The Black Stork

Last updated
The Black Stork
Black Stork at the Oliver Theatre.jpg
Advertising for screenings at the Oliver Theater in Boston
Directed by Leopold Wharton
Theodore Wharton
Written by Harry J. Haiselden
Starring Jane Fearnley
Allan Murnane
Harry J. Haiselden
Production
company
Distributed bySheriott Pictures Corporation
Release date
February 1917
Running time
5 reels
CountryUnited States
LanguageSilent (English intertitles)
Dr. Harry J. Haiselden Harry John Haiselden.png
Dr. Harry J. Haiselden

The Black Stork, also known as Are You Fit To Marry?, is a 1917 American motion picture film both written by and starring Harry J. Haiselden, who was the chief surgeon at the German-American Hospital in Chicago. [1] The Black Stork is Haiselden's fictionalized account of his eugenic infanticide of John Bollinger, who was born with severe disabilities. [2] The film depicts Haiselden's fictionalized story of a woman who has a nightmare of a severely disabled child being a menace to society. Once awoken from the nightmare, she visits a doctor and realizes all was fine with her child. However, the purpose of the film was not to have a happy ending and move on. The purpose was to basically warn people, especially teenagers, of the dangers of sexual promiscuity and "race mixing", as these actions were believed to be the cause of disabilities in children. [3]

Contents

Haiselden's film garnered many mixed reviews[ citation needed ], and his actions were very controversial at the time. At this point in history, when the word "disability" was brought up, all anyone thought of was a "disease" that could be spread[ citation needed ]. Through this way of thinking, a majority of people agreed with Haiselden's actions and enforced the idea that doctors have the right to decide whether a disabled child should live. [4] However, there was also a number of people who protested Dr. Heiselden's actions, including the Roman Catholic Church. Despite the public backlash, The Black Stork was still shown commercially in movie theaters for two years. After 1918, the movie was renamed Are You Fit To Marry? and remained in theaters and traveling road shows for many more years, as late as 1942. [5]

Dr. Haiselden

Harry J. Haiselden was born on March 16, 1870, to George W. Haiselden and Elizabeth Dickey. Throughout his life, he expressed a passion for the medical field and ended up graduating from the University of Illinois medical school, and later accepted a job at the German-American Hospital in Chicago. [6] During his time working at the hospital, he experienced many different instances of children growing up with disabilities[ citation needed ], which led to his reasoning behind letting children with severe disabilities die. He experienced first hand the toll it took on both the child and family[ citation needed ], and chose to promote infanticide rather than letting the disabled children live their lives with excessive treatments and painful procedures.

The Bollinger case

On November 17, 1915, John Bollinger was born to a woman named Anna Bollinger. He was born with no neck or right ear[ dubious ], as well as a severe skin ailment, all determined to be the cause of syphilis passed on from the father. [3] After treating children with disabilities for many years at the American-German Hospital, he saw the severity of John Bollinger's condition and took it upon himself[ ambiguous ] to advise Anna that the quality of life for her son will only get worse as he grows up. [6] He confided in her that he has the skill set to surgically repair his defects and save the child's life, however he has experience with similar cases and convinced her that it was in the best interest for John to just let him die naturally. [3] Out of fear for her son's future quality of life, the mother ultimately decided to follow Haiselden's advice and agreed that the best course of action is infanticide, instead of allowing him to grow up and deal with the disabilities in his adult years. [4] As the child was dying though, an unknown person attempted to kidnap John Bollinger in an attempt to save his life and take him to another hospital for treatment, but her efforts were futile and ended unsuccessfully. [3]

While the Catholic church was in full protest against Dr. Haiselden's actions, activists Helen Keller and Woodrow Wilson, as well as attorney Clarence Darrow and many others each wrote separate articles in support of Dr. Haiselden's choice. [3] Dr. Haiselden was an outspoken supporter of the eugenics movement prior to the case and, after the publicity made him famous, he took eugenics onto the national stage. [2] He was taken to court following a public release of information, and was ultimately acquitted by a jury for allowing John Bollinger to die. [7] The Illinois Board of Health attempted to revoke Haiselden's medical license but that action was dropped. [8] Even through these protests, he still managed to preserve his title and keep his medical license. [3] During the trial, a coroner's jury determined that the child was not syphilitic, but in fact brain damaged and therefore defective. [7] This brain damage gave Haiselden's actions even more validity and praise. Still, the Chicago Medical Society expelled Haiselden from their membership for The Black Stork film and the publicity that he sought out after the infanticide. [8]

Film

The film revolves around a fictional Dr. Dickey, played by and based on Haiselden himself, who is called in to operate in order to save the life of a "defective" child. Dr. Dickey refuses to operate on the child, as he is seen shooing his apron away from the nurse. Other doctors save the child and he grows up as a shunned monstrosity. He later returns to kill the doctor who "condemned [him] to life." [9] The mother then wakes up from her nightmare and realizes that she and her fiancé need to get tested to ensure that they will have "fit" offspring. They pass the exam and have a happy and healthy child. The film concludes with Congress passing mandatory premarital testing legislation in order to prevent defective children. Images of disabled individuals are inter-played throughout the film. The film served two main purposes. Younger children were not allowed into theaters while this movie was playing, but teenagers were. Teenagers were allowed to watch this movie as a warning, showing the dangers of sexual promiscuity and "race mixing". [3] Sex at a young age that results in pregnancy could cause serious defects to the child, as well as the worry of spreading syphilis. The film also showed adults what life would be like if a disabled child was allowed to grow up and live among the rest of society, and basically seed the idea in their minds that if they were to have a child with a "defect", it would be better for everyone just to let it naturally die instead of treating the disability.

Public perceptions

The reviews for Haiselden's film were mixed[ citation needed ]. Rarely did people directly criticize his message but rather they attacked his egotism and his poor production values. [10] Many were in favor and agreed with Haiselden's actions, stating that doctors are knowledgeable enough to make these decisions. [4] At this point in time, the majority public opinion was that disabled children were "degenerates"[ citation needed ], and many were worried that disabled children could spread disabilities like a disease. [11] Many also compared this situation to how we treat disabled animals[ citation needed ]. Sick dogs beyond treatment are euthanized, and many people used this idea as justification, stating we should do the same to children with disabilities beyond repair. Lastly, many parents with fully grown disabled children also came forward, stating that while it may be sad, it would have been better for their children to have not dealt with all the hospital visits and the constant worrying about health. [11]

Alternatively, a number of people disagreed with Haiselden's actions, using religion as a basis of their protests. Many civilians argued that God should be the only one in charge of deciding who lives and who dies. [11] With this mindset, an average man should not have the power or ego to make these decisions. Many also cited the Fifth Amendment, which states "No One can be deprived of life, liberty, and property without due process of law". [12] Others justified their protest on the fact that the main purpose of a doctor should be to heal patients and make sure they live as long as they can, not the opposite[ citation needed ].

The movie itself was not received well in the media, with critics stating that it was "sickening and disturbing" to record a child in this way. [11] While audience members were split on how to perceive this, the media was set on being against anything that dealt with this movie and with Dr. Haiselden, condemning him in the press.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eugenics</span> Aim to improve perceived human genetic quality

Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population. Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter human gene pools by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior or promoting those judged to be superior. In recent years, the term has seen a revival in bioethical discussions on the usage of new technologies such as CRISPR and genetic screening, with heated debate around whether these technologies should be considered eugenics or not.

The Eugenics Board of North Carolina (EBNC) was a State Board of the U.S. state of North Carolina formed in July 1933 by the North Carolina State Legislature by the passage of House Bill 1013, entitled "An Act to Amend Chapter 34 of the Public Laws of 1929 of North Carolina Relating to the Sterilization of Persons Mentally Defective". This Bill formally repealed a 1929 law, which had been ruled as unconstitutional by the North Carolina Supreme Court earlier in the year.

Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Despite the changing attitudes in the coming decades regarding sterilization, the Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell. It is widely believed to have been weakened by Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942), which involved compulsory sterilization of male habitual criminals. Legal scholar and Holmes biographer G. Edward White, in fact, wrote, "the Supreme Court has distinguished the case [Buck v. Bell] out of existence". In addition, federal statutes, including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, provide protections for people with disabilities, defined as both physical and mental impairments.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Racial Integrity Act of 1924</span> Virginia anti-miscegenation law

In 1924, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Racial Integrity Act. The act reinforced racial segregation by prohibiting interracial marriage and |classifying as "white" a person "who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian". The act, an outgrowth of eugenicist and scientific racist propaganda, was pushed by Walter Plecker, a white supremacist and eugenicist who held the post of registrar of Virginia Bureau of Vital Statistics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harry H. Laughlin</span> American eugenicist (1880–1943)

Harry Hamilton Laughlin was an American educator and eugenicist. He served as the superintendent of the Eugenics Record Office from its inception in 1910 to its closure in 1939, and was among the most active individuals influencing American eugenics policy, especially compulsory sterilization legislation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph DeJarnette</span> American physician

Joseph Spencer DeJarnette was the director of Western State Hospital from 1905 to November 15, 1943. He was a vocal proponent of racial segregation and eugenics, specifically, the compulsory sterilization of the mentally ill.

In 1928, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, Canada, enacted the Sexual Sterilization Act. The Act, drafted to protect the gene pool, allowed for sterilization of mentally disabled people in order to prevent the transmission of traits to offspring deemed undesirable.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Leilani Muir</span>

Leilani Marietta (O'Malley) Muir, previously named Leilani Marie Scorah, was the first person to file a successful lawsuit against the Alberta government for wrongful sterilization under the Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta. Her case led to the initiation of several other class action lawsuits against the province for wrongful sterilization. Muir's advocacy shed light on eugenics, institutionalisation, human rights for persons with a disability, and self-advocacy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nazi eugenics</span> Nazi German policy of the murder of "undesirable" persons from the German people

Nazi eugenics refers to the social policies of eugenics in Nazi Germany, composed of various ideas about genetics. The racial ideology of Nazism placed the biological improvement of the German people by selective breeding of "Nordic" or "Aryan" traits at its center. These policies were used to justify the involuntary sterilization and mass-murder of those deemed "undesirable".

Homo Sapiens 1900 is a 1998 Swedish documentary film directed by Peter Cohen, about various eugenics methods that were in practice in Europe during the first part of the 20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Harry J. Haiselden</span> American surgeon and eugenicist (1870–1919)

Harry John Haiselden was an American physician and the Chief Surgeon at the German-American Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. Haiselden gained notoriety in 1915, when he refused to perform needed surgery for children born with severe birth defects and allowed the babies to die, in an act of eugenics. The film The Black Stork was made by him, about him, and starred him.

Child euthanasia is a form of euthanasia that is applied to children who are gravely ill or have significant birth defects. In 2005, the Netherlands became the first country since the end of Nazi Germany to decriminalize euthanasia for infants with hopeless prognosis and intractable pain. Nine years later, Belgium amended its 2002 Euthanasia Act to extend the rights of euthanasia to minors. Like euthanasia, there is world-wide public controversy and ethical debate over the moral, philosophical and religious issues of child euthanasia.

Compulsory sterilization in Canada has a documented history in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia. It is still ongoing as in 2017, sixty Indigenous women in Saskatchewan sued the provincial government, claiming they had been forced to accept sterilization before seeing their newborn babies. In June of 2021, the Standing Committee on Human Rights in Canada found that compulsory sterilization is ongoing in Canada and its extent has been underestimated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cornelia Chase Brant</span> American physician (1863–1959)

Cornelia Lucretia Brant was an American medical doctor.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eugenics in the United States</span>

Eugenics, the set of beliefs and practices which aims at improving the genetic quality of the human population, played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States from the late 19th century into the mid-20th century. The cause became increasingly promoted by intellectuals of the Progressive Era.

This disability rights timeline lists events relating to the civil rights of people with disabilities in the United States of America, including court decisions, the passage of legislation, activists' actions, significant abuses of people with disabilities, and the founding of various organizations. Although the disability rights movement itself began in the 1960s, advocacy for the rights of people with disabilities started much earlier and continues to the present.

The Ladd School in Exeter, Rhode Island operated from 1908 to 1993 as a state institution to serve the needs of people with mental disabilities or developmental delays. It was closed largely due to the deinstitutionalization movement of the 1980s.

The history of eugenics is the study of development and advocacy of ideas related to eugenics around the world. Early eugenic ideas were discussed in Ancient Greece and Rome. The height of the modern eugenics movement came in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George G. Eitel</span> American surgeon; designed and built Eitel Hospital

George Gotthilf Eitel was an American surgeon who designed and built Eitel Hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 1912. Eitel was its chief of staff for fifteen years until 1927, after which he was called proprietor.

Sterilization of Latinas has been practiced in the United States on women of different Latin American identities, including those from Puerto Rico and Mexico. There is a significant history of such sterilization practices being conducted involuntarily, in a coerced or forced manner, as well as in more subtle forms such as that of constrained choice. Forced sterilization was permissible by multiple states throughout various periods in the 20th century. Issues of state sterilization have persisted as recently as September 2020. Some sources credit the practice to theories of racial eugenics.

References

  1. "The Black Stork". tcm.com. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
  2. 1 2 Pernick, Martin S. (1996). The Black Stork. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. all. ISBN   0-19-507731-8.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Taylor, Stephen J. (2016-02-05). "The Black Stork: Eugenics Goes to the Movies". Hoosier State Chronicles: Indiana's Digital Newspaper Program. Retrieved 2021-03-22.
  4. 1 2 3 "Beyond Affliction: The Black Stork Document". legacy.npr.org. Retrieved 2021-03-22.
  5. Pernick, Martin S. (1996-04-18). The Black Stork: Eugenics and the Death of "Defective" Babies in American Medicine and Motion Pictures since 1915. Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-975974-3.
  6. 1 2 "The Black Stork;Eugenics and Infanticide in the twentieth century America.pdf". Google Docs. Retrieved 2021-03-22.
  7. 1 2 na, na (November 20, 1915). "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden". The Chicago Tribune.
  8. 1 2 Camery, Luke. "The Black Stork; Eugenic Infanticide in twentieth century America" . Retrieved 19 May 2013.
  9. Haiselden, Harry J. (1917). The Black Stork. Chicago: Jack Lait.
  10. Kelly, Kitty (April 4, 1917). "The Black Stork". The Chicago Examiner.
  11. 1 2 3 4 "Forgotten Stories of the Eugenic Age #4, Part 2: The Black Stork Rises: Dr. Haiselden's Celebrity and Public Controversy | Center for Genetics and Society". www.geneticsandsociety.org. Retrieved 2021-03-22.
  12. "Due Process". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2021-03-22.