The US government (and other governments) have a long history with attempting to control the reproduction of citizens. From the past coercive sterilization of tens of thousands in the US, to the modern day Harvard, Berkeley professors who write about population control and try to lower the birth rate of countries around the world, there exists an agenda that is very persistent.

Because some powers seem to be obsessed with curbing population growth, lawmakers found it a priority to legalize children receiving contraceptives without parental permission.

A sexual education program at a Tulsa, Oklahoma school led to a 16 year old girl receiving a dangerous contraceptive implant without parental consent.

As a 21 year old American who remembers sexual education in Texas (right next to Oklahoma, where schools are not much different), I know for a fact that they fear-monger about STD’s, push vaccination for HPV, contraceptives, and anything else they can, in these so called lessons.

I can personally tell you that several people were coerced into getting contraceptive implants in sexual education at my Middle School in Central Texas (Mountain Valley Middle School), and highly dangerous Gardasil vaccines were pushed as well, in 2009. I saw young, impressionable peers receive a sales pitch, and fear-mongering about HPV.

According to Fox23:

“A Tulsa parent is speaking out after she says her daughter had a birth control implant embedded into her arm during a trip from school. Miracle Foster says her parental rights were violated.

It all started when her 16-year-old daughter attended a Youth Services of Tulsa lecture about sex education at Langston Hughes Academy.

After one of the sessions, the teen and other girls reportedly said they wanted to learn more, and the school arranged for Youth Services of Tulsa to pick them up and take them to a clinic. Foster says that her daughter then received a three-year Norplant implant at the clinic without her parental consent.

Representatives from Youth Services of Tulsa say they do not have to tell a parent about any contraceptives given to minors. Title X federal guidelines allows for teens as young as 12 to receive various forms of contraceptives without a parent’s consent.”

To make it worse, Norplant is associated with a wide array of adverse effects. It is an implant that releases Levonorgestrel, and has been linked to serious hormonal changes, cervical cysts, and worse. Sometimes the implants get lost in the body and cause permanent infertility.

Both the dangers of Norplant and the population control motives behind its promotion were well summarized by the Population Research Institute:

“The population controllers have long dreamed of chemically sterilizing women for extended periods of time. That was the idea behind Norplant I, which consisted of six silicon capsules loaded with levonorgestrel that, implanted permanently in a woman’s body, was intended to shut down her reproductive system for up to five years. And it is this same idea that is driving the release of Norplant II, touted as “one of the most effective reversible contraceptives available.”

Except that, if the history of Norplant I is any guide, the second generation of this device will prove just as dangerous as the first.

No sooner had Norplant been approved by the FDA in 1990 than woman who received the implant began reporting serious side effects. By 1996, over 6,000 complaints of “adverse medical consequences” had been filed by American women who were suffering from various Norplant-related ailments, from heavy bleeding and vision impairment to general malaise and lack of appetite.

But these problems paled in comparison with those suffered by women overseas, perhaps because these latter were more often malnourished and in poor health to begin with. PRI investigations revealed that these women, instead of just suffering from vision problems, sometimes went blind, and instead of just suffering from a general feeling of malaise, were sometimes actually bedridden for months on end. And when they sought to have the troublesome implants removed, their requests were turned down by population control officials. They were forced to continue in pain and suffering, and sometimes died.

So it was that PRI in 1996 launched a media campaign against Norplant, advising American women who were suffering serious side effects from the device to contact legal counsel. We also filed a “citizen’s petition” with the FDA to have Norplant taken off the market.

Both of these efforts bore fruit. Faced with tens of thousands of lawsuits from injured women, the original manufacturer, Wyeth-Aherst, in 2002 reached an out-of-court settlement with the victims. That same year it took Norplant I off the market in the U.S., in an obvious effort to stem the financial hemorrhaging caused by the lawsuits.

It was a different story overseas. Wyeth-Aherst continued to manufacture, and USAID continued to purchase, millions of Norplant I to use on women in the developing world. Such women were, after all, easy targets. They lacked the means to fight back legally, and their complaints were brushed off by local health agencies complicit in population control programs. USAID finally ended its contract with the manufacturer in 2006, after PRI called attention to the obvious double standard at work here: How can the U.S. continue to promote the use of a drug/device overseas, we asked, that is so dangerous it has been taken off the market in the U.S.?

Now the same thing is happening all over again. It turns out that the new manufacturer, Bayer HealthCare, has no plans to market Norplant II in the United States. USAID has nevertheless signed a contract with the German pharmaceutical company to purchase and distribute the drug/device to its population control partners to implant in poor women around the world. Sound familiar?”

“Norplant I died a very public death some years ago, pilloried in the courts and pummeled in the media. One may well ask why it has now been resurrected, under a new name and with a new manufacturer.

The answer is that implanting long-term contraceptives in poor women is one of the cherished goals of the population control movement. USAID itself reiterated its commitment to this goal at the recent London Family Planning Summit sponsored by the Gates Foundation.

A woman on birth control can stop taking her pills. A woman on depo-provera can stop taking her injections. But Jadelle, like its predecessor, is impossible to remove short of surgery. A woman who has been chemically sterilized by Jadelle will stay sterilized—for five long years.”

So why do laws like this exist?

It can be summarized like this: we live in a society where former advocates for forced abortion, coercive sterilization and population control can become the highest scientific authorities in the country (in reference to John Holdren, the author of controversial book “Ecoscience” who became the Science Czar in the Obama Administration).

Many power players and lawmakers, throughout history and of recent, have passed legislation aimed at controlling reproduction and ultimately reducing population. Entire organizations have been founded to expose the overpopulation myth and the population control agenda. The Population Research Institute is a prime example.

This is a much less extreme measure than coercive sterilization, but it’s a slippery slope to population control, and removing the rights of parents to raise their children.

People need to understand the history of population control to understand why this is being pushed in public school.

(Image credit: CA, TB)