Denmark to compensate its women, but forced birth control was global

From India's Emergency-era sterilisation drives to Peru's rural women, Denmark's apology for forced contraception highlights a troubling global history of reproductive abuse

Imagine discovering years later that a medical device had been placed inside your body without your knowledge or consent. For thousands of Greenlandic women, this was not a distant nightmare but a lived reality. Denmark has now formally apologised and promised compensation to women subjected to decades of non-consensual contraception—acknowledging one of the darkest chapters in its history and raising urgent questions about reproductive rights worldwide.

What exactly happened in Denmark and Greenland?

Between the late 1960s and early 1990s, Danish authorities ran a campaign in Greenland aimed at reducing Inuit birth rates. As part of this programme, more than 4,000 women and girls, some as young as 12, were fitted with intrauterine devices (IUDs) without their knowledge or consent.

 

 

According to media reports, an independent inquiry confirmed that many women later faced infertility, complications, or lifelong trauma. Some only discovered years later that devices had been inserted during unrelated surgeries.

 

On Wednesday, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen travelled to Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, and issued a tearful apology. She also announced a “reconciliation fund” to provide compensation to victims. “Sorry for the injustice that was committed against you,” she said.

Why did governments force contraception or sterilisation in the first place?

Most such campaigns emerged under the banner of population control, eugenics, or public health policy. In practice, they disproportionately targeted marginalised, Indigenous, poor, or disabled women, those with the least power to resist.

 

The rationale ranged from fears of “overpopulation” to discriminatory beliefs that certain communities should not reproduce. For governments, it was often easier, and cheaper, to control birth rates than address poverty or improve healthcare access.

Was Denmark the only country to do this?

Denmark is only the latest to officially acknowledge and compensate victims. Similar programmes have been exposed across continents:

• India (1970s Emergency era): During Indira Gandhi’s Emergency (1975–77), millions were sterilised in mass drives. While men were often targeted, poor and rural women were also coerced. Some procedures were conducted in unsanitary conditions, leading to serious complications and deaths.
• Peru (1990s): Under President Alberto Fujimori, over 270,000 mostly Indigenous and poor women were sterilised—often misled or without consent. Many developed chronic health issues.
• Japan (1948–1996): Under the Eugenic Protection Law, around 25,000 people, mostly women with disabilities, were forcibly sterilised. In 2019, the government apologised and offered compensation.
• Sweden (1930s–1970s): Thousands of women deemed “unfit” or socially disadvantaged were sterilised under eugenics policies. Sweden formally apologised in 1997.
• Czech Republic & Slovakia (1970s–2000s): Roma women were subjected to forced sterilisation. The Czech government apologised in 2009 and later passed a compensation law.
• United States (20th century): Several US states sterilised women under eugenics laws—primarily women of colour, the poor, and the institutionalised. As recently as the 2010s, California’s prison system was found conducting sterilisation surgeries without proper consent.
• China’s one-child policy and coercive enforcement (1980): China’s family planning policy, imposed in 1980, by Chinese Communist Party, was one of the most sweeping examples of reproductive control. Millions of families faced heavy fines if they had more than one child. Reports documented cases of forced abortions and sterilisation. The state framed the measure as essential for economic development. Decades later, the one-child policy has created a demographic imbalance that China continues to struggle with. A shrinking workforce, rapidly ageing population, and skewed gender ratios have all been traced back to the policy. Despite scrapping the rule in 2016 and later allowing three children, the effects are proving irreversible.

What does this mean for women’s health today?

For many victims, the consequences were not just physical—infertility, infections, chronic pain—but also emotional, leaving deep scars from being denied autonomy over their bodies.

 

Whether it’s birth control, vaccination, or any medical procedure, no individual should be subjected to treatment without informed consent. When institutions control reproductive rights, the line between policy and abuse can blur dangerously.

 

Accountability matters. Apologies and compensation may not erase trauma, but they mark essential steps toward recognising injustice.

 

This is not just “history”. Even today, debates around consent, contraception access, and bodily autonomy remain active in many countries—including India.