through the building and i should be encouraging everyone to buy tickets that you can walk those grounds in place that sees rural and so far away, this young man formulated a series of ideas that were so much larger and broader r than where he was and who he was. in that it was obviously that right there was one point almost the center of the world fighting fascism. and the four freedoms, those ideas, that t generation that what we takewith us , that's what powers the future. all of that. i love how your book calls out from memory that idea to. >> i want to drop this in somebody's become so enthusiastic to look at all fdr's speeches and for what it's worth i got my fdr four

freedoms look and i later edited both volumes, fdr and democracy and edited it and a stop but there's speech, some of those spages are still worth reclaiming and there's speech that he gave in cleveland all i'll in october , i think it was 1940 as he's running for his third term as president, the unprecedented third term and he speaks to americans about those who would then i have e what they achieved but he also speaks about what they have achieved and he doesn't say my administration should have done this, your lines americans for what they have done and you raise it piece by piece what they have done and he's not exaggerating. he's talking about their leaders, their energies, their struggles had to do with reconstructing or it informing america by creating

a labor movement, house wives movements, all that stuff and he lays out and this is where he shows he remains fundamentally not just the liberal we know him as the social democrat he never called himself. he laid out the vision of what still remains possible, what americans can still achieve s. i'm not telling you it will bring tears to your eyes but if you don't read that speech and get enthused about the possibilities but it just p that you wait on your president. he told interest in 1992 he never wanted to get toofar out in front of his fellow citizens . he was saying is push me on, that famous story. i agree with you, now make me do it. what humans is i need to show congress that you are all

with me. >> is remarkable, before freedoms are on deal, there's something to inspired you but it's also something you can put intoaction . i think i'll close on this for comments but when you don't condescend to people, when you don'tpatronize them , when you people about big things, in a way that incorporates you in the conversation and doesn't set yourself above them that a lot can be accomplished. >> you described fdr. >> thank you harvey. as always just a pleasure and we hope to have you at the library soon maybe in the spring and we invite

everybody to come to the library, use our research group by appointment and come enjoy everything that is there for you. >> best wishes and merry be christmas to all the staff. merry christmas and happy new year to all ofyou . >> american history tv saturdays on c-span2, exploring thepeople and events that tell the american story . selling author david grant shares the wager about the mid-18th century british naval ship the wager on the coast of south america and court-martial that followed and south dakota republican governor on the presidency of calvin coolidge the lessons she sees from contemporary politics. watch in history tv based on

c-span2 and find awful schedule on your program guide or watch any time at c-span.org/history. >> this fall watch c-span's new series books that shaped america. join us as we embark on a captivating journey with the library of congress which created the books that she americans list to explore key works of literature, the 10 books have won awards, led to significant societal changes are still talking about today . you're from renowned experts will shed light on the impact of these works virtual journeys to significant locations across the country's tied to the sovereign authors and their books. among our featured books common sense by thomas paine, although very thin, their eyes were watching god and

free to choose but milton and rose friedman. watch our 10 part series books that she america starting at 9 pm eastern on c-span now or online. >> weekends are an intellectual feast. every saturday american history tv documents america stories on sunday as you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. on the house from these television companies and more including media, >> media, we believe what you miss here or right here or way out in the middle of anywhere you should have access to fast reliable internet. that's why we're leading the way. >> media, supports c-span2 as

a public service. >> good evening and welcome to equal, a work in progress. my name is lauren and i serve as one of the managers of engagements at the indiana historical society. my role is to introduce the program as well as provide additional information throughout our time together. at the indiana historical society we are indiana storytellers linking people to the past is our mission to collect and preserve these stories and sharing the past and inspire future pivalues and principles. we can fulfill this mission by collecting objects and books, letters, photographs and more as well as other stories such as oral

histories, videos and additional content. the historical society is a smithsonian affiliate member of the international coalition. the only global network of historic sites, museums and memory initiatives that connect to today's movement for human rights bringing memory into action. a work in progress is a conversation based program exploring quality and history . indiana's constitution declares all people are created equal so this revolutionary idea is a foundational principle of our state that is marred with a myriad of conscience. this ongoing series with the complexion of indigenous citizenship and around title ix. it begins today with a conversation . the injured disciplinary conversation of our definition of the quality to

better understand who is ndgets a seat at the table and who maintains power insociety . before i introduce miss martinez who will be moderating our conversation i have logistics to review. before this event jill and nicole will discuss our topic for about an hour and 10 minutes and after that we will be opening up for questions. so if you have questions please drop it in the question and answer section. we will incorporate them into our conversation. as our conversation goes i may be dropping links into the chat. don't worry if you miss anything abor aren't able to look at them at this time. you can include them. this program is being recorded and you can check the replay on our website

indiana history.com. i want to take a moment to remind us all to be compassionate and understanding as we navigate mental health and illness is that we now understand completely and fully for our lens of medical advancements. i urged us to think more dgmore holistically about what medical knowledge you need an invitation in action. it is easy to judge 100 years later but we need to also think about what the future historians and doctors have to say about us today. now i would like to pass the mic over to my colleague. curator ihs will be introducing our panelists moderating to. nicole, the floor is yours. >> i am nicole martinez grant , curator here at the indiana historical society.

we are met with great colleagues from across the united states. coming to us from pennsylvania, dental altar from indiana medical history museum and bill simmons from the indiana historical bureau . i want to talk a little bit about all of them. do you mind me doing the introductioneveryone ? all right. sarah is the heritage medical historian and advocate. sarah is executive director of the indiana medical history museum, past president of the league of women voters secretary of the southern women's history of medical and science and serves on the board of directors for the john shaw living history of medicine society at indiana university and association of indiana museum and you advancement.

also advisory board tof easter seals crossroad of central indiana and center core rate bradberry studies. holds a ba in anthropology and continued education with history and leadership with the american association for state and local history fundraising management of the school. doctor james hartsell is a medical doctor and psychiatrist with over 25 years of experience in communities and all wide range of studies. he works on payment-based treatment approaches and integration of service onfor the chronically mentally ill, medically ill, homeless and disenfranchised i. based in philadelphia he supports resources for the programs including assp, a

shelter based in mental health pain management and he's a consultant for project home at a number of the psychiatric leadership committee, a fellow at ada 's 2014 recipients of the psychiatric societies award honoring a psychiatrist's lifelongcommitment and service to the chronically ill . joel simmons is a historian at the indiana historical bureau, a division of the indiana state library where she has worked since 2008. she's right all the work conference is the award-winning podcast talking through history. she writes regularly for the indiana history long and is professionally interested in stories of immigrants asylum-seekers. jill is a lifelong hoosier from boston university and a in history from indiana university. in 25 once you receive two

major awards, the georgia hoosier historian of work and indiana university distinguished masters thesis award for humanities and fine arts . jill is also a musician in early with her husband and collection of way too many vinyl records. you can see them in the background and of course myself. i consider myself a community collaborator first and professionals. it's basically been going on relationships with the indiana historical societies collection and so let's get started. let's talk about eugenics and before we can off with questions and discussion let's talk about a the history of eugenics. in the 83 surprises wanted a

19th-century social science is statistician and psychologist climbed eugenics from the greek word eugenics being wellborn. the practice of eugenics schemes the general quality of human population selective breeding encouraging reproduction for the psalmist humans while encouraging reproduction for the weakest. in the late 19th century d earlier 20th-century eugenics programs received widespread public support and took two approaches positive and negative eugenics . positive receive above average intelligence to reproduce, negative eugenics the predominant form in the united states experienced reproduction and sterilization of those perceived to have undesirable traits. eugenics programs were supported by legislation and

were linked to powerful promoters. an early advocate was pulled spring harbor youthnew york . and significantly shaped native eugenics legislation policies in the united states . margaret singer who also supported the eugenics movement . a founder of the control movements, specifically supported sterilization of those considered mentally unfit. lastly during the 1920s and 30s the american eugenics society was founded in addition to groups across the country members competed in better baby competitions at fairs and ask the divisions including the division of infant child jean, and immensely popular better these contest at the indiana state fair from 1920 to 1932

and the list goes on. i want to thank you all for sitting through all that and listening to the heart of this discussion. we know indiana was the first state in the union to pass the first eugenics sterilization law in the united states. with anybody like to take up the history of that and what does that meantime ? >> so eugenics thinking was growing in many parts of the country at the start of the 20th century introduced in other states, didn't become law so in 1907, indiana had a unique combination of multiple factors but i think probably started off to allow the state eugenics

legislation and i think one of these main factors was that the same leaders that were having expected indiana's public health policy were also forefront in the eugenicsmovement . let's call them like the indiana state board of health secretary. he led successful campaigns against tuberculosis and advocate for public sanitation. and he believed that marriage bans and sterilization would help to make a stronger human race. not able to be separated from ideas about white supremacy. he had other leaders like andrew pollock 's interest in eugenics came from his

lifelong work with the poor. he saw this as a losingbattle . and so he became eugenics proponents and the was preaching this in his ministry. there's a long list of other people opbut he also had doctor harry sharp who had been conducting tests at the indiana reform sent at least 1899. so all these leaders were able to, these were prominent citizens . they had prestige and a movement and the unit with scientific authority and on one hand in moral authority, on the other hand the directly influence the general assembly a support for sterilization. >> sarah you claim the

medical history museum, what did that look like? talk about what your institution support before the museum. >> so the indiana medical history museum is tied in what we call the old technology building, it was a pathological department, central state hospital was the first mental hospital in indiana opened in 1848 so opened in 1896 as the cutting edge research facility dedicated to being these physical causes of mental must hopefully curing and preventing them in the future . and the doctors really even before people like nicola had been and harry sharp and there were doctors who were really kind of pushing these ideas inas early as the 18 he' . their ere speaking out medical association meetings about the very nature of

insanity and there was this sort of rediscovery or renewed interest in men deli and genetics. and this idea that traits like intelligence, criminality, poverty, all of these things were traits that were inherited. so there was this growing sense that these things can be cured by trying to control the environment where people live. so the way to prevent this was to prevent people from reading. so doctors had called for castration at times previously. that was itunpopular, never passing but there were people advocating for. then restrictions on marriage and isolation of people who

were deemed institutions of various kinds. there was a growing sense of how it would end up and the second these were fairly new at the time. and they were seen as a less disfiguring and more socially acceptable alternative to these other things. and actually more effective in anything reproduction. >> it's not great but i think that both of your answers, we seem to be forced sterilization is something that is often talked about on women so you locate great examples of both male and female in terms of gender discrimination. which is within this realm.

it's important for us to understand the intentions behind the movement so we can better discuss 1819 20th-century ideas within the lines of our medical knowledge vocabulary. how can we better understand how they were approaching this to o benefit society. do we think this is written by biology or life environments i would like to open the floor to everybody from our guests from pennsylvania as well to china on this. >> i think it's definitely both . >> seems like it would have been both. i think certain lay understanding of some biological principles like from the origin of species, the basic ideas of natural selection and genetics as well as the mendelian genetics sort of layout and

optimistic view that we really could have more simplistic way improve our gene pool if you will. >> i think they couldn't separate their ideas from economic concerns at the time . we were applying those darwinian ideas about survival of the fittest to people without considering social factors like economic downturns or loss of a job or getting in an accident that makes it so you can work if those factors like illness and at the same time, this shifted the response to poverty and crime from the traditional church led charity, the state led

sterilization. so the eugenics leaders painting those as unfit as the drain on society than generalization was considered more regressive, more efficient caand more lease out and charity work and institution. >> there is this shift in taking about charity and government services where people are starting to see insanity and mental deficiency, criminal deficiencies as things that were inherited traits that at first we couldn't help it was hopeless but keep pouring money into care forthese people . they were seen as so like,

these services, the charitable organizations were not really helping these people to survive, but they were actually driving and it was believed they were reproducing at an alarming rate. there's a lot of complaining and fear monitoring but this idea that these services and charities were really just keeping these people going on naturally. that these were people who in nature, social darwinism, natural selection, survival of the fittest tended to ensure those lines died out so we were keeping them going on naturally and it was a drain on the economy. the used language describing as useless, as costing taxpayers money. as dangerous not only for society but even for personal

safety so there was language being thrown around that demonized people for their circumstances and those kind of ideas stuck with people so it kind of helps get some of that through. >> i feel we are scratching at the service of it. what theological ideological framework is an evil those two eugenicists to make the cultivation of better babies and sterilization of these factors. >> we named some darwinian box, who were, what were some of the organizations for just organizations or basic ideological frameworks? >> llthe better babies were the flip side of the coin for sterilization in a way.

instead of focusing on restricting the appropriation of the undesirables this was more of a gencouraging the fit to reproduce and help children thrive. so this other duties contest, they were organized by the state board of health indiana state fair. and at these events, workers distributed scientific literature on child hygiene, there was a lot of educational components that went with it and somehow late their efforts to the lowering of infant mortality rates in the years this was going on. you remember it was only those that had the time and resources to travel to the state fair that had these model what healthy babies that were receiving this information so that it contacted those ideas about

white supremacy, the wedding babies were always one, male or upper-class families but also a wedding educational. >> excellent point. and that was primarily in the 20s and 30s. but jumping back earlier to heal five, indiana was essentially home to one of the first district of marriage laws in the country in the 1905 prohibiting mentally deficient persons of disease and habitual drivers from marriage. we are receipt in the legislative for. can we talk more about that? >> it all goes back to the

idea of preventing people who shouldn't be, or were thought to not be fit to contribute to the gene pool from reproducing but i think it was pretty obvious to most people that didn't really prevent people from going into marriage but the other side of that nswere there were restrictions on good married but there were people who ended up not just in mental hospitals but in the institutions for the feeble minded and other institutions like who were segregated from the rest of society and isolating. the idea was that they were kept there not only out of sight out of mind but out of

society that they would be prevented from reproducing , from and the 1907 law comes right after that where we should just start sterilizing . >> again on that sort of legal framework. preventing people from forming unions and producing a family it also prevented them from coming into the united states in for terms of the integration will. can you talk about that? >> hoosiers have always been concerned about policing as not american. the discussion has always been linked to white supremacy. so kind of looking at the laws leading up to eugenics laws, eugenics thinking is

behind a lot of liberation laws so the first naturalization law passed in 1790 was black americans. and in 1882 we have to act of regulation of immigration which prohibited immigrants who might become a public charge for all public nuisance from entering the united states and using that eugenics language in their preventing people who are in impoverished circumstances from coming here. this 80 year you have the chinese exclusion act, it is the first law in the united states to target an ethnic group so this kind of thinking then culminates in the johnson read act which is the immigration act of 1924 ha which drastically limits

immigration to the united states that targeted specific groups for inclusion by their country of origin so these undesirable groups using this type of language included eastern and southern european immigrants, many of whom are catholics and specifically single jewish immigrants. so these people were directly influenced by leading eugenics speakers, especially superintendent harris laughlin who runner in the beginning he collected huge data claiming that immigrants from these areas were unlikely to become public charge. he lobbied for sterilization and in the same breath as the exclusion act he claims

specifically jews had higher rates of feeble mindedness which is the term we will come back to and those coming in would pollute what they call native american stock which did not refer to indigenous people that scandinavian origin immigrants as well. but he testified to all of this to congress at a time when we were looking to pass this immigration act. he also drafted model sterilization laws at the same time that were adopted by indiana and it really is wording that directly influences the nazi response of 1933 and in fact jews are

attempting to flee not see persecution in the 1930s and he is advocating insight which has a direct line from eugenics lobbying to anti-immigration laws of the 1930s to those quote outlaws being in place long enough that they impacted jews during the atrocities. >> you can save a lot of those progressive thoughts and he had a public charge especially in the united states with the mexican repatriation movement, a lot of genetics laws were based on that. you can look up mexican labor in the united states, 1930s era where they talk about especially here in indiana early mexican populations

where their talking charity and public charge and all of that stuff, almost giving them more fuel to the fire for repatriation of originally 400,000 to 1 million mexicans who, some who are of american or nativeborn heritage. >> you see this shift in whether or not mexican immigrants are considered one but when we needed then asked laborers around world war ii then they were classified as te whites and nonwhites when it suited us. >> and chinese two were encouraged to come when we were trying to build railroads until we need them anymore.

>> when you want to look at immigration law it's pretty reactive . >> before we move beyond the progressive era, there really was a sentiment of increased compassion ioand care in the sense that people who couldn't take institutions, there was a wave or a sense that they needed to be cared for compassionately and humanely and regarding procreation were part of a longer-term solution so at least there was an idealism and realization that folks that needed social care were not the product of a genetic disorder , just an increased

understanding of some of the infectious diseases . so that slight bright spot was there but it turned darker when you get into where germany took it in the not sierra. >> it failed though because the immoral treatment was a thing that came out of the way quaker reform efforts. to keep doctors of what we now call psychiatry, they were doing more damage than they were doing good so the quakers started opening institutions where people would be cared for tihumanely, given fresh air and sunshine and beautiful surroundings and they did have success that a lot of people improved because of that but then when states or government starts opening mental hospitals,

with good intentions and high hopes and all that but we are limited in terms of our understanding of these w, that we didn't have effective therapies. there were all kinds of problems related to money that quickly overwhelms hospitals. there was edmismanagement of funds, political cronyism, all these days that calls all these problems so by the mid to late 19th century you see these hospitals filling up with patients who aren't being cared for and who weren't well-made in the first place. the staff aren't well trained . they're not equipped todeal with all of this . right. so that contributed to it in the sense that that mental disease was not as durable as

we thought because look at all these hospitals, they are filling up with patients and they're not getting better so you start seeing this kind of tied to that shift and ideas about charity that imentioned . you see kind of a decrease in these facilities and that's when they were needed the most. there were of course a difference between traumatic injuries and things like congenital disorders that were thought to be hereditary but yeah, it's interesting how quickly that sort of went down the toilet. >> to here in philadelphia also with the quakers but regarding people who were incarcerated there's still the eastern state penitentiary which is a very

idealistic idea that believes in spiritual transformation. really quiet places, i know, spooky but part of the idea that maybe someone could be really dumb with that. >> state institutions and whatnot, when they were getting overcrowded with these economic challenges they turned to sterilization as a condition for the week. so trading consent, i don't know if you can consent to try to get out of an institution, trading consent as a way that sterilization can increase and even after.

even after we hear how the aristocracy has come down. >> the bulk of them were done between the early 30s but there were period's as far as the state hospitals go through the 1940s you don't see them but max barr who was superintendent of the state hospital attributed that more to the lack of surgeons. they were all off war and there was no one there to perform the sterilization so what's unfortunate about the information we have about sterilization is we whave an idea across the state hospitals but we don't know who was sterilized necessarily.

we don't even know this is data in the hospitals but he talks later in his life about how they were reporting zero during that period because there was no onethere to perform them . not because they thought better of it . >> this is a great thread to talk about institutionalization. what i guess in the field of mental health care and sterilization what were some of the common reasons for somebody to be institutionalized zebut it's definitely treatable today that would have required that level of i don't know, incarceration? i'm just looking at long-term . , it the early years fluctuates throughout time as our understanding of these things change and evolve and

psychiatry becomes more of a specialty you feel more of this mania and dementia between schizophrenia, a lot of gender degenerative diseases but then in the really early years you don't even get a diagnosis but you get this person is such and such a religion but this person wanders at night. you get more descriptions of the issues they were facing rather than an actual diagnosis and it changes over time. after that maybe jed could take it from there, maybe after the 1940s. >> even before that around the turn of the century. it's hard to find completely accurate dadata but 50 percent

of the people in institutions such as this tertiary syphilis. syphilis was by far the most significant reason why people would be in one of these institutions. at times there was the sense that there was a separation between adults who acquired the condition and children or youth that have a level of disability that at home normally would absorb in a typical bar they would absorb a slower individual that had what we would now call intellectual disabilities but there was a sense that they then went to an institution and down the road some of the institutions in some of the words, the history of mental health institutions points to the 50s when some early

antipsychotic medication at least helped and made them more manageable as well as the early parts of a movement towards the institutionalization occurred . that sort of moves back on into the 70s and 80s partially because of the overcrowding and one can critique how wedid with .nstitutionalization >> that's a whole different tale. go ahead. >> in terms of things that you might be institutionalized for that you would not be today would include things like alcoholism or epilepsy that was considered a mental illness before it was understood as a neurological condition. then there are things that we might not consider a mental

illness today until the 1970s, homosexuality was listed in the dsm is a diagnosis of mental illness and now we have a completely different understanding of. >> when you get into the 40s and 50s we did have a two class system of psychiatric or mental hospitals and some which were like trust fund children or babies that were confined and there wasn't a lot of personal choice for autonomy many women diphtheria would be hospitalized against their will. then same thing with people with mania. they weren't in the public institutions that were the most hard to stomach. >> i have to go back because

you mentioned tertiary, can we talk about what that is? he spent this time understanding a very basic understanding and if you could unpack that for us. >> primary syphilis would be types of presentations and symptoms of people that have syphilis now would have and then tertiary to those would be unidentified although people knew what it was but people would develop dementia , lots of confusion. lots of what basically was brain disease that was easily prevented with antibiotics. there it wasn't and would often be misdiagnosed as schizophrenia or dementia.

>> we do talk about forced sterilization during world war ii. there being a lack of sterilization. to discontinue beyond 1945? >> in indiana the 1907 law, governor marshall said let's stop doing this, it makes me uncomfortable and he cut off funding for it so that's when it was declared constitutional until 1929 and there was a new law in 1927 that further narrowed the types of people who were targeted in the law but that law was not repealed until

1974 haso that point you do see sterilization. their estimate in indiana alone there were 2500 sterilizations done that were reported. >> you also see a shift in the language, hereditary being attacked and that language around eugenics to ideas about bad parenting by four families. so it's shifting from sterilization to other kinds of poor decision-making. >> and just to bring it up to present day, what are other

issues in healthcare around original ideas of sterilization, reproductive education, economic bias, medical care or other ideas? i guess starting more into this what is medical care for the institutionalized or incarcerated look like today compared to what it had been historically aor what are some of the biggest instances regarding their safety, bodily autonomy and happiness i know you're working in the field so this is a question more directly related towards you. >> so the terms of the treatment, i will lay out what seems fato be factors that evolve that and the question of reproduction, reproductive rights and reproductive

choices and later on top of that, i say into the 60s and 70s which was this real civil rights emergence included the mental health patients, people that they deserved to have more autonomy or would be better off with their families. later they were encouraged to go to institutions wewhere their parents weren't always happy with that pressure or that decision. the last law that the community kennedy signed before he was assassinated was the getting of the mental health atact which at its core changed the decision about reasons for involuntary

hospitalization. sort of changed it from paternalistic model where a professional physician for psychologist thought it was in their best interest to be held against their will. to needing evidence of danger to self or others so just being mentally ill, not that medication always works but declining treatment could lead to involuntary treatment and just because your spouse thought it would be good for ityou or your doctor was enough to get people hospitalized against their will. that was happening at the same time more effective medical treatments were emerging for more serious mental illness where a lot of folks hewere in institutions. so although states seemed to

like the idea of getting that money back a little too fast there was a movement towards the institutionalization. with obvious challenges. i think particularly with false that had significant limited capacity sometimes didn't even have legal capacity to make their autonomous decisions, lessons around reproduction changed and i say the emergence of these longer acting choices for birth control which were temporary birth control, not permanent entered the picture and cchanged the moral questions that individuals and caregivers had to wrestle with . still lots of problems but on the ground and even more recently i worked at a program where there were

housing first program for people who were had been homeless and met the criteria for the wraparound program along with housing. we had a who have lost children to dhs for children in youth services and she got pregnant twice during that time and was supported that choice, second time she lost both children to dhs. once we had to be the reporter because she was not in a position to do that with the resources we could, with so those are some of the great areas that occur. now, but still where i see pressure there might be somebody who's on a 10 month shot and their primary care

provider or familymember might make sure they make that appointment . really make track of that and make sure there is a slippery slope there and it might be perceived in their best interest even if it's in bend their stated goal in the past . those are some thoughts on where we come. >> i think we are not working in the field. we're all in the history now but the historical bureau does historical markers so there is a historical marker that marks the 1907 legislation and is in front of the statehouse and you

can't just create something and put it in the ground. it's a detailed process but can you talk about the historical marker program? >> so in 2007 as part of the centennial of the 1970s and an attempt by a few different organizations to ogrecognize those impacted, marker was installed so the marker is completely publicly driven. we're not a state agency. we don't go into communities and tell them what's important about their history . anyone can apply u. so there's research and we work with the applicant to get the text right.

we like to say that it's like two tweets and different texts. but we tried to get a lot in there so in our case applicants with doctor william schneider who is both a professor emeritus of history prand professor of medical humanities and health studies. he led the application for this marker as well as the symposium of scholars. like what we're doing today. there was also an exhibit at the state library around this . there was an issue of the indiana magazine of history looking back on indiana's eugenics past. so the marker had the 1927

law notes the number of individual impacts and provides some context on eugenics thinking . there's actually on the law of the state library this marker went in a year before it started at the bureau so i don't have all the information but it seems from looking at newspapers the intent is to put it on the state house grounds and in that did not go through but on the library grounds the statehouse faced each other so you can't see it from the state house grounds but the idea was for legislators to pass this and that was blocked so the library as part of the edge of the statehouse. but the dedication seems like it may have been a tiny step

towards healing. one of the people that unveiled the marker was janie warren, one of the last people sterilized in indiana but she was sterilized without her knowledge under the guise of having cervix removed. and the other person that unveiled the marker was india's health commissioner will offer a formal apology to hoosiers who were forcibly sterilized. >> one last question for everybody before we open the discussion to our attendees . thinking about questions and drop them into the chat. >> .. >> .. ri

anybody can take their first attempt at answering this question. >> i have a couple of thoughts. first i think we need to protect ourselves but especially our most vulnerable citizens in legislation policies that infringe on our individual rights to make her own health choices. also looking at h healthy societies and not repeating mistakes but empathy first and decisions on how to help people should be based on economics, politics, science of our communities. we need to think of people

saying there unfit, worthy or unworthy. we know people cannot be those things that people can also not be illegal. as one of the responsibilities of people seeking asylum. especially children i would argue in our past mistakes such as allowing these immigration policies were shaped and thinking to shut the door on refugees to serve as a warning. if policy is impacting humans are not humanely that's pretty devastating. and one last thought. let's look out for other hateful policies that are wrapped in patriotic language. a lot of these weaponizing about america first and let's video children with a suspicion as we talked about today who is and

who not as american has been historically by those who claim prto be. of what is white has changed time, too, based on politics and other things. so italians were considered white for, for >> italians were always considered white. >> pro, from a historic history perspective important thing to take away. >> i have a lot. >> one thing that strikes me, this did happen slowly without resistance but it is still learning how easily these things progress. you cannot argue that this all happened because bad people who subconsciously wanted to hurt

d people that they thought were bigger than them. many had gooden intentions and thought they were doing good work, and they wanted, they base all of themselves and they wanted to have the change of society but the view that made society good was colored by their own experiences in their own situation. and they did not account for any background or religion or culture or worldview or priority. very close minded effort to make things better. it's sort of like it hurt people and that's alarming to me. but also it was doomed to fail also it was doomed to fail because it was a certain set of ideas and something that people know easily because they have these misunderstandings and misinterpretation of data in

genetics and science. they did not understand that it makes sense to them and reinforce their own ideas about themselves and other people in harmful stereotypes about people that are different they were subjective to fear mongering, made to feel that their culture or religion was threatened but notte only that but people who were unfit were threatening the economy as well so the fitting people's financial well-being. all of these things in their own ideas of their superiority that they couldn't even see and they were invisible to people and you see that today too. >> it allowed people to be

diplomatic. people who are poorer from someplace also looked different or who were suffering from a mental illness or label mentally deficient, they were less human and fewer rights and they should be grateful and happy to contribute to society by giving up their own autonomy in the name of thehe greater good in te society that meant for the most part an upper-class white american society. >> doctor, what do you feel the most important think tank it away from your perspective knowlf

of the lay language like happened with evolution and mendelian genetics that even the science didn't >> even the science did not really have a lot of details and had its own humility to it but people to fat and ran in i think the tendency is with us today. there's still a lot we don't know in my field in psychiatry we don't know much about the brain and the cause of most mental illnesses certainly made progress and yet we are one of

two countries on the plated that allows direct to consumer advertisingt so everybody thins that s the science is a lot for the long that it is in these medications or pills that are being advertised have a lot of clarity in terms of the use of it makes my life crazy, go ask your doctor, no thanks. tthe other thought if we want o go backd to new gen x which is alive and well were not focused on cutting off the lower refined from below but a lot of pressure from above, enhancements, fertility counseling and clinics, people that can go to a sperm bank catalog and pick from

various traits who's going to be there child. >> human race is there but we need to be cautious about. >> great, we have a question directly for sarah. no well asks, i wondered about the obsession with religion as a mental disorder in the late 19 and early 20th centuries. could you please talk about that more. >> it was beyond somebody who would be religious, these are people who took things to a fanatic level. you might describe as a modern mania, they were the same, this is more mid - late 19th century not so much of 20th century but you see the same

ideas like an obsession with anything, there w were people wo were obsessed with politics to a point where it impacted the lives of other people around them. that's kind of what they were referring to not just people that were deeply religious. >> okay, what was the other question. >> no well says i've heard the term religious man and call you. >> it's involving the same lines. i would not call them a diagnosis there just scripture of symptoms that people were categorized before they were symptomatic diagnoses and even that changed over time but you see a lot of people have this

inability to deal with their surroundings in the world so they react in different ways and people might become obsessed and manic about something another's might go the opposite direction. >> another frame from that from a religious definition is dark night of the soul, spiritual crisis and it's been written about in describe the crisis of meaning especially for people that relied on the religion significantly and have a real crisis of meaning i'm guessing that might be what she's talking about. >> other questions geared toward sarah the hot topic tonight. jill talked about the unveiling of the marker in the last

legally sterilized person in indiana. with your work you do a lot of research on individuals and beyond being the specimen and thee pathology lab and giving them a story in the second life. can you give us examples off individuals from central state there wererc individuals forciby sterilized? >> unfortunately i can't really. one of the problems is that these numbers were not recorded in any detail so the kind of record that we have access to don't really indicate specifically he would sterilize or how many from each individual hospital for the most part and

where the information lies is when the patient's medical record in their collective after the debt and some of those are becoming assessable but a lot of the records have not been available to researchers to compile so we don't know a whole lot about those. the kind of things that you see is a 1907 law made legal for r people who were deemed mentaly ill or mentally sufficient but there was various terms that would apply in the categories criminals was they were constitutionally criminals are open to interpretation by the dimensions of the early law required that two surgeons at the institution, i don't know

what my camera stopped two surgeons at the institution investigate candidates and sign off on the sterilization and they would interpret the hollywood. the 1927 law really focused on mentally deficient mentally ill and the criminal cut out of the second law and the system changed a little bit in the process so the superintendent of an institution could decide who is a candidate for sterilization and they would make a recommendation to whatever the institution's governing board was and they would have a hearing where the patient and their family if there was family around and physicians would testify in the governing board would make a decision about sterilization. then it was expanded in 1931 in

the courtroom judges to make that determination as part of the commitment process so you would have these quest in the court and as ended up with the central state hospital or another institution it can be determined they were eligible for sterilization and that required the two physician sign off but it did not have to be a particular physician. >> the kinds of things that would makee you eligible were open to interpretation. >> you talked about those records. >> i was going to say as people are interested in some of the case studies like sarah said there is a pretty easy accessible indiana magazine a

historyrc article you can search the archives online. the others last name is stern from 2007 and she does give a few case studies from her research on individuals that were sterilized, she starts off article talking about the sterilization of one of the inmates at the indiana former tory. so he was incarcerated for petty larceny and is one of the people that wrote to governor thomas marshall to say that he was sterilized and did not agree to a vasectomy and he physically resisted the doctor in the operating room. these kinds of stories are some of the things that governor marshall to put a stop to

tysterilization laws in the constitutionality of the law. she's right records reflect our individual stories in the article and i cant probably drp it in the chat. >> i think lauren put onn a slide. you can see the pedigree chart from 1918 of this individual. >> that is it. >> that was fast work. >> are there any other questions? >> we have some questions in the chat.ki >> ahead. >> one question back to present-day in stories and

videos floating around social media that is financially encouraging sterilization for individuals who are homeless and also opioiddd addicts. to not enter and i've seen some videos that encourages to get theirva tubes tied or vasectomyr whatever great is as prevalent in what seems to be the psychiatric opinion about sterilization when it comes to the opioid addicts today? >> that is interesting i've not heard that. as was a mentioned earlier aroud

the incentive to get released from an institution there had been settle and not to settle coercion in. i think people have a the number of children on welfare could be conditionality formal or informal and pressure toward that. it makes me nervous. he also has the distinction of not being solely against their will so it is different than other types of pressures. >> to me people would be encouraged to have their tubes tied or whatever specifically they are proposing. when i was in my early 20s i wanted to have my tubes tied in

my doctor refused to do it because he was certain i would change my mind and want to have children and i was not smart enough to know what i wanted or what was best for me so i was not able to do it when i want that. i think it is interesting. not i do not think of it as positive at the time. >> i would be more client to say that is disrespectful to the people who are opioid dependent because especially for the condition they've not lost their sense of personal morality and responsibility and i think it's hard to get access to the birth control that they want so it's hard to see that.

>> are there any other questions for piano? >> with the encouragement, some states are also offering reduction to prisoners who volunteer a vasectomy or iud and see that they co-hers in the sterilization procedures. in your individual opinion do you think the reversible procedures are coerced are still an example of the new gen x conversation? >> in the name for sure.

>> i don't see a lot of situations where i would imagine that core hers and there is a lot of prohibition against that core version more than a being likely. i think will ship it to another place when were giving people access to their choices. i think there would be a lot of forces up against the easily and quickly. a lot of guardrails. >> i think we talked about that historically can you give consent if the trade is your freedom? >> okay. >> any last final thoughts,

parting words that you really wantm our audience to take away with them? >> beyond the 21st century question that i asked earlier, we had more discussion and more about the topic. >> i think we kind of hit on individual rights and healthcare is so personal. >> i agree. >> i agree i'm a bit of a cause optimist and i'm aware of the progress that's been made. the last question that's not likely to be happening in many places, we have a lot of blind spots and we have work to do.

but we've come a long way. >> with that thank you to sarah, tim and jill in my teammate for tonight's conversation. any last questions drop it into the q&a or chat. i wouldn't say thank you we can dive into one of those or you can have a wonderful rest of the evening but i want to say thank you to sarah, jim and joe for tonight's conversation and we greatly appreciate the time that you gave to this incredibly important discussion. thank you as well tour participants to engage with these questions and took the time to join us as evening. if you enjoy this program we hope you consider coming back for more. if you're nearby visit the

indiana history center through january 27th for an interaction journey into the history here historian legacy of the holocaust survivor and who settled in indiana and founder of the museum the children of aneffort to locate other surviving. also visit eva from indiana from generate 27 more about surviving as a child in the experience of doctor joseph franklin enter life leading up to be one of the most influential holocaust educators and activists inhe the world. visit us open after january 7 our hours or until 8:00 p.m. next week for december 20 in the

family including virtual conversation on the department store. an extra shout out to nicole book. a newly mention author to the society were all excited about. your contribution for all of the iindian stories. it's on our website. >> thank you all for joining us tonight especially thank you to sarah, jim and jill nice to meet nicole in every single participant. have a great rest of yourd tuesday. >> thank you. >> night. >> american history tv saturdays on c-span2 exploring the people and events that tell the american story.

at 7:00 p.m. eastern best-selling author david grant shares his book the wager about the mid 18th century mutiny of the british naval ship off the coast of south america and the court-martial that followed. 10:30 p.m. eastern south dakota republican governor kristi noem on the presidency of calvin coolidge and the lessons for contemporary politics. exploring the american story, watermarking history tv saturday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide our watch anytime online at c-span.org/history. >> sunday night on q&a presidential historian richard norton smith shares his biography of gerald florida titled an ordinary man he talks about his personal life in the establishment pitics as well as his efforts to heal the

country following the watergate scandal and the controversial decision to pardon richard nixon. >> hello americans. our long national nightmare is over. >> whoever wrote it, for did not want to use it. it was kicking a man when he was down and hartman made the case, you to understand people need to feel this and here it from you. >> richard norton smith this book an ordinary man sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on the free c-span now at