Draft:Eugenics in New Zealand
 | This article or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring, and is not yet ready for use. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this article or section has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use.
This page was last edited by Schwede66 (talk | contribs) 2 months ago. (Update timer) |
Lead to be created
Prominent New Zealand eugenicists
[edit]Several influential early New Zealanders in the late 1800s and 1900s were eugenicists. This is credited by historians to be due to New Zealand being a young nation, and lacking in Catholic influence, which they saw as being able to implement eugenic ideas to guide the rest of the British commonwealth.[1]
Plunket Society founder Truby King was a eugenicist, who set up Plunket in 1907 in order to encourage upper-class white women to give birth rather than seek education, which he deemed detrimental to their ability to mother.[2][3] King was a member of the Wellington council of the Eugenics Education Society.[4]
Academic Dr. Duncan MacGregor was also a prominent eugenicist, who published an article titled "The Problem of Poverty" in the short lived New Zealand Magazine which proposed several eugenic ideas, including measures to eliminate poverty, mainly the permanent incarceration of drunkards, criminals, and paupers. MacGregor also proposed several harsh measures during his time as inspector of the Dunedin Lunatic Asylum and later Inspector-General of Asylums and Hospitals in New Zealand[5], which although not implemented, are considered by historians to have contributed to the stigma against "defective" people in New Zealand.[6]
William Chapple, an independent MP for 5 months in 1908, was the author of the influential eugenicist book Fertility of the Unfit, which advocated forced sterilisation and attributed crime to poor breeding. Notably, he did not support the use of vasectomy due to his sexism, suggesting instead the use of tubal ligation.[7]
Lionel Terry, the perpetrator of the murder of an Asian man, Joe Kum Yung, in Wellington on 24 September 1905 cited eugenic reasons for the murder, stating "I have come to tell you that I am the man who shot the Chinaman in the Chinese quarters of the city last evening. I take an interest in alien immigration and I took this means of bringing it under the public notice", when turning himself in at a police station the next day.[8] He had previously published a book, The Shadow, calling for racial purity through only allowing European people to immigrate to New Zealand. Prior to the murder, he had been lobbying the House of Representatives and immigration officials to halt non-European immigration. He was found guilty and sentenced to death, being held at Lyttleton Gaol, but had his sentence commuted to life on grounds of insanity, which he served at the Seacliff Lunatic Asylum after escaping from Sunnyside Hospital.[9] At Seacliff, he met and influenced the ideas of King, who was then-medical superintendent.[10]
The New Zealand Magazine
[edit]
The New Zealand Magazine was a quarterly periodical of New Zealand literature published by the Otago Daily Times between January 1876, and October 1877.[11] Articles were written by some of New Zealand's foremost intellectuals, such as Robert Stout, William Fox, and Reverend William Salmond. Issues often discussed social ideas, with reviewers constantly noting its eugenic undertones.[12] [13] It was criticised for being unintelligible to the average New Zealander, and due to the lack of popular appeal, it folded in 1877.[14]
Other serialised publications
[edit]Subscription to the Eugenics Review in New Zealand in 1912 amounted to 210 members.[a][15]
New Zealand Eugenics Education Society
[edit]The Eugenics Education Society was formed in Dunedin in 1910,[16] three years after the Eugenics Education Society in London had been established. It soon established other branches in Wellington, Timaru, and Christchurch.[17]
The Society was closely aligned with that of the London Society, both through literature such as the Eugenics Review and personal links of members.[b] It's objectives were the same as the London society:
(1) To set forth persistently the National Importance of Eugenics in order to modify public opinion, and to create a sense of responsibility in the respect of bringing all matters pertaining to human parenthood under the domination of Eugenic ideals.
(2) To spread a knowledge of the Laws of Heredity so far as they are surely known, and so far as that knowledge may affect the improvement of the race.
(3) To further Eugenic teaching at home, in the schools, and elsewhere.[18]
In order to not alienate public opinion, the Society presented itself as body of people looking to educate themselves on eugenics, and as of such, did not support forced sterilisation. All addresses given in the society had to be first cleared by the council. Reverend Canon Curzon-Siggers, former vice-president of the Dunedin branch, delivered a speech supporting forced sterilisation after retiring from the role. This resulted in the president of the Dunedin branch further dissociating the Society from the idea. The emphasis on self-education, and a resultant inward looking, ineffective society led to "The New Scheme for Organization of the Society" being introduced to act on the third stated objective of the society, to educate others.[19]
The New Scheme for Organization of the Society saw Miss Macgeorge, the honorary secretary and editor, deliver lectures to interested parties. She delivered lectures to Waitaki Boys' High School, Te Oranga Reformatory for Girls, the North Canterbury Educational Institute, and the Canterbury Women's Institute.[20][21][22]
Several attempts were made at lobbying the government to implement eugenic reform by the Society. In March 1911 the society sent a deputy to Minister of Education, Immigration and Minister in Charge of Mental Hospitals, George Fowlds, requesting the Society be permitted to collect data on inmates in special schools. The minister was sympathetic, and as a result the society drew up a detailed schedule, which was never implemented.[22]
In late 1911, the Society urged the Minister for Justice, John Findlay, to consider the eugenic benefits of the National Provident Fund Act, suggesting an increase in awarded money to couples who had obtained a certificate of fitness prior to marriage. A proposal by A. N. Field, a journalist, also suggested the government set up a scheme for medical inspection prior to marriage, where each person would receive a grade from 'a' to 'd'.[23] He suggested that by making a non-disclosure of this grade eligible for no breach of promise, better breeding would result. Field further suggested that the Health department use these gradings to supervise children of defectives in order to prevent the children from becoming defectives themselves.[24]
Strong support for curfews and accommodation of feeble-minded girls also came from the Society. These ideas also gained support among other organisations. Interest within the Society also extended to town planning, maternity insurance,[c] immigration, and preference of employment to married men.[25]
The Society ceased operations four years after it's founding, in 1914, at the outbreak of the Great War.[17] Though the outbreak of war is credited with the cessation, it is noted that a lack of popular interest contributed to the decline.[26]
1924 Committee of Inquiry
[edit]WIP
Mental Defectives Amendment Act of 1928
[edit]WIP
Clauses 21 & 25
[edit]WIP
Proposed Eugenics Board
[edit]WIP
Women's Division of the Farmers' Union
[edit]WIP
Immigration
[edit]New Zealand's immigration policy has included eugenic ideas several times, often due to racism and the desire to "Keep New Zealand British", but increasingly in more modern times to prevent the reliance of people on state welfare.
Against Chinese
[edit]The Chinese Immigration Act 1881 placed a £10 per migrant head tax on Chinese immigrants to New Zealand, equivalent to NZ$1,770 in 2023, and prohibited more than a ratio of one immigrant per 10 tons of cargo. In 1896, the 13th New Zealand Parliament raised the tax to £100, equivalent to NZ$20,000 in 2023, and changed the ratio to be one immigrant per 200 tons cargo.[27] The tax was raised to over £300,000, roughly NZ$47M in 2022. The act was repealed in 1944 with the Finance Act 1944 , but a formal apology was not issued until 2002, and not in Cantonese until 2023.[28][29][30]
Several other measures were taken against Chinese people in New Zealand by successive governments, including the requirement to pass an English language literacy test, as instituted by the Chinese Immigrants Amendment Act 1907 , the requirement of Chinese people living in New Zealand to supply a thumb print when leaving the country in order to obtain a re-entry permit, as instituted by the Immigration Restriction Amendment Act 1908 , and Chinese were denied the right to free naturalisation, and later naturalisation fully, by legislation earlier than and including the Aliens Act 1948 , until 1951.[29][31]
'White New Zealand' policy
[edit]WIP
Modern day
[edit]Between 2016 and 2021, 446 residential visas, and 141 essential skills visas were denied in New Zealand on the grounds of being a burden to the health system, which is defined by the Immigration New Zealand as someone with a condition likely to cost the health system more than NZ$41,000. The Green Party have stated in past that "this policy borders on eugenics".[32]
The policy has drawn further criticism due to it's targeting of neurodivergent people, with several reported cases of autistic people being denied a visa, and people who have Down Syndrome not being permitted to obtain residency.[32][33]
Far-right circles
[edit]WIP
James Fairburn
[edit]WIP
Accusations against the Government
[edit]In recent history, several accusations of eugenic policy have been made against politicians and governments of New Zealand by various groups.
Discussions of sterilisation
[edit]In 2010, ACT MP David Garrett suggested sterilising abusive parents in exchange for NZ$5,000 compensation to prevent further cost to the state. The ACT Party distanced itself from the claim, and both ACT and Garrett emphasised it was his own personal opinion. Jigsaw, the New Zealand Child Abuse Prevention Service, said the idea was reminiscent of Nazi Germany eugenics policies. A former Children's Commissioner also stated that the idea was absurd, and Paula Bennett, then Minister for Social Development, ruled out the idea completely. Advocacy group Child Protection Studies stated that those who had grown up in abusive households may be willing to choose sterilisation, but that any implementation should not be coercive. Another lobby, the Sensible Sentencing Trust, said it totally supported the idea.[34][35][36]
In 2012, when measures to strengthen the confiscation of children from abusive parents were being introduced, there were allegations that the cabinet had discussed sterilisation. Prime Minister John Key denied that the discussion ever came up. Paula Bennet reaffirmed her earlier stance stating that sterilisation was "a step too far".[37][38]
Persons with Down Syndrome
[edit]In 2013, a group of people representing those with Down syndrome lodged a complaint to the Human Rights Commission objecting to a paper promoting prenatal screening. The group described the practice as discriminatory to people with Down syndrome, and "a form of eugenics" due to the decreased birth rate of those with Down syndrome resulting from abortions chosen after prenatal screening.[39]
Parents of children with Down syndrome also addressed concern at the Abortion Legislation Act 2020, which made it easier for mothers of disabled children to receive an abortion. The New Zealand Down Syndrome Association reported unverified statistics that the ratio of births of children with down syndrome had dropped from 1 in 170, to 1 in 1,200. [40]
Oranga Tamariki
[edit]WIP
Notes
[edit]- ^ Broken down by region:[15]
Dunedin: 120
Timaru: 50
Christchurch: 20
Nelson: 20 - ^ e.g., Mrs P. Harris, the New Zealand representative to the London Eugenics Education Society was the sister-in-law of Mrs Leslie Harris, a member of the Dunedin branch council.
In 1912 Dr Emily Siedeberg was the New Zealand representative for the First International Eugenic Congress held in London.[18] - ^ The Society saw a eugenic value in monetary incentives and disincentives for mothers.[25]
Citations
[edit]- ^ Eugenics at the Edges of Empire 2018, p. 3.
- ^ Brookes, Barbara. "King, Frederic Truby". Te Ara: The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ Writes, Emily (7 May 2019). "Plunket's founder was an awful person obsessed with eugenics". The Spinoff. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ Fleming 1981, p. 9-10.
- ^ Fleming 1981, p. 11.
- ^ Tennant, Margaret. "MacGregor, Duncan". Te Ara: The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ Fleming 1981, p. 12-13.
- ^ Tod 1977.
- ^ Tod, Frank. "Terry, Edward Lionel". Te Ara: The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ Ray, William (11 November 2016). "Eugenics: the story of a really bad idea". Radio New Zealand. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ "New Zealand magazine (Dunedin, N.Z.) a quarterly journal of general literature. – National Library of New Zealand catalogue". National Library of New Zealand. Retrieved 26 November 2023.
- ^ "REVIEW". New Zealand Tablet Volume IV. No. 195. 12 January 1877. p. 11. Retrieved 26 November 2023.
- ^ "THE 'NEW ZEALAND MAGAZINE.'". New Zealand Tablet Volume IV. No. 195. 12 January 1877. p. 12. Retrieved 26 November 2023.
- ^ Schrader, Ben. "Magazines and periodicals – Early ventures, 1840 to 1890". Te Ara: The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Retrieved 26 November 2023.
- ^ a b "Eugenics". Daily Post. Vol. V, no. 244. Tasmania, Australia. 12 October 1912. p. 5. Retrieved 28 July 2024 – via National Library of Australia.
- ^ "For Eugenic Education". Vol. 53, no. 115. Taranaki Daily News. 23 August 1910. p. 5. Retrieved 22 November 2023.
- ^ a b Fleming 1981, p. 1.
- ^ a b Fleming 1981, p. 19.
- ^ Fleming 1981, p. 20.
- ^ "Eugenics". No. 10528. Star (Christchurch). 1 August 1912. p. 1. Retrieved 22 November 2023.
- ^ Wanhalla 2001, p. 62.
- ^ a b Fleming 1981, p. 21.
- ^ Eugenics at the Edges of Empire 2018, p. 112.
- ^ Fleming 1981, p. 22.
- ^ a b Fleming 1981, p. 23.
- ^ Eugenics at the Edges of Empire 2018, p. 290.
- ^ "Poll tax imposed on Chinese". Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ "Poll tax on Chinese immigrants abolished". Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ a b "NZ government apologises to Chinese community". 16 March 2002. Archived from the original on 16 March 2002. Retrieved 18 October 2022.
- ^ Tang, Eda (14 February 2023). "Poll tax apology delivered in language of those impacted, 21 years after first apology". Stuff. Retrieved 27 February 2023.
- ^ Beaglehole, Ann. "Immigration regulation – 1881–1914: restrictions on Chinese and others". Te Ara: The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ a b Hall, Kristin (16 September 2021). "'Bordering on eugenics' – Greens want to see immigration policy scrapped". TVNZ. 1 News. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ Gordon, Liz (2 August 2021). "Dr Liz Gordon: Eugenics in New Zealand immigration policy". The Daily Blog. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ "ACT MP suggests sterilisation of abusive parents". Radio New Zealand. 4 March 2010.
- ^ "Pay abusive parents to be sterilised – Act MP". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ Espiner, Colin (4 March 2010). "Outrage at MP's call to sterilise bad parents". Stuff. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ Levy, Danya (6 June 2012). "Sterilisation 'a step too far'". Stuff. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ "State eugenics or common sense?". Radio New Zealand. 7 June 2012. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ "Pre-natal screening paper upsets Downs lobby". Radio New Zealand. 12 March 2013. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
- ^ Perrottet, Alex (19 September 2019). "Parents fear more disability terminations: 'We were under immense pressure to have genetic counselling'". Radio New Zealand. Retrieved 19 November 2023.
Bibliography
[edit]Paul, Diane B.; Stenhouse, John; Spencer, Hamish G., eds. (2018). Eugenics at the Edges of Empire. Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-319-64685-5.
Tod, Frank (1977). The Making of a Madman: Lionel Terry. Otago Foundation Books.
Wanhalla, Angela C. (2001). Gender, Race and Colonial Identity: Women and Eugenics in New Zealand, 1918–1939 (Master of Arts in History thesis). University of Canterbury.
Fleming, Philip J. (1981). Eugenics in New Zealand 1900–1940 : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History at Massey University (Master of Arts in History thesis). Massey University. hdl:10179/5567.