
Female Inmates Sterilized In California Prisons Without Approval - ytNumbers
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/07/5549696/female-inmates-sterilized-in-california.html
======
jlgreco
Mother of all misleading headlines... the doctors received the approval of the
patients. They didn't receive _state_ approval.

~~~
cgranade
Approval under continual coercion, especially by people with significant
authority over you, isn't actually approval in any meaningful sense. It's not
a misleading headline at all.

~~~
jlgreco
I'm not a doctor, and I cannot speak for the ethical standards that doctors
hold themselves to. I understand only that they are stringent. Quite possibly,
I am on the wrong side here as far as doctors are concerned.

However, to me, the methods of coercion are entirely relevant here, and make
all the difference. From what these doctors weren't holding lengthened
sentences or reduced meal quality over these women... I would describe it more
as "convincing" than "coercing". Perhaps they were too persistent in seeking
approval, but that is something that is subject to individual interpretation.

Regardless, even if what they were doing was clearly deplorable coercion, the
headline _is_ clearly misleading. I went from _" What century is this!?!"_ to
_" eeeh..."_ in record time...

~~~
cgranade
Given the history of forced sterilization in California, I think it's clear
that at least some doctors do not hold themselves to a high ethical standard
at all, but in fact, a quite low one. Pressuring an inmate or even offering if
they are in labor a tubual ligation is now illegal as a result of that
history:

"Since then, it's been illegal to pressure anyone to be sterilized or ask for
consent during labor or childbirth."

Moreover, it has been documented in the article that at least some of the
"approval" was given while patients were under sedation, which cannot be taken
as approval in any ethical way, given the nature of the procedure. That is
basically enough for an unethical doctor to cover his or her ass, but it is
not appropriate for a journalist to refer to that as approval.

At any rate, it's good that you're asking why this is going on in this
century. Just a shame you seem to be concern trolling about a very valid
headline instead of addressing the issue at hand.

~~~
jlgreco
I mean ethical standards of the profession in general, as in:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_ethics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_ethics)

If they were getting approval after drugging up their patients or while their
patients were in labor then that is clearly an issue; an issue that deserves
an accurate headline.

~~~
cgranade
You got an accurate headline: approval was not obtained. You cannot call
drugged up statements approval. You're trying to split a hair that isn't
there, about what kinds of coerced approval can be counted as approval and
what kinds can't. By doing so, you're ignoring that the prison medical staff
abused positions of authority and abused drugs even to obtain consent for
permanent medical procedures.

What you're arguing is much like arguing that if a woman had sex while drunk
(under the influence of a drug that impedes judgement), then no headline
should call it rape. In that context, the error should, I hope, be quite
clear.

~~~
jlgreco
If the controversy here is limited to the times that doctors pressured sedated
patients, then the article does not make that clear. It sounds like they are
talking about doctors doing this in the more general case.

 _" What you're arguing is much like arguing that if a woman had sex while
drunk (under the influence of a drug that impedes judgement), then no headline
should call it rape."_

HELL NO what I am arguing is not like that. _I am not okay with doctors
pressuring drugged up patients._ As I said: "If they were getting approval
after drugging up their patients or while their patients were in labor _then
that is clearly an issue_ "

Holy hell... Do try to be more careful when you accuse somebody of being like
a rape apologist...

The headline matches only a subset of the articles content. A subset that it
mentions only _very_ briefly, almost as an aside. That particular incident was
clear coercion, but if the other incidents involved similar coercion then the
article fails to say so.

Instead the article focuses on the failure of the doctors to seek _state_
approval. It is a poor headline.

------
dromidas
"He made me feel like a bad mother if I didn't do it."

Ya know, if you have 5 kids and you're in prison and a candidate "likely to
return" then guess what? You ARE a bad mother whether you prevent fucking up a
6th, 7th, nth child in the future won't change that.

