|
Canadian
Council of Natural Mothers' Library
Wake
Up Little Susie
Ricki Solinger
Talk
at Brisbane Conference on Adoption based on this book
I'm reading Wake Up Little Susie,
Single Pregnancy and Race before Roe v. Wade. There's not a lot about feminism
in this book, but in the preface Solinger links the political and social
climate of post-WW II to the US Supreme Court's decision, Roe v. Wade when
abortion was legalized in the US in 1973. She says, "...my political
project here is to show that the treatment of unmarried girls and women
in the era that preceded Roe, a period contemporaneous with the post-war
phase of the civil rights movement, reflected a powerful and enduring willingness
in our culture to use women's bodies to promote conservative political goals."
"An unwed mother was not
part of a legal, domestic, and subordinate relation to a man, and so she
could be scorned and punished, shamed and blamed. She gave birth to the
baby but she was nobody's heroine," (p. 4) whereas women who gave
birth in the context of marriage were heroines. After WW II, nonmarital
sex increased and many unmarried mothers were white and middle class.
By 1950 professional social workers managed the maternity homes which
became increasingly accountable to the community since that's where they
got much of their funding.
In the early decades of the twentieth century most maternity homes excluded
blacks; most black families and communities did not "require each
other to expel their unmarried pregnant daughters, as white families and
communities did." (p. 17)
"Until the late 1930s, cases of illegitimacy were generally handled
by child-centred agencies charged with making sure that children born
out of wedlock were accorded care as nearly equal to other children as
possible, mainly by ensuring that illegitimate children remained with
their birth mothers." Some states legislated breast-feeding for six
months. "The post depression, postwar agenda... gave a prominent
role to the family and thus to female conformity." Those who attacked
women insisted that all contemporary forms of 'social disease' from juvenile
delinquency, to homosexuality, to unwed motherhood, to henpecked husbands,
were caused by 'women's misplaced sexuality,' which meant her reputed
unwillingness to be subdued within the family. A woman's assertion of
self was equated with perverse and dangerous sexuality." (p.21)
"...[In] the 1940s [we see] the shift from child-centred agencies
to woman-centred agencies to manage the outcomes of illegitimate pregnancy.
It was at this point that public and professional attitudes about who
was a mother emerged as racially variable. Women-centred social agencies
introduced casework treatment for white, single, pregnant girls and women,
with the effect of redefining illegitimacy for this population as a psychological
rather than a sexual issue... Consistent with social attitudes about single
women, white unwed mothers became, by definition, unfit mothers, in fact,
not mothers at all. By professional definition and diagnosis, white unwed
mothers who wanted to keep their babies were diagnosed as particularly
immature, or more usually, mentally ill." "White unwed mothers
... were viewed as socially productive breeders whose babies, unfortunately
conceived out of wedlock, could offer infertile couples their only chance
to construct proper families." (p.24)
"... [The] vast majority,...the leadership of the Salvation Army,
Florence Crittendon Association of America, and Catholic Charities, psychologists,
psychiatrists, and clergy, were largely in agreement that white unmarried
mothers must, for the sake of their own futures and the future of the
illegitimate child, put these babies up for adoption." (p.26)
"The state's view of white unwed mothers as desirable reproducers,
which supported and in part created the postwar adoption craze, is closely
related to the views of some in the anti-choice movement today."
(p. 40)
In the 1960s, "both the [population] bomb and the [sexual] revolution...
cast unmarried females... as aggressors against American society and diminished
appreciation of their true vulnerability, particularly when they became
unwed mothers. By constructing unwed mothers as aggressors, the public
was justified in meting out punishment, scorn and disrespect..."
(p. 230)
It seems to me that the modern women's movement has given natural mothers
virtually no attention. Perhaps this is because in the early days of the
movement, the 1960s, motherhood was something to be avoided, not embraced.
The ideal woman was strong and free, unfettered by children. Many early
feminists chose to be childless. Plus, there was no tradition of supporting
"unwed mothers" to draw on from the past as the suffragists
were intent on getting the vote. Now that the early feminists are older
and had delayed having children, they found themselves infertile and they
adopted. Whatever the reason, the consequence is that we exist outside
both mainstream society (which still insists on punishment of unmarried
mothers, especially those who "gave away their babies") and
the women's movement, despite the fact that most of us resemble those
in that movement, being white middle-class women. Maybe we're just a little
too close to home.
Reviewer:
Karen Lynn
 
The Canadian Council of Natural Mothers
|