Involuntary Sterilization and the Rights of the Mildly Retarded

  • Ruth Macklin
  • Willard Gaylin
Part of the The Hastings Center Series in Ethics book series (HCSE)


In discussing the involuntary-sterilization court cases, some members of our group were particularly concerned with the discrepancies between decisions in different states, noting a lack of a consistent moral or philosophical point of view. The question of whether or not involuntary sterilization ought to be allowed under any circumstances was broached, revealing a number of differences of opinion among the group members as to the possible existence of circumstances in which the retarded might indeed “benefit” from sterilization. A particularly telling debate arose over the difficult matter of judging in advance the ability of a retarded person to function as an adequate parent.


Moral Community Rear Child Competent Parent Heterosexual Intercourse Genetic Rationale 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. R. Kramer, “The Right Not to be Mentally Retarded,” in M. Kindred, J. Cohen, D. Penrod, and T. Shaffer, eds., The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law (New York: Free Press, 1976).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Hastings Center 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruth Macklin
    • 1
  • Willard Gaylin
    • 2
  1. 1.Albert Einstein College of MedicineBronxUSA
  2. 2.The Hastings CenterHastings-on-HudsonUSA

Personalised recommendations