| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Women and Infanticide,

Page history last edited by PBworks 16 years ago

 

 

 

"Infanticide," A Sussex Parson, August 10, 1865.

 

 

 

 

               Notes on the Text

 

Definitions:

 

Foundling: A deserted infant whose parents are unknown, a child whom there is no one to claim.

 

Foundling Hospital: an institution for the reception of foundlings. 

 

 

 

Names in Article:

 

Mary Ann:  Refers to an average middle class woman. 

 

 

Lady Theresa: Refers to an aristocratic woman. 

 

 

Diana: The goddess of virginity and hunting.

 

 

 

 

                Commentary on the Text

Monica Williams, 2/18/2008

Deanna Wroblewski, 2/18/2008 

 

The Great Social Evil

This letter to the editor appeared in the August 10, 1865 issue of The Times.  In this particular letter to the editor, the writer, a Sussex parson, discusses his views on infanticide.  In his letter he discusses the women most likely to commit the crime and his proposed solution to these terrible acts.    

    During the nineteenth century, the spread of infanticide was increasing in England.  In the 1860’s, the instances of infanticide reached an all time high, as did the public response to these atrocities.  The public outcry regarding the issue is reflected in the numerous letters to the editor that appeared in The Times in London.  As shown in our article, the author of the letter references a previous letter written by S.G.O from the same month, revealing that the issue existed as a topic of debate. 

            From 1862-1866 the verdicts of declared infant murders ranged in number from 124 to 203.  In the same span of years, an estimated amount of 225 dead abandoned children were found per year.  Also, averages of 30 living children were found, after being abandoned by their mothers.  "No one who sees the newspapers can have failed to observe almost daily, instances of new-born children found, it may be at a railway station, it may be on a door step, but always under circumstances leading to the belief that the child so found had been destroyed during birth, or immediately afterwards."[1]  A majority of these statistics are based on cases in the London area, where infanticide was most concentrated.  More than half of the infanticides mentioned above occurred in the Middlesex County.  Infanticide in the Middlesex region was so severe that it surmounted the number of documented cases in the rest of England and Wales combined.   

            The main reason infanticide was so prevalent in the London area was due to the high population and urban environment.  The women most predisposed to carrying out such acts were women involved in the working sphere, especially domestic servants.  As the letter notes, women in these positions were constantly in the presence of their employers.  This increased the chances of an attachment developing between the two.  In the case that an illegitimate child was produced from an affair, the future employment of the women was put at risk, embarrassment of having an illegitimate child was felt, and because of these two, their future livelihood was threatened.    

            All working class women in this position dealt with the burden of economic stress in one way or another.  Adding an illegitimate child to the picture just increased the burden.  At the time, the high level of poverty made it virtually impossible for lower class women to support their children.  Under these awful conditions, the women believed murder was the most viable option.  Even intellectuals of the time felt that “an early death was often preferable to a life of poverty and crime.”[2]  Aside from infanticide by the mothers' own hand, some women resorted to more drastic measures.    

            One of the options available to the women was that of baby farming.  Baby farming began as a type of professional adoption option, in which mother’s paid to have their children taken in by a mistress or another family.  This idea was great in theory because it provided the mother’s with an option besides infanticide, but as time went on it soon became an institution in which the systematic killing of infants for a profit occurred.  In this setting, the infants were often either deliberately killed or neglected.  In June and July 1869, a midwife named Mrs. C. Martin allegedly "destroyed no less than 555 babies during . . . 18 months, charging £1050 a time.”[3]  The rise of infanticide during the 19th century sheds light on the cultural conditions of the Victorian Era, the poverty that spread throughout the country, and the desperation of the women who were so limited in their actions based on the social hierarchy that was deeply rooted in society.



[1] Jackson, Infanticide, p. 169

[2] Sauer, Infanticide and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century Britain, p. 83

[3] Rose, The Massacre of the Innocents, p. 94

 

                Works Cited

 

 

Jackson, Mark. Infanticide: Historical Perspectives on Child Murder and Concealment, 1550-2000. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2002.

 

 

 

Rose, Lionel. The Massacre of the Innocents. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul plc, 1986.

 

 

 

Sauer, R. "Infanticide and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century Britain." Population Studies Vol. 32

 

 

 

                For Additional Reading

 

Mitchell, Sally. Victorian Britain: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Pub., 1988.

No. 1. (Mar., 1978) pp. 81-93.

 

 

 

Collect BritainThe Penny Illustrated Online.  This website contains articles on infanticide from The Penny Illustrated, a newspaper geared towards the working class in 19th Century Britain.  

 

 

This is the place to add bibliographic information for print OR online sources that usefully supplement your chosen text.  Please format entries for print sources in MLA style.  Please format links to websites using brief titles (e.g. The Charles Dickens Page) followed by a one-two sentence description of the contents of the site.  [For the benefit of future users, please do not delete these directions.]

 

 

 

 

                Project Group Members

 

Member Name

University

Course

 Monica Williams  Western Washington University English 310, Mahoney 
 Deanna Wroblewski Western Washington University  English 310, Mahoney 
     
     
     

 

 

             

 

 

     Project Completed: Winter 2008

 

                Group Chat

 

Use this chat room to facilitate collaboration if you are working on this project from multiple locations. [Please don't delete these directions.]

 

gabbly errorPlugin error: That plugin is not available.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (7)

Anonymous said

at 9:05 am on Mar 24, 2008

Upon reading the historical letter to the editor about infanticide in the 19th century, I feel that the growing rate of infanticide has not truly decreased. However, with new technology, we have found more civil methods of birth control. Loretta Mason

Loretta Mason said

at 9:31 pm on Apr 3, 2008

From legalized abortions to women who hide their pregnancies, ending in murder is not uncommon for our current times. Social status definitely plays a role in whether a women feels empowered enough to raise a child. Similair to the trends of the 19th century, we find women having to choose between survival, social acceptance, and careers to make the life bearing decision to give or deny their motherly responsibilities. As I stated before, infanticide is just the term used in the 19th century. Like so many other trends and ways of life, we have evolved to the point of renaming common undesired practices, but we have not corrected the ills that contribute to the conclusions we select. I find this wiki information vwry relevany to what our society face at this time, because thi issue is still existing, but in a more confined manner. Loretta

Lauren Obermark said

at 11:28 pm on Apr 28, 2008

Wow--your wiki really raised my awareness about a 19th-century practice that I was not aware of. This is certainly informative, though very shocking. While I don't know that I would equate it to current societal practices, I do think it offers great insight into gender and class politics of the Victorian era. I would actually be interested to know more about these "midwives" who were paid to kill babies--sort of like hitmen that target babies, which is certainly disturbing to think about. What was their class status? Why were they willing to carry out such a despicable task? This also has an interesting transatlantic connection. During the same time period, slave owners would have been taking advantage of their female slaves, which often resulted in unwanted pregnancies. I wonder if infanticide rates were similarly high in the U.S.? Thanks for addressing this fascinating and difficult topic with your wiki. I think it opens up questions for further research!

Anonymous said

at 4:41 pm on May 1, 2008

Again, I could not resist commenting on this wiki project just like Lauren and Loretta could not. I also began thinking a great deal when reading about this practice. I suppose my response was to wonder about some of the societal and historical impacts of this practice. For instance, did infanticide ever reach the more "domestic" classes. I know that, by the turn of the century in Britian, some women, most often from the working classes, were travelling to various homes to perform secret abortions. In fact, I found a report that suggests 100,000 women aborted their fetuses in 1914. Given this fact, I wonder why women in the nineteenth century chose to give birth to their children and then murder them when they could have aborted their fetuses much earlier in the womb. Also, prior to 1803, abortions were not necessarily a crime if they were done before the fetus moved in the womb. Do you think that the rise in infanticide is related to the criminality attached abortion after 1803? Hmm. Truly, your article is scary as much as it is informative. Further analysis of this article could uncover a pretty horrific subculture that existed in Britain.

Anonymous said

at 1:41 pm on May 2, 2008

Infanticide is not something that I normally associate with Victorian society. I appreciate that you uncovered this issue and shared it with others on this forum. There are a couple of points that I find particularly interesting. The first one was the quote in the comentary, which read "Even intellectuals of the time felt that 'an early death owas often preferable to a life of poverty and crime." That is fascinating that makes me realize that while in our contemporary times we complain that times are hard, it really makes me understand how many people must have been going without the basic necessities to even considering killing an infant preferable to life.
The other point that I find intersting is the argument in the editorial of not allowing foundling hospitals because they would encourage immorality. This makes me think of the contemporary argument against giving teenagers access to birth control because it would encourage pre-marital sexual activity. Amazing how rationale remains the same over the course of time.
The last point I would like to comment on is the editorial writer advising employers to allow their servant to marry. It continues to amaze me that not that many years ago that "servants" had so few freedoms.

Anonymous said

at 1:42 pm on May 2, 2008

For some reason, my comments above do not have my name. the May 2, 1:41 pm, contributor is Cynthia Knight.

Cynthia Knight said

at 9:40 pm on May 2, 2008

Infanticide is not something that I normally associate with Victorian society. I appreciate that you uncovered this issue and shared it with others on this forum. There are a couple of points that I find particularly interesting. The first one was the quote in the comentary, which read "Even intellectuals of the time felt that 'an early death owas often preferable to a life of poverty and crime." That is fascinating that makes me realize that while in our contemporary times we complain that times are hard, it really makes me understand how many people must have been going without the basic necessities to even considering killing an infant preferable to life. The other point that I find intersting is the argument in the editorial of not allowing foundling hospitals because they would encourage immorality. This makes me think of the contemporary argument against giving teenagers access to birth control because it would encourage pre-marital sexual activity. Amazing how rationale remains the same over the course of time. The last point I would like to comment on is the editorial writer advising employers to allow their servant to marry. It continues to amaze me that not that many years ago that "servants" had so few freedoms.

You don't have permission to comment on this page.