THE PRACTICE OF HIRING WET NURSES (SPECIALLY THOSE FROM THE "FALLEN") CONSIDERED, AS IT AFFECTS...
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~ltu004/ws/king/110-10txt.htm
THE PRACTICE OF HIRING WET NURSES (SPECIALLY THOSE FROM THE "FALLEN") CONSIDERED, AS IT AFFECTS PUBLIC HEALTH AND PUBLIC MORALS
A PAPER CONTRIBUTED TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROMOTION OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AT THE BRADFORD MEETING, OCTOBER 1859.
PUBLISHED BY PERMISSION OF THE COUNCIL LONDON: JOHN CHURCHILL, NEW BURLINGTON STREET
SOLD ALSO BY T. HATCHARD, PICCADILLY; BOOTH, 307 REGENT STREET; TWEEDIE, 337 STRAND BRIGHTON: FOLTHORP, ROYAL LIBRARY, NORTH STREET; W. SIMPSON, KING'S ROAD
THE PRACTICE OF HIRING WET NURSES
The physical and moral evils involved in the practice of hiring WET-NURSES are very numerous; those which belong to the moral aspect alone, would, if fully discussed, far exceed the limits of this paper. The writer will, therefore, merely glance at the most distinctive features included in this division of the subject, and then pass on to consider those physical results, which more immediately concern the question of PUBLIC HEALTH.
The moral and social evils resulting from the hire of wet-nurses may thus be enumerated:-
1st. The sanction and encouragement given to immorality by preferring unmarried mothers for the duties of that delicate office.
2nd. The risk of contaminating other members of the household, by associating them under the same roof with persons of that description.
3rd. The bad moral tone that may be disseminated very widely, by countenancing vice in any form; but especially if it is injurious to society to allow the fallen to be lifted to the highest position in the household, and to have bestowed upon them such privileges and such favour as should only be enjoyed by the virtuous and the pure, but rarely to be obtained by them.
The PHYSICAL evils of this practice will now be considered:- It has been ascertained that the high rate of mortality among infants under two years of age, may chiefly be referred to two distinct causes, viz.:-
1st. The want of maternal milk.
2nd. The injudicious feeding and tending to which young children are too often subjected.
top
With regard to the first-named cause, it is lamentable to think that much of this fatality is induced by mothers refusing to perform an obvious duty to their children. An instance may happen here and there in which Nature has denied the mother the power to fulfil that duty, but in the majority of cases no such physical disability exists; and "a mother who cannot, or will not suckle her own offspring, has no right to endanger the life of the child of another."(i) Nevertheless, this is too often done: the infant of the wet-nurse is put aside to make room for an interloper; both children are robbed of their rightful inheritance, and both fall a sacrifice, in too many cases, to the prevailing fashion!
Oh that mothers could comprehend the endearing pleasure they miss, and the miseries they inflict upon their hapless little ones by this ignorantly or wilfully neglecting to obey one of the first great laws of their being! Would that some eloquent pen could pourtray these facts; some persuasive voice convince mothers of their error - the wrong they are committing, not only to themselves and their offspring, but to the whole community - the possible good rejected - the possible evil pursued, nay, realised!
A picture might be held up to them, so inviting, that none save those who are unworthy of the name of mother could resist its influences upon their better nature. A very touching appeal is made to the sympathies of mothers towards their offspring, by an esteemed correspondent, whose name would give weight to his words, were it permitted to be published; he says:- "Is there any pleasure of which her nature is capable, equal to the touch of those little fingers resting on her bosom, and those loving, trusting eyes looking into hers? Or can anything compensate the child for the want of that love which her own eyes should send back into its little heart?"
top
But another and far different picture is visibly before us: our every-day experience tells us of that which will form a dark page in this history of many a mother: "The wailing, dwindling infant confided to an inefficient or careless wet-nurse for its sole means of sustenance; the 'child of misery baptized in tears,' whose little life is starved away; the babe who slowly but surely dies from repeated doses of sedatives - all these are witnesses which may well make many a mother tremble, lest, for the little life blighted here, an accusing spirit should confront her in the hereafter." (ii)
It may be fairly assumed that the children of we-nurses form a large proportion of those who die prematurely , (iii) and such a result must continue to take place as long as Nature's laws on this point are ignored, and the duties incumbent on woman in her maternal relation are so grievously disregarded. The preceding description - though bad the state of things it discloses - forms the very best view we can take of the pernicious custom. We have been supposing the wet-nurse may be a respectable, healthy, married woman, but let us imagine a case where a healthy, moral nurse is not secured: think of the effect upon the constitution of the suckling, by nutriment derived from such a source! Disease may not exhibit itself at once - it may take months, nay years, to appear; but it is well known that scrofula, consumption, and other disorders are frequently due to the nurse; it will be understood, therefore, how great a risk to the child is incurred by the employment of a wet-nurse under any circumstances. Such being the facts of the case, the writer wishes to suggest the propriety - it might be the necessity - of instituting some restrictive means by which women should be prevented lending themselves for hire in this objectionable manner, and some compulsory measures might be adopted with regard to capable mothers suckling their own infants.
(i) Lancet, April 3rd, 1858.
(ii) "It is much to be regretted, that our vital statistics have not been arranged to show the evil results of wet-nursing. In the absence of such statistics, nor exact calculation as to the number of infant lives lost through this practice can be made; but it is certainly very large. French statistics of infant mortality disclose the fact, that out of one hundred children in Paris, suckled by their mothers, eighteen die in the first year; while of those wet-nursed, twenty-nine die."
The Evils of Wet-nursing.
Published by the LADIES SANITARY ASSOCIATION
(iii) "Scrofula and consumption are both dependent on the deposit of a cheesy substance (tubercle); in scrofula, this happens in the neck and other glands, in consumption it takes place in the lungs. They are different manifestations of the same tendency." There seems therefore no impropriety in speaking of them as distinct forms of disease, although due to the same condition of blood. This may appear an extreme proceeding to advocate; but a similar plan has been proposed in the Lancet, and those who are inclined to take a fair and impartial view of the matter, will consider the suggestion reasonable and right. After remarking in strong terms upon the evils of the system alluded to, the following passage occurs:- "If the mother can afford a wet-nurse, she can also pay for a certificate from a responsible and official medical man, nominated by the state, of the fitness of the nurse; that her infant's need shall not be supplied at the risk of the life of another human being. The number of wet-nurses in large towns who are fitted for the duties they undertake, is but small, and, inefficiency is fraught with danger to the child. It is a sad truth, that such vicarious aid is often sought without necessity, because some foolish, vain woman desires to preserve the outline which she calls her 'figure', or to get rid of the burden of fulfilling a mother's duties. Such an official referee, as that above alluded to, would be a check to these proceedings."
Medical Annotations. Lancet, April 3rd, 1858.
top back
(From 1858!)