“There is nothing that can be done more effectively toward the prevention of feeble-mindedness, crime and poverty and toward the promotion of our best citizenship, than to segregate the feeble-minded and properly care for them. … Segregation is the most humane and ideal remedy for providing for the defective.”

– Dr. Frederic J. Russell, superintendent of the Brandon School (1916)

In the 1830s, Vermont began to turn to institutionalization as a way to provide care for the mentally ill and juvenile care—but the new institutions soon exploded in size. Officials believed the root cause was heredity, overlooking or underplaying the complex issues they actually faced. Town aid had worsened existing health issues while restraining socioeconomic recovery and success. Municipalities began to blatantly abuse the new system, sending their unwanted citizens to avoid fiscal responsibility.

Limited advances in medical care made the possibility of recovery unlikely, particularly as the institutions soon faced overcrowding, understaffing, and funding issues. These issues did not allow for an environment that supported the personalized treatment so greatly needed. Early records point to clear caregiver burnout, creating a dangerous situation. Dehumanizing mass institutionalization also attracted people who thought of those under their care as little more than animals.

Over the late twentieth century and into the twenty-first century, the institutions were slowly shut down due to local reform advocates and a national push for deinstitutionalization.

Institutionalization and eugenics

 

Interested in heredity, early institutional officials started to keep short records of families. This simplistic tracking system did not document environmental context and was highly predisposed to show that certain families were contributing to Vermont’s issues. With a nearly immediate explosion in institutional population, leading citizens and state officials began to fear that Vermont was in the midst of a severe crisis of human quality.

Institutional staff became strong supporters of eugenics. During the 1912 campaign and the Eugenics Survey of Vermont, they served as advocates and volunteering information. Public superintendents sat on the Eugenics Survey’s advisory committee and volunteered to turn over all of their medical and family records to the Survey’s fieldworkers.

Both eugenics and the general system of mass institutionalization as an answer to societal issues led to widespread labor practices at the institutions and their colonies to meet high costs. American eugenicists intended that eugenical segregation alongside sterilization would eliminate “poor” heredity by cutting off the bloodline. Until that ending, however, eugenicists intended that their subjects would be put to work as part of a menial class—that’s why eugenicists often described their targets in both medical terms and trainability. When the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1966 banned the so-called therapeutic practice of largely unpaid labor, Vermont’s state-run institutions lost up to 90 percent of their workforces.

Segregation and sterilization

Eugenicists looked towards institutionalization—the forcible restriction of “undesirable” people from society to prevent their procreation—as a key cornerstone of eliminating bloodlines. Although officials spoke widely about institutional segregation by the 1910s, determining eugenic cases is difficult. Courts typically had to order a commitment for institutionalization for medical or criminal causes and institutional officials had discretion in determining releases, negating the need for new eugenical laws. As eugenicists targeted people on the basis of ability, background, health, perceived behavior and morals, and socioeconomic status, someone could be committed for a legitimate medical reason and receive treatment while also being considered a eugenical case.

Institutional officials were major advocates for sterilization, particularly in light of skyrocketing costs and overpopulation. Due to widespread issues with sterilization records, however, it may be impossible to know the scale of sterilization at the institutions. Determining the scale and timeline of eugenical segregation is likewise difficult, as eugenics was not a diagnosis nor was segregation an official policy. Determining cases typically requires additional informal notes that refer to a eugenics reason, such as threat of procreation. 

 The institutions

Resources

Allen, Holly, and Erin Fuller. “Beyond the Feeble Mind: Foregrounding the Personhood of Inmates with Significant Intellectual Disabilities in the Era of Institutionalization.” Disability Studies Quarterly 36:2 (Spring 2016). 10.18061/dsq.v36i2.5227.

Gallagher, Nancy L. Breeding Better Vermonters: The Eugenics Project in the Green Mountain State. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1999.

de Guardiola, Mercedes. “Vermont for the Vermonters”: The History of Eugenics in the Green Mountain State. Barre: Vermont Historical Society, 2023.

Kenneally, Christine. Ghosts of the Orphanage: A Story of Mysterious Deaths, a Conspiracy of Silence, and a Search for Justice. New York: PublicAffairs, 2023.

Kincheloe, Marsha R., and Herbert G. Hunt Jr. Empty Beds: A History of the Vermont State Hospital. Barre, VT: Northlight Studio Press, 1989.

McGovern, Constance M. “The Insane, the Asylum, and the State in Nineteenth-Century Vermont.” Vermont History 52:4 (Fall 1984): 205–24.

The Vermont Asylum for the Insane: Its Annals for 50 Years. Brattleboro, VT: Hildreth & Fales, 1887.