Diana Jurisic

Dr. Amundson

AMH4561

2 December 2016

Women’s Health and Roles as Mothers

Raising children, even in today's world, remains one of the most difficult responsibilities

that is mainly dominated by women. While there isn't a universal manual on how to be a good

parent, especially in the 19th Century, Godey's Lady's Book provided women with information

on how to best handle their roles as mothers and as women. The health of the child, being the

biggest responsibility of a mother, was discussed in this magazine by a child physician to

educate women on how to provide the best care for their child. This paper will address a

woman’s medical responsibility to her child and to herself as outlined by articles in Godey’s

Lady’s Book written by practicing pediatrician Dr. JNO Stainback Wilson and compare his

perspective to the changes occurring in the 1830s-1850s with the Popular Health Movement.

During American colonial times, physicians were not present during childbirth and the

event was usually a public gathering for women where midwives handled the birthing process.

During this time, midwives were seen as medical authorities and in addition often served as

healers. Martha Ballard, a famous midwife of the 18th-19th century, kept a detailed record of her

daily activities as a midwife and healer. Her diary illustrates her value to the community and also

demonstrates how doctors occasionally consulted with midwives over the handling of the
birthing process. In the antebellum south slaves would serve as midwives and occasionally slave

owners would rent out midwife slaves to others in the community for a fee; eventually it

became less common as the 19th century progressed. Like other midwives, physicians didn’t

respect black midwives or value their skills; they branded it as “witch doctor or hoodoo stuff.”

Child birth was seen as a natural process that women would assist each other with and was not

viewed as something that mandated a doctor’s attendance. The village physicians only

intervened in childbirth when complications arose that which required surgical procedure or

where births were terminal.

Over time, male physicians were able to gain a formal education, while women were

excluded from doing so and men were able to dominate the field. The differences of approach

between midwives and doctors became apparent as male doctors purposefully tried to make

themselves appear more qualified for the job. Men in general had not been allowed to

participate but an economic need for doctors to expand their clientele allowed for the new

practice of obstetrics. Given that doctors only attended childbirths in critical scenarios, they had

begun to regard childbirth as unnatural, dangerous and moreover decreed that the presence of

a professional was necessary; this effectively undermined the skill and credibility of midwives.

Doctors also fed to the societal norms that women were too fragile to handle such work and

went so far as to advance new technology, terminology and interventionist methods to further

monopolize the industry. Obstetrics was a market created in order to funnel newly educated

doctors into and allowed these men to set the standards of care.

Midwives became less common in cities, where there were hospitals, and tended to

remain in rural areas. These shifting attitudes perpetuated society’s perception of women as
weak and unscientific. Doctors even used the women’s movement’s argument of

progressiveness against them when they claimed that a man’s presence was considered

indecent by rebutting that such is a regressive way of thinking. Physicians kicked women out of

their own area of expertise in an attempt to make money and possibly render them without

influence in a field. As a result, women themselves were less educated about child birth, it

became an inappropriate topic of discussion and fictional stories, such as that of the stork or

cabbage patches that we are familiar with today, were created to explain where babies came

from. The new industry of childbirth that was created also shifted the way that children were

received by family, whereas in the time of Martha Ballard where family members would visit

freely to greet the new child, women were secluded themselves to rest.

In the professional medical education for women there has been a sort of “professional

pride” among practicing physicians, as noted by Stainback, that is loaded with sexist prejudices

aimed at excluding women from the profession. He claims however that this pride, while

deplorable as a means for the exclusion of women in medical education, is also a bond between

M.D.s that serves to safeguard the integrity of the profession. Unlike the physicians who oppose

being on the same level as the “weaker sex,” Stainback believes that there is a necessity for

educated women to be included in the practice of medicine. This created a conflict amongst

physicians who disagreed whether women should be included in the medical field and sexist

prejudices were evident in the opposition for female doctors. Dr. Stainback thinks, in

accordance with the cult of true womanhood, that medical education for women, not just for

purposes of a career, enhances a woman’s ability to take care of her children.

 Despite Stainback’s position on the inclusion of women in the medical field, he retains

his male authority in his articles as he uses strong language to lecture women that improperly

serve their roles as mothers. A woman’s responsibility to breast feed has long been a topic of

discussion and Stainback backs up the claim that breastfeeding is essential for the development

of a healthy child as well as pointing out that a woman should be in tip-top shape to perform

this duty. Determined that breastfeeding a child is an obligation to women imposed by God, he

asserts that emotions like anger can pass on to her milk and affect the baby. Due to this reason

he advises strongly against Irish wet-nurses in the event a mother absolutely cannot breastfeed

the child herself. He adds that some children could suffer from indifference to the nurse and

inflict pain on them during breast feeding, he continues on to insinuate that the wet nurses will

end up drugging the child and result in their likely death. Writers in the antebellum south also

urged caution against wet-nurses to avoid the child developing a relationship with woman that

was not it’s mother. By the 1820s Southern elite white women had stopped using slave women

to nurse their children. While Dr. Stainback may be for the inclusion of women in medicine he

does not seem particularly inclined with foreign women assisting in raising children or serving as

wet-nurses. The act of breastfeeding in the 21st century, while scientifically recognized as being

more beneficial to the child and its development, is evidently not socially accepted in a public

setting that laws had to be enacted to protect women from discrimination and harrassment.

In all of his articles Stainback designates most, if not all, responsibilities relating to

children on the mother including the transmitting of hereditary conditions. He claims that

women carry the most modifying power over their children due to the fact that they share the

same blood supply when the child is in the womb. Stainback scrutinizes women for consuming
tea, coffee and smoking tobacco during pregnancy, breastfeeding or directly giving it to their

children. This modifying power that women had over their children in the womb, according to

Stainback, constipation could also hurt the child as the “blood is poisoned by retained

excretions.” Not only does he offer harsh criticisms for this but also for women who focus on

fashion trends from Paris over the moral duty to raise a child. In the event that in the face of

these risks a child is born with no transmitted disease, Stainback claims that there will be a

“hidden weakness” that can leave the child prone to disease its entire life. He regards ill feelings

for parents that fail to counter this inherited weakness and claims that “it cannot be denied that

these children are murdered –ignorantly [by their parents].” In addition, he disregards the use

of stimulants in children, even in the face of medical conditions he claims that the only sources

of health are from hygienic practices, clean air and diet. Tea and coffee serve as stimulants and

he claims that children already have excitable nervous systems and can go into convulsions in

the event of overexcitement.

Godey’s Lady’s Book was a good resource for women’s fashion as well as other subjects

and Dr. Stainback proclaims throughout his articles that women would receive much more

fulfillment from motherhood and practicing good hygiene than against the evils of fashion. His

vehement support of proper health and hygiene practices, were highlighted by the importance

of both proper air and blood circulation, bathing, prevention of worms and a diet of grain and

fruit. When mentioning techniques for preventing worms in children, Stainback describes

soaking a handful of rusty nails into vinegar and administering 1-2 teaspoonfuls up to 3 times

daily. As far as the case of blood circulation, he highly recommends that women gently rub their
infants all over to promote blood circulation. The flow of clean is also of importance to

Stainback and what he believes promotes a healthier lifestyle.

As the women’s rights movement progressed it began to absorb the Popular Health

Movement that called for hygiene, dress and diet reform. Sylvester Graham, a notable leader in

the health movement started out as a lecturer for temperance, he claimed that with proper

diet, exercise and regular bathing that people would be healthier and through this prevention

physicians and medicine would become obsolete. Women took to this particularly because as

they understood it a male physician could not comprehend a woman’s anatomy as they

themselves could. Interestingly, Stainback himself is in accordance with good hygiene practices

and expresses his disdain for women’s folly with fashion. Part of the women’s health movement

was dress reform that turned away from tight corsets and more towards loose clothing. In

referencing what a mother should dress her child in, Stainback advocates for long sleeves and

pants to avoid having exposed limbs. The reasoning he provides for this is that by the very fact

that limbs are extremities they do not get sufficient blood circulation and can make a child

vulnerable to becoming sick. While he doesn’t provide specifics for what Parisian fashions

women should not care for, he does go on to say:

With Paris we must suffer the dreadful consequences of following the senseless

requisitions of vanity and folly in preference to the plain dictates of reason, physiology,

and common sense. Mothers can never expect health for themselves and their children

until they make the laws of health their guide, instead of the decrees of fashion…

Interestingly, a part of the women’s dress reform movement involved the invention of short

trousers for women that aimed at eliminating their usual long skirts from dragging on the
ground and becoming dirty, they were called Bloomers. While these trousers were not invented

by Amelia Bloomer, editor of a temperance and abolitionist newspaper, she became associated

with it by adopting the fashion and writing about it in her newspaper. Bloomers became

successful among women for the health benefits and comfort, however men were opposed on

the grounds of that it was either bad fashion, clothing based on Middle Eastern styles or just

plain immoral. The trousers eventually became heavily associated with the women’s movement

and decreased in popularity as a fashion but there were women who still dressed in them

genuinely believing in the health benefits they provided. The mid 1800s saw an increase in

exercise which further incorporated Bloomers into women’s health as they were accepted for

physical activity, yet not so much for fashionable dress.

Toward the end of the 1700s, as cities were arising and children became more of an

expense than an asset, birth rates began to decline dramatically. There was an understanding

between parents that in an increasingly industrial society, children were no longer of use for

farming labor but were investments that would need an education in order to become

successful in an industrial society. The economy was not the only thing that kept women from

reproducing, but also women’s desire to not be in a constant cycle of pregnancy. Women at this

time were also entering the work force as factory workers and felt a desire to be in command of

their own lives which kept them from having children. While women did feel more independent

and in charge of themselves as well as their earned wages, most still largely held the desire to

get married and have children of their own in the future.

Contraception did not really contribute to the decline in birth rate and during the 1800s

it consisted of a variety of methods such as periodic abstinence, coitus interruptus (i.e. the
pull-out method), spermicides, violent movements following sex or engaging on an angled plane

to prevent the sperm from reaching an egg. These methods were widely ineffective as each

allowed for some rogue sperm. The condom was invented in 1839 by Charles Goodyear but had

been intended for the use of preventing venereal diseases as opposed to pregnancy. At this

time, it was difficult to determine whether a woman was pregnant until the baby could be felt

moving in the womb and occasionally resulted in late-term abortions. Male physicians had

religious and moral hang-ups regarding contraception and abortion. In the 1830s there was

distancing between people and the church and Christianity lost some control over sex.

Unwanted pregnancies arose, particularly since contraceptive methods then were not very

effective, and women were forced to bear the responsibility of seeking alternatives to giving

birth to the child. While abortion was highly controversial and states eventually outlawed it in

the mid-late 1800s, the greatest enemy was the “unschooled abortionist” who performed these

procedures with little regard for the health of the mother. A famous example of this is Madame

Restell, who was the most successful practitioner in New York City. She performed abortions not

only for desperate women who felt entrapped but also for women who used it as a means of

birth control. At the time that Restell began her practice, abortion was legal prior to the

four-month mark, in essence the “quickening” phase which is when a mother would be able to

feel the child inside her. After the criminalization of abortions, it did not stop the demand for

them and as a matter of fact made abortions even more unsafe. Abortions would remain illegal

from the 1880s until 1973 when it was overturned by Supreme Court Case Roe v. Wade. It is

interesting to see how the religious reservations of both men and women placed a medical
procedure, as well as a woman’s intimate decision to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, into

federal legislature to determine it’s lawfulness.

Medicine has not always been utilized for the healing of patients but in history it has

shown as being a means for money. This can be seen in the transition of midwives to male

physicians in the field of obstetrics and other industries such as the traveling Snake oil

merchants that peddled questionable elixirs. In a more cynical point of view, it can be argued

that in addition to a means of making monetary gains that these advancements in the medical

profession could have been aimed at controlling women and their bodies. Even in subtle ways

the male-dominated field of medicine effectively excluded women from the practice,

maintained influence over their bodies and dictated how a woman should raise her child.

Throughout time men have aimed at keeping women subservient to them and dependent on

them, by excluding them and controlling the means of medical advancement and medical

education they can further exert their control. Even in 2016 white male politicians attempt to

impose on a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy, a decision that he, as a man, really has no

jurisdiction to make. This is interesting because while men had taken over the childbirth

industry, common sense would argue should be dominated by women, they find other ways to

control women’s decisions.

In conclusion, changes in the understanding of female anatomy, new innovations and

economic motivation all contributed to the introduction of men in the childbirth industry from

the 18th to the 19th centuries. This created a ripple effect amongst women that resulted in

women being less educated about their own anatomy, burdened by the expectations of a

male-dominated society and ultimately a loss of control over their bodies. However, since the
19th century women have come a long way in terms of achieving autonomy and influence but

not completely still.

Bibliography

Mintz, S., & McNeil, S. (2016). Limiting Births in the Early Republic. Digital History. Retrieved
November 30, 2016 from http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/topic_display.cfm?tcid=134

Shryock, Richard H. "Sylvester Graham and the Popular Health Movement, 1830-1870." The
Mississippi Valley Historical Review 18, no. 2 (1931): 172-83.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1893378.

Mschoeny. “Reforming Fashion, 1850-1914: Politics, Health, and Art.” Historic Costumes &
Textiles Collection.
http://costume.osu.edu/2000/04/14/reforming-fashion-1850-1914-politics-health-and-art/
(retrieved on November 30, 2016)

Stainback Wilson, JNO. “Health Department.” In Godey’s Lady’s Book. Philadelphia, PA: L.A.
Godey, 1840

Stainback Wilson, JNO. “Health Department.” In Godey’s Lady’s Book. Philadelphia, PA: L.A.
Godey, 1840

Stainback Wilson, JNO. “Health Department.” In Godey’s Lady’s Book. Philadelphia, PA: L.A.
Godey, 1840

Stainback Wilson, JNO. “Health Department.” In Godey’s Lady’s Book. Philadelphia, PA: L.A.
Godey, 1840

Footnote:

JNO Stainback Wilson, Godey’s Lady’s Book (Philadelphia, PA: Louis A. Godey, 1840), page 80-81
(breastfeeding)
JNO Stainback Wilson, Godey’s Lady’s Book (Philadelphia, PA: Louis A. Godey, 1861), page
444-445(education)
JNO Stainback Wilson, Godey’s Lady’s Book (Philadelphia, PA: Louis A. Godey, 1861), page
560-561(worms and fashion)
JNO Stainback Wilson, Godey’s Lady’s Book (Philadelphia, PA: Louis A. Godey, 1840), page
275-276(hereditary disease)

Stevenson, Brenda E.. Life in Black and White : Family and Community in the Slave South. New
York, US: Oxford University Press, 2014. Accessed December 1, 2016. ProQuest ebrary.
Carlson, A. Cheree. 2009. The Crimes of Womanhood : Defining Femininity in a Court of Law.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost(accessed
December 1, 2016).