Leave a comment

Comments 33

marycatelli July 1 2012, 22:41:05 UTC
How rich is the family? A poor family would likely not have the means to keep her at home. A rich one is much likely -- also, it helps hush up the matter.

Reply

eilonwy July 2 2012, 00:45:04 UTC
Yeah, they could definitely afford it. Good point re: hushing up!

Reply


samtyr July 1 2012, 23:24:47 UTC
How 'disabled' is she? Did she appear normal until she began to hit puberty? Or is it apparent from birth? Is she teachable? Can she do some things with minimal supervision? Or is she more dependent than that?

Also, instead of a madhouse,they might decide to send her to a convent for life. IF she's been abused or molested, the Magdalenes are almost a sure bet for a place to dump/hide her.

Reply

lolmac July 1 2012, 23:33:34 UTC
England is Protestant in this era: no Magdalenes and no convents. I don't think they'd put her in a convent overseas, since that would be scandalous as well.

Reply

eilonwy July 2 2012, 00:47:41 UTC
She appears completely average physically, and family didn't realize something was really wrong until she wasn't hitting any development milestones, particularly verbal ones. She's an adult at the time of the story and again, physically she seems average. She's teachable, but very slowly, needs lots of repetition, lots of help. Definitely needs supervision, but more in a "don't wander off" "don't get hurt doing something" kind of way than in a every-moment-supervision kind of way.

Reply


lolmac July 1 2012, 23:31:44 UTC
A family of reasonable means would keep her at home and pretend she was Just Fine, Thank You. Since they're landed gentry, they will absolutely not send her to a madhouse: it would be shameful and scandalous. A mentally defective child casts suspicion on the bloodline, to put it crudely, and will endanger the brother's chance of marrying well. It will then endanger the social status and marital prospects of his children, and their children ( ... )

Reply

eilonwy July 2 2012, 00:55:13 UTC
Hm. I would have thought that putting her in a madhouse/wherever would be a way to hush it up. On the other hand, I want her to stay with her family and for there to be precedent for such, so that's all right then. :)

They aren't likely to make it legal in the manner you describe, because that might let the dangerous secret leak out.
Hm. Good point. But could they make it a legal matter? I know it might be unheard of, but the only male left in the family at this point is her (douchebag) guardian, and the person who wants to be her guardian (I can go into why, but I don't think that's necessary here) has essentially collected all of the brother's debts/ious. So the good guy has power over the brother and wants guardianship to keep the character-in-question safe. If the brother feared the scandal of debt/the dun collector/etc. more than the scandal of having a "half-wit" for a sister, mightn't he agree to such a legal exchange of guardianship? Assuming yes, I just need to know that it would be possible ( ... )

Reply

lolmac July 2 2012, 01:49:01 UTC
She can't be put into a madhouse without it being known, and the potential damage from the scandal is, for anyone with any social status, appalling and permanent. This is why you have the classic Gothic image of the family madwoman locked in the garret, with a Faithful Household Servant keeping the thing hushed up. It isn't just the scandal of the 'idiot' sister: it's the damage to all future generations of the brother's family. Madness was assumed to be hereditary. Keeping a vulnerable female immured was horribly easy, and cheap.

A very good fictional example of the social situation is Georgette Heyer's Cousin Kate, which I enthusiastically recommend ( ... )

Reply

eilonwy July 2 2012, 01:59:14 UTC
A few additional thoughts, if she’s actually an adult (I kept thinking she is, but I'm probably wrong): the big question, for me, would be why Guy doesn't simply marry her. It would be the obvious solution to all parties, unless he's already married or engaged to be married to someone else. (Of course, he might not want to marry her because she’s mentally disabled, but they’re trying to keep that hushed up.) (Or you might be planning on leading up to a marriage: but in that case, you might have them marry for convenience and have the love develop afterwards.)She's an adult, but she's the sister of the main character, with whom "Guy" will eventually fall in love. (Also, she doesn't want to marry anyone. She's not really capable of understanding marriage and sex and such.) I am, in fact, writing a regency romance... (They're my guilty pleasure.) Douchebag brother wanted to give Mentally-Challenged-Sister to Creepy Lord (to whom he owed much monies) but to help out the main female character/Mentally-Challenged-Sister's, uh, Sister (and ( ... )

Reply


alicephilippa July 2 2012, 00:45:19 UTC
lolmac has made some good points. An alternative is that she'd be hidden away at a remote country property with a few staff to see to her needs.

Reply

rhiannon_s July 2 2012, 12:17:31 UTC
ICBW, but wasn't there some relative of the current British Monarch that they did precisely that with?

Reply

dorsetgirl July 3 2012, 10:51:42 UTC
Yes - Prince John (1905-1919), youngest son of the Queen's grandfather King George V. (Prince John was therefore uncle to the Queen). He had epilepsy and his wikipedia entry has a summary of his life.

It's difficult to know at this remove whether he was being "hidden away" (that has always been the implication) or whether they wanted him to have a quiet and gentle life away from the Court.

Reply

syntinen_laulu July 3 2012, 12:03:41 UTC
And then there were the Queen Mother's two Bowes-Lyon cousins, Nerissa and Katherine. They really were hidden away, for their entire lives: the head of the Bowes-Lyon family even told Debrett's peerage that they were dead.

The Bowes-Lyons and the royals got a huge amount of flak for that when it became public knowledge, but back in 1941 when they were 'put away' it was the normal thing to do.

Reply


lilacsigil July 2 2012, 04:00:14 UTC
Sending her to a madhouse would seriously damage the marriage prospects of her siblings - much likelier just to keep her at home or send her off to a remote estate, if they have one. It's quite possible they'd try to marry her off; it's also quite possible that they don't want to do this and just keep her at home for her whole life. Her guardianship would be the same as for any unmarried woman - first her father, then her eldest brother. This also means, of course, that they are expected to provide for her.

Reply

dorsetgirl July 2 2012, 07:13:52 UTC
first her father, then her eldest brother

Absolutely. And then her nephew and so on down. As I understand it, even perfectly capable women tended to be handed down with the furniture if they didn't marry. I'm thinking of Great-Aunt Agatha in Poldark. I think she's Aunt or Great-Aunt to Francis Poldark, and when Francis dies his widow Elizabeth remarries and her new husband, George Warleggan, moves in. Although hating her, George is pretty much in a position that Agatha is part of the house he's married into and society absolutely expects him to provide for her. He doesn't have to do it well, or nicely, of course.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up