted 2 brothers born addicted to drugs and one had to be institutionalized because his behavior was out of control and very dangerous while he was still a child. I have for the past 2 years been involved at a childrens home where I have witnessed first hand the difficulties brought on to a child who was born to a drug abuser. He has problems at school and most social situations because of erratic behavior. Twice police were notified by bystanders and he is only 9 years old.
Why is everyone so worried about the one making the choice instead of the innocent victim who gets the displeasure of having consequences of their parents addictions. If the same person walked by a dog and kicked it every day the perception might be a little different and would be considered animal abuse. I have sympathy for people with addiction issues. I have worked in the medical field most of my life and have had first hand experience with addicts. When one becomes ”clean” life becomes so much easier and better for everyone involved in their lives; especially their health care providers.
So what if the decision has been made to sterilize prior to becoming clean and they want to have children? There are millions of children in the United States who need help. Instead of having my own children (I do not have infertility issues) I have made it my passion in life to be a champion for children in my community. Bless the people who can get their lives in order and help others do the same. I don’t think anyone is pushing for the person who is pregnant with their first child but is trying to prevent is the multiple births; which really seems like the most humane thing to do.
Babies who are sick with unprevenetable diseases like cancer is sad enough to observe and seems unjust. To think that the rights of a women who repeatedly has drug addicted babies is the biggest issue just seems wrong. It would be labeled as cruelty if we were talking about aniimals.