| 
Health and Disease
Contents
Health and
Disease >> Childbirth in the late 19th Century >> Cholera
>> Marasmus and Scrofula >>
Hydrocephalus >> Byssinosis
>> Typhus Fever >> Typhoid
Fever >> Polio >> Infant
Mortality >> Combating Epidemics
at the Turn of the Century >> Tuberculosis
Childbirth in the late 19th Century
The idea that women were destined to be constantly
giving birth took the guise of a biological imperative backed by
religious beliefs that women suffered this fate because of the "Original
Sin." Limited access to contraception and male dominance of
the household gave women little opportunity to dictate the number
of children they wished to have; to become pregnant was not a conscious
choice made by women of the time.1
Over the course of the 19th century, the average American woman
gave birth to seven children, not including children lost to miscarriages
and stillbirths. Lacking modern medical care, women often suffered
from lacerations and permanent damage that made subsequent birth
even more painful. In addition, most working-class women were not
afforded the opportunity to convalesce after giving birth and were
expected to resume domestic chores and work almost immediately.
A reformer from the time period described one Polish immigrant who
after giving birth at her sister's place, walked home and cooked
supper for a group of boarders.2
Whereas unmarried and abandoned women were more likely to go to
a hospital to give birth because they lacked any support network
and in many instances sought to hide their situation, married immigrant
women remained at home. If they could afford it, an immigrant family
would have hired a midwife to assist in the birth. In this case,
the midwife would stay with the family for several days following
the birth, taking on domestic responsibilities and allowing the
birth mother to convalesce for a short period. If this option was
unattainable financially, the pregnant woman would have relied on
kin and good-willed neighbors to aid in the delivery. The participants
were likely to call in a physician only if a crisis arose during
the birth. Unlike native-born members of the middle class, who by
the mid-19th century were seeking out private, male physicians to
assist in birth, immigrant women disapproved of the presence of
men at the birth.3
Birth Control in 19th Century New York
For the average working class couple in mid-19th
century New York, female syringes, condoms, and written material
containing reproductive and sexual advice, would have all been
affordable if they so choose to purchase them.
Mid-19th century customers in New York could walk into shops such
as T.W. Strong's bookstore on 98 Nassau Street, where they could
choose among rubber and "skin" (made from animal intestines)
condoms, while also perusing a widespread selection of tracts
on reproductive control and sexual advice. Traditionally, condoms
were made from the skins or intestines of animals. By the 1850s,
rubber condoms became available - while they were cheaper, about
half the price of "skin" condoms - they also broke more
frequently.4
In addition to using condoms, many women also practiced douching
(also referred to as vaginal injections) as a means of preventing
pregnancy. Solutions used in douching were usually prepared at
home and included everything from carbolic acid, vinegar, baking
soda, and vegetable astringents, to simply cold water. Following
sexual intercourse, women would flush the vaginal area with the
chosen solution using a "female" syringe, which was
also commonly available although it was presented, in keeping
with the mores of the time, as being solely for hygienic purposes.
In addition to the dangers of the acidic solutions, douching in
general was ineffective (compared to other techniques) and posed
numerous potential harms to the woman's body.5
Another method of birth control was withdrawal (coitus interruptus).
This technique was also relatively ineffective, a fact heightened
by the lack of scientific knowledge in the 19th century.6
The only method of birth control that the Catholic Church did
not outright condemn was the rhythm method. The rhythm method
entails keeping track of the woman's menstrual cycles, and engaging
in sexual intercourse only when the chance of pregnancy is greatly
diminished or impossible.7
Most couples practicing birth control used a combination of the
different methods available to them. The use of birth control
is an issue that provides insight into the power structures that
exist/existed between men and women. Withdrawal, for instance,
was unpopular among men, who felt it lessened the pleasure they
derived from sex. Condoms were also criticized by men for reducing
pleasure - a male argument that persists in popular discourse
today as well. Although women would bear the majority of the burdens
associated with childbirth, they often were at the mercy of their
husbands, who could decide whether or not they would practice
birth control (save for douching, which in part explains its popularity).However,
the 1860s represent the twilight of open discussion and merchandising
of birth control in the public sphere. The advent of the Comstock
Laws in the 1870s introduced government legislation designed to
prevent women from accessing birth control.8
On March 6, 1873, Congress passed the Comstock Law, which prohibited
from the mail "any article whatever for the prevention of
conception, or for causing abortion." This also made it illegal
to send advertisements or information regarding birth control
through the mail. Soon after the federal law was passed, similarly
restrictive state laws were enacted. Anthony Comstock, for whom
the law was named, was a native New Yorker and a prominent opponent
of birth control. He was active on the Lower East Side, where
he personally led law enforcement officials in closing down storefronts
at 77 East Broadway and 489 Grand Street, which had been using
the mail system to sell their products. It might be an interesting
tie-in to discuss Margaret Sanger and the opening of her clinic
in 1912. It is not until then that birth control once again becomes
an open matter of public discourse, and one in which the needs
of the working-classes in limiting the size of their families
is at the forefront.9
1 Judith Walzer Leavitt, Brought to Bed: Childbearing
in America, 1750-1950 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986).
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 Janet Farrell Brodie, Contraception and Abortion in 19th Century
America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994); Linda Gordon,
Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in
America (New York: Grossman, 1976); Linda Gordon, The Moral Property
of Women: A History of Birth Control Politics in America (Urbana:
University of Illinois press, 2002).
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid.
|
|
