The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

History of Discrimination


Article # : 21537 

Section : NATURAL SCIENCE
Issue Date : 11 / 2001  308 Words
Author :
Larry R. Churchill is professor of social medicine and codirector of the Center for Health Ethics and Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

       In the United States, the history of discrimination in the areas of reproductive freedom, eligibility for military service, and employment options is a sobering one. For instance, during the 1920s and _30s, dozens of states engaged in involuntary sterilization of "habitual criminals" and "feebleminded" individuals. Such practices were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1925 (Buck v. Bell) as a public health matter, and they were widely condoned by the public. Yet many who were involuntarily sterilized were neither criminals nor mentally deficient but simply poor and socially stigmatized.
       
       A similar bias was evident as late as the 1970s in the treatment of carriers of the sickle cell trait. They were systematically denied opportunities for military service, even though their own health was not affected. The Air Force Academy did not drop this exclusion until 1981.
       
       Workplace screening for predispositions to illness was championed during the 1930s, as it became clear that some workers exposed to toxins on the job became ill while others did not. Such screening is an increasingly frequent though highly controversial practice in industry today. Screening prior to employment can help individuals avoid jobs that could be hazardous to their health. But testing workers for genetic susceptibility after they become ill could be a way for employers to avoid responsibility for workers' safety and compensation claims, shifting the blame to "genetically predisposed" workers while ignoring workplace hazards.
       
       In our time, the potential for the reemergence of involuntary sterilization as a U.S. social policy seems remote. Legislative protections for disabled ... (2000 of 2068 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy