Eugenic States: A Contextual ArchiveMain MenuIntroductionCritical Themes in the History of EugenicsEugenic Practices in California, Iowa, and North CarolinaWhat We Can Say with DataAcknowledgementsGianna May Sanchez52f70e8243b469d8015c7550a8cc718bc4460376Jacqueline D. Wernimont74f0121b4969a68798926bffef58ce29410a6b81Alexandra Minna Stern890e264c2ef7645d038bfeae8ec718e694c9c9ee
An Uneven Timeline
12026-08-19T01:56:02+00:00Jacqueline D. Wernimont74f0121b4969a68798926bffef58ce29410a6b8132plain2026-08-19T01:57:53+00:00Jacqueline D. Wernimont74f0121b4969a68798926bffef58ce29410a6b81It's alarming to read and/or hear that more than 20,000 people were sterilized and that those sterilizations extended from the 1920s to the 1970s. Taking a look at the national trend over time reveals a sharp peak in the 1940s and then a fairly dramatic change in practices within a few short years. While California mirrors (probably actually drives) much of that trend, there's a notable difference in North Carolina, where rates actually rise into the 1960s. While the shift in North Carolina doesn't account for all of the disparity between national and California data post-1945, it is suggestive of how we might look for other state trends that look more like that of North Carolina.
This page has paths:
12026-08-19T00:32:22+00:00Jacqueline D. Wernimont74f0121b4969a68798926bffef58ce29410a6b81Looking at Eugenic Practices Across the NationJacqueline D. Wernimont37visual_path9562026-08-19T12:08:37+00:00Jacqueline D. Wernimont74f0121b4969a68798926bffef58ce29410a6b81
