>>camp which separated married and unmarried women. The married women were given pregnancy tests, Nurdybay recalled, and forced to have IUDs installed if they had children
> Her interview with Bitterwinter 4 months ago, zero mention of any "family planning", mostly how CCP is messing with her finances.
I don't think those are necessarily contradictory. That article glosses over a lot with "Dina went into horrific details about tortures in the camps, about blackmailing and threats if she didn’t obey the severe CCP rules." and it's possible that "The married women were given pregnancy tests and forced to have IUDs installed if they had children" was one of those details.
In both articles it's mentioned that she was not yet married at the time, so her information about IUDs isn't first-hand. Maybe she heard it from the woman who shared her cell?
It wouldn't be surprising if some inaccuracies were introduced in the process of retelling and translating the story. E.g. it might have applied to only those women who had more children than allowed, in which case it would be sad but also nothing new.
I definitely agree it's hard to tell what the scope of the problem is if articles get written by picking a topic and then collecting a handful of statements by people who mentioned it once, even if they were more concerned with something else.
>>camp which separated married and unmarried women. The married women were given pregnancy tests, Nurdybay recalled, and forced to have IUDs installed if they had children
> Her interview with Bitterwinter 4 months ago, zero mention of any "family planning", mostly how CCP is messing with her finances.
I assume you mean this article? https://bitterwinter.org/crackdown-on-ethnic-kazakhs-continu...
I don't think those are necessarily contradictory. That article glosses over a lot with "Dina went into horrific details about tortures in the camps, about blackmailing and threats if she didn’t obey the severe CCP rules." and it's possible that "The married women were given pregnancy tests and forced to have IUDs installed if they had children" was one of those details.
In both articles it's mentioned that she was not yet married at the time, so her information about IUDs isn't first-hand. Maybe she heard it from the woman who shared her cell?
It wouldn't be surprising if some inaccuracies were introduced in the process of retelling and translating the story. E.g. it might have applied to only those women who had more children than allowed, in which case it would be sad but also nothing new.
I definitely agree it's hard to tell what the scope of the problem is if articles get written by picking a topic and then collecting a handful of statements by people who mentioned it once, even if they were more concerned with something else.