SCHOLAR: The Sterilization of Leilani Muir REVIEW

The documentary, “The Sterilization of Leilani Muir” is a film depicting a case that was tried in Alberta with regards to the sterilization of minorities.  It depicts Leilani Muir’s journey within the legal system in her effort to sue the government of Alberta who was conducting a eugenics program.   This is a film depicting the discrimination not only of the disabled but also of immigrants.  In the wider scheme of things, this portrayal can be symbolic of white privilege.  In Alberta’s attempt to control the population they evidently got stifled resulting from human rights concerns.  The government was discriminatory and caused genocide of the mentally ill or defectives people in their attempt to segregate them in facilities.  

Leilani Muir was a young girl from Alberta who was abused by her parents and further sent to a sterilization facility.  She was described as, “case 3280, female, race origin, Irish Polish, Leilani has shown a little improvement in her work habits, she is still young and needs considerably more training, verbal IQ 70, performance 64, full scale IQ 64, reason for sterilization, danger of transmission to progeny of mental deficiency, incapable of intelligent parenthood” (Whiting 1994, 9:44).  Further she was diagnosed as a, “moron.”  However according to Leilani her IQ’s have varied to 90 and 101.  This questions the integrity of the IQ test.  The film delves into the history of this IQ test.  The film says that the IQ test was invented in France in the first decade of this century.  Alfred Binet used the test for his own purpose and it was non hereditarian.  The IQ test was perverted in America to promote heredity objectives.  This then resulted in eugenics.  This test would become the first line of defense against the, “inferior breeding stock invading America” (Whiting, 1994 12:08).  Prominent psychologist, HH Godard at the time believed that the majority of these immigrants 80% were feeble minded.  This film provides information on this history of discrimination in Canada.  

Eugenics was first discovered by the agriculture industry.  Farmers discovered that selective breeding of crop produced better crop.  They then became concerned with the benefits of selective breeding the nation.  These farmers backed by corporations lobbied the government and the Sexual Sterilization Act became law.  Eugenics is a biological theory regarding genetic trait discrimination.  It aims to create a population with traits that are considered desirable.  Through generations these traits can be inherited to children.  This is one of the main objectives that are depicted in the film.  The Canadian government was discriminating against the mentally ill and referring to them as, “mentally defective.”  It explains that one of the major threats to a healthy nation is the, “spread of the bad genes of the mentally defective” (Whiting 1994, 12:28).  The film provides evidence that not only mentally ill people were the targets of these programs but also other minorities especially immigrants.  The film depicts a case study conducted by HH Godard who apparently, “phoneyed,” photographs to depict that, “defectives,” have a certain look.  For example, he retouched the photos to make people appear more dumb or sinister.  This case study became influential to the study of eugenics.  

The readings discuss ideology in detail.  Ideology can be defined as, “a set of beliefs, perceptions, assumptions and values that provide members of a group with an understanding and an explanation of their world” (Tator 2010, 3).  With consideration of ideology, it can be safely said that eugenics forms the basis by which the dominant ideology of, “whiteness,” was asserted during WW2.  In this global event, the Germans pushed a superior race referred to as the Aerians.  The Aerians were blue eyed and blond.  It was said that they were the most intellectually and physically superior race on the planet.  This dangerous ideology caused massive genocide in Europe and serves as a basis by which ideology should be prevented from interfering in government relations.  

The literature describes privilege as, “advantages that accrue to individuals by virtue of their group membership rather than through their individual effort” (Perry 2011, 58).  White privilege specifically refers to the normalization of the, “white, thin, male, young, heterosexual, Christian and financially secure” (Perry 2011, 58).  Through this so called, “white privilege,” whites have ascertained significant power which shapes their life chances.  This film can be symbolically associated to the concept of white privilege because the film depicts, “defective,” minorities under the oppression of an ideological based entity.  According to the documentary the Eugenics Board caused 2000 plus sterilization in Alberta.  With relation to white privilege, it can be said that since the whites are the colonizers of America, and traditionally the winner of wars, they experience such privilege.  They are the dominant group in society whose preferences are always prioritized as opposed to the minorities who have innovated to cause deviance in society.  In fact, according to the literature, white accused [are] more likely to be released by the police and less likely to be detained after a bail hearing” (Tator 2010, 130).   When in comparison to the blacks and the indigenous, who are more likely to be scrutinized by the police, whites experience and benefit off of white privilege.  As it pertains to what the film refers to as, “defectives,” it can be seen that these minorities rights got taken away because of their disability.  It took those that got sterilized years to be able to receive their rights back.  They suffered inequity at the hands of doctors and nurses who were under the guise of ideological principles which could be considered flawed.   The disabled were powerless and oppressed in the hands of the medical establishment.  

Through the discussed subject matters, it becomes evident that this all boils down to human rights.  Canada has in their constitution has a clause which prohibits, “odd [and] peculiar treatment.“     It becomes clear that those who succumbed institutional oppression via sterilization were treated against the constitution.  Devoid of privilege, these people’s rights got violated and it resulted in a court case.  The literature talks about democratic racism.  It is defined as egalitarian values such as liberalism, justice and fairness (Tator 2010, 6) on one side and racism on the other.    Interestingly, the film portrays a similar ethical dilemma with pertinence to Eugenics.  David King says that in the society at the time of the enactment of the Sexual Sterilization Act, there was a contemplation that everything could be remedied with science, and that there was a wide spread feeling that science and morality were the same thing.  It becomes strikingly clear that what David King explains is similar to the value clash of democratic racism.  Therefore, it is entirely possible that holding conflicting values contributed to the sterilization of these, “defectives.”  

In modern times this is really considered a human rights issue.  It is striking that Canada, with consideration of this documentary, was one of the main advocates of legislation in the United Nations.  The documentary reveals the dark side of Canadian history.  The discrimination against the disabled is unfathomable in contemporary times.  The manipulation of the public via ideology was apparent in lobbying the government to support eugenics plans.  The public has a role to play in protecting minorities and especially the disabled.

REFERENCES

Henry, Francis and Carol Tator. (2010). The Colour of Democracy: Racism In Canadian Society 2009 4th Edition. Toronto: Nelson Thomson.
Perry, Barbara (Ed.) (2011). Diversity, Crime, and Justice in Canada. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press.

Whiting, G.  (Director).  (1996).  The Sterilization of Leilani Muir [Motion Picture].   Montreal:  National Film Board of Canada.  DVD.