Vasectomy Requirement Part of Virginia Man’s Plea Deal



A Virginia man who has fathered children with several women has agreed to get a vasectomy to reduce his prison term by up to five years in a child endangerment case that has evoked the country’s dark history of forced sterilization.
None of the charges against Jessie Lee Herald, 27, involved a sexual offense. Shenandoah County assistant prosecutor Ilona White said her chief motive in making the extraordinarily unusual offer was keeping Herald from fathering more than the seven children he has by at least six women.
“He needs to be able to support the children he already has when he gets out,” she said, adding that Herald and the state both benefit from the deal, first reported by the Northern Virginia Daily.

That is getting very close to the forced sterilizations that happened in the first half of the 20th Century under the Progressives.

(Not that I encourage more child rearing…but…)


That is horrible. There never should have been a vasectomy requirement. A court should never require someone to do a gravely sinful thing in order to get a lesser sentence.


This is the wrong means to address a serious problem, but it is easy to get frustrated at the scope of the problem that is non-support of a dependent. It is not only a serious moral failing:

1 Timothy 5:8
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

It is one of the least prosecuted crimes in our country. Here is how another Virginia county tried to deal with the problem:


I don’t know what the answer is for such a problem; 8 kids. He could Father dozens in a lifetime obviously. As far as arresting these men and putting them in prison they can’t pay if they don’t have the money.

A sad problem indeed, fatherless children without adequate financial support from their parent.

May God intervene towards a better solution.


The various mothers are as guilty as he is.


Yes but he is the one who owes the child support so apparently the various women are raising his child alone without support.


Perhaps so, but they shouldn’t be sterilized either.

.The plea deal is outrageous. Regardless of the crime, it would be outrageous. But all the more so since the crime he was charged with has nothing to do with child support




No one said anything about sterilizing the mothers.

But presumably the mothers were a willing participant in the act. They made their bed, so they must sleep in it.


Maybe they should make his life difficult enough so that he thinks twice before he fathers another child. I don’t support the sterilization, but the only outcome if they didn’t force him to have a vasectomy is that he fathers another dozen or so children.

My friend’s father is a father of 20 or so children by dozens of different women and he is in his 60s and still fathering children with women half his age. I don’t think that men and women like that are really capable of stopping and I haven’t a clue what society should do with them.


But they don’t think. That is the problem. You know the old joke that God gave man a brain and a penis but only enough blood to operate one at a time. :smiley:


There’s an important part of this case that nobody mentioned. The man wasn’t jailed for failure to pay child support. He was jailed for child endangerment.

Herald, of Edinburg, was sentenced this month to one year and eight months in prison for child endangerment, hit and run, and driving on a suspended license in a crash in which authorities said his 3-year-old son was bloodied but not seriously hurt.

It’s more than refusing to take care of his children. This man actively endangered the life of one of those children. It is not criminal to father children. It is criminal to act in such a wantonly reckless fashion that you cause them harm and risk their lives.

That is why the court wants him to stop fathering children.

He wasn’t forced to get the vasectomy either. The court offered him the option, and he agreed to it. He could have chosen to stay in prison.

There’s one other thing: no one ever suggested the man is Catholic.


That’s pretty much what it comes down to unfortunately. Apart from obviously immoral methods I don’t think there is anything that can be done to stop men like this.

I can understand the man in this case, he can go around spreading his seed all over God’s creating and never have to worry about carrying or supporting a child. It is the women I can’t understand. I would imagine that getting pregnant by a ne’er-do-well without a penny to his name would be pretty low on a woman’s list of things she wants to accomplish.


What am I missing here. A government can take a persons life as punishment for a crime and it not be immoral. Why then, would be taking his ability to bear children as punishment be immoral?


Because this is NOT a punishment. He was not being jailed for having too many children. He was being jailed because he endangered the life of one of his children. The judge determined that he had too many children and then said that he would suspend the sentence if the perpetrator decided to be snipped.

In other words, it was not relevant to the crime for which the gentleman was convicted.

It would be different than if, for example, a serial rapist was offered parole if he agreed to be chemically castrated (or, for that matter, physically castrated). Or a murderer being executed. Those penalties can be seen as commutative justice regarding the crimes committed.

This? Is it a crime within the USA to have too many children?



I see my dogs replied for me again. :blush:

Thanks markomalley. I was just asking generally, not so much to this specific case. It seems odd that a court would even allow this as part of a plea bargain when the issue has nothing to do with the number of children he fathered. But, then I expect we’ll be heading more toward the direction of government trying to decide for us how many children we should have.


This is all part of the rotten fruit of the sexual revolution of the 60’s and 70’s which have led to the breakdown of the family which sadly many feminists encouraged then and still encourage now along with the Hugh Hefner type men.
I once listened to a pro-life evangelical pastor many years ago(in the early '90’s) who predicted that forced abortion and sterilization would be brought In our country due to the high rate of out of wedlock births and unfit parents, ect,(drug abuse, ect) which have been accelerated due to the sex drugs and rock and roll movements of the 60’s which ripples into our era, and that more and more calls would be to sterilize these irresponsible people.
And he predicted the public would go along with it. A few years ago There was a woman in the pacific northwest who was campaigning to pay crack moms to be sterilized and the public was all for it, how could you not be they asked?
And yes I agree with OP this is very close to coercion.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit