_Case 1._--_A baby girl was born to a young mother of unstable though not altogether bad character. The father was a gentleman: he did not seduce the girl. He paid the expenses of the confinement and afterwards, and with the mother"s consent, placed the little one with good country people, paying for her support. For more than a year and a half the baby lived with its foster mother and grew up a very healthy and joyous little girl. The real mother visited the child and showed most emotional love for her. One day, without reason and without warning, she took the child away. The foster-mother appealed to the father; he did all in his power to have the child returned, and finally, when the mother refused, said he would make no further contribution for the support of the child.
He knew the mother was unfit to bring up the child, but he could do nothing to prevent her action. The mother took the child to another town. What she did with the little one is not fully known, but when, after nine months, the foster-mother traced her, she was in a most pitiable condition of dirt and neglect, and, what was much worse, she was terribly frightened. Quite plainly she had been beaten and ill-used.
The mother was not poor, so that cannot be made an excuse._
_The foster-mother offered now to adopt the child and bring it up as her own. Her offer was accepted by the mother, but with the provision, which unfortunately was granted, that she should still come to see the child.
Her visits always affected the child unfavorably._
_During the next three years the little girl found renewed health and peace in her happy adopted home. Then her enemy--her mother--again took her away. For a year she kept this delicate, nervous and well-brought-up child with her in London under very adverse circ.u.mstances. Then she went off, leaving her daughter, now five years old, with no proper person to care for her and quite without means of support._
_Case 2._--_A girl of loose character, but not a regular prost.i.tute, found herself pregnant. She did not know certainly who among her lovers was the father, but she decided on one man, who she knew was not the father. He was rich and kind, or rather as she told me "he was a softy."
Accordingly she told him the baby was his. He arranged for the confinement, afterwards he took the baby and the mother to live in the home of his mother. They were kindly treated in every way, and the baby flourished. But the mother was bored by goodness: one day she went off: she did not take the baby. Unfortunately she left a letter--not I fear from conscience, but from mischief and a desire to insult goodness--telling the man she had tricked him and he was not the father of the child. The man was angry, disliking the knowledge of his having been duped; his mother was still more angry. Once more the child was the sufferer. It was sent away from the happy and rich home to an inst.i.tution._
_Case 3._--_A working-cla.s.s girl, belonging to a respectable country family, gave birth to a baby girl. The father was a soldier, but the girl did not know his name or where he was. During her confinement and afterward she remained at home with her mother and brother. The baby was ailing and became ill. The brother told his sister, the mother, that she must take it to the Infirmary in the neighboring town. She objected on the ground that she would have to go in with the baby. However, the brother insisted and arranged to meet her and the baby at the Infirmary gates the following evening. His sister was there, but not the baby. She told him that a friend was going to take care of the baby for her. The baby was never heard of again._
_Case 4._--_This time the mother was highly born and educated, but she belonged naturally to the promiscuous type of lover: she ought to have been a prost.i.tute. She had many lovers and was strongly s.e.xual, not pa.s.sionate so much as voluptuous. By one of her lovers, and by mistake, a child was conceived, and though attempts were made to get rid of the mistake, a boy was born, fairly healthy. The father, a modern tired profligate, refused to accept the responsibilities of his fatherhood, though he did not deny the child was his, and continued as one of the lovers of its mother. The mother showed no sign of maternal love; the little one was much neglected and probably would have died, but, when about two months old, he was taken from the mother and cared for and most tenderly loved by one of the woman"s other lovers. He left her as her indifference to her child killed his affection, but he took her child to bring up as his own son._
_Case 5._--_A record of this very revolting case appeared recently in the daily papers under the heading "8000 Baby"s End." I copy the story as it was told in the "Daily Mail": the date I do not remember._
"_The love affair of a middle-aged painter, Charles G.o.din, with his model Georgette Belli, aged 16, has led to a remarkable charge of murder. Georgette became a mother, and when the painter died a few months later he left the child 8000._
"_The girl married a young man named Emile Gourdon, and the baby was placed in the care of a grandmother. Later, when the young mother wished to get back her child, the grandmother refused to give it up on the ground that the young couple meant to destroy it in order to inherit the money, and produced letters and telegrams in support of her suspicion.
Georgette, however, got an order from a court for the surrender of the baby, and went to live at Ma.r.s.eilles with her husband._
"_One day, while walking on the jetty, the woman appeared to stumble and the child fell into the sea and was drowned. The couple have been arrested, the woman, it is alleged, having pretended to faint in order to make away with her child._"
Now, I know that these five cases I have recounted are not exceptional, though some of their sordid details may be specially disagreeable. Give but a moment"s attention to the facts that stand out, and at once you will grasp what is wrong. We are demanding too much from these unmarried mothers, and, by leaving the full power of parenthood in their weak hands, are jeopardizing the child"s safety; we are also encouraging conditions harmful to society. It is like leaving a loaded gun in the hands of a little child. These cases speak for themselves. In No. 3 and No. 5 the child was killed by the direct act of the mother; in the former case there was some excuse from the harsh rule that the sick baby of an unmarried mother cannot be received into a hospital unless the mother goes in with it (the reason of this, of course, being that the mother will use this means of ridding herself of the baby) and will never come to reclaim it; but in the horrible case of No. 5 there is no ray of excuse. This case is especially interesting because it makes so abundantly plain the terrible need there is for the immediate establishment of safe legal adoption. In cases No. 2 and No. 4 we have the curious situation, by no means so uncommon as many might think, of the wrong man acting the part of father to an illegitimately born child; in the one case this was done through the trickery of the mother and was but temporary, the child suffering, while in the other case, more interesting and less common, vicarious fatherhood was voluntarily adopted. I would ask you to note that in none of the five cases was bad motherhood caused by poverty and homelessness. So frequently it is said: "Give these mothers a chance, and their mother-love will blossom like the rose"--or some similar and unproved tosh. It is not true. The good mother may be a bad mother by adverse circ.u.mstances, this I acknowledge readily, but that the most favorable circ.u.mstances can make the bad mother into a good mother, I emphatically deny. This is why it is so unsafe and so wrong of society to leave the child unprotected and unwatched, for the mother to do with it what she likes.
The first case, because it shows so clearly the adverse action of the mother"s influence is, in my opinion, most instructive among the five cases I have given. Such changeableness on the mother"s part, and interference with the child is just what is likely, and most often does take place, and will go on taking place, until the law protects these children by effective guardianship. I would specially point out that this mother was not in the least indifferent to her baby. If you had talked to her, probably your sentiment would have burned and glowed about the hardness of her case in being separated from her baby, and you would have said wonderful plat.i.tudes about the beauty of a mother"s love. And yet the shameful hurt she did to her child can never be undone. Her undisciplined love was the cause of the child"s undoing.
I have now, I hope, made it sufficiently plain why the illegitimately born child should no longer be considered as belonging to the mother, but should be recognized as a member of society, and, as such, ent.i.tled to protection, so that it may suffer as little, and not as much, as is possible from the disadvantages of its illegal birth. This is plain justice. Yet before it can be done we shall need an immediate and great reform of our bad and antiquated b.a.s.t.a.r.dy and affiliation laws. We shall need also a change of heart.
XII
I shall be asked what changes I would suggest. The answer is not easy: it is not so much a question of altering this regulation or that, of removing hindrances and giving increased help; that is good, but more is needed: we want a change of the entire system: _the firm understanding that the clear aim before us is to place the child, as nearly as this can be done, in the same position of advantage as it would have had if it had not been illegally born. If there must be punishments, let them fall on the parents, never on the child._
Now, how can this best be done? In the s.p.a.ce I can devote here, it is possible only to throw out a few suggestions.
First, and I think exceedingly important, the law should take account of the att.i.tude of the father. In all cases where the paternity of the child is acknowledged openly by the man and with the mother, and guarantees are given that the duties of both parents will be faithfully fulfilled, the child should be legitimized, receive the name of the father, be qualified to inherit from him, and in every way given the same rights as the legitimate child, even if the parents are unable or do not wish to marry. This opportunity of right conduct once given to men by the law, I believe that many, who are fathers illegitimately, would voluntarily take this course and gladly acknowledge and fulfill the responsibilities of their fatherhood.
In all other cases, in which paternity is not voluntarily acknowledged, I take the most important duty of the law to be the official appointment of guardians. I believe nothing else is so urgently needed to protect these fatherless little ones. Such guardianship[187:1] could be provided without great difficulty or expense if _each illegitimately born child, not openly acknowledged and willingly provided for by its father, was made a ward of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction in the district in which it lived and thus placed under authoritative supervision. The child would, by the authority of the Court, be boarded out (1) with the mother in all cases where her health, character and previous records were such as to make this arrangement the best for the child, (2) in hostels, either with the mother or without her, (3) with paid foster-parents, (4) with adopted parents. In every case regular visitation of the child would be necessary, and the child must not be removed from one home to another or any change made with regard to it without the authority of the Court, which shall have power (1) to appoint guardians, either in addition to, or subst.i.tution for the mother of the child; (2) to approve any scheme for the education or training of the child, and at all times and in all ways to exercise authority in every matter pertaining to the child"s welfare._[188:1]
I would wish for a further restriction, which, however hardly it may seem to bear on the mother, is, in my opinion, most necessary for safeguarding the child. It is this: _If the child by the decision of the Court is boarded out with foster parents, permanently adopted or placed in a home apart from the mother, no interference or even visiting by the mother shall be permitted except at the discretion of the Court._
I would suggest that in every town or rural district guardians should be appointed (preferably a man and a woman) either paid or voluntary, but officially appointed: all that is needed is an extension of the duties of the Collecting Officer, appointed under the Affiliation Orders Act of 1914. This officer already takes out of the mother"s hands the work of collecting the weekly payments granted under a maintenance order, and he also has certain powers of enforcing payments from a defaulting father.
But at present his taking action is dependent on the desire of the mother. His duties ought in all cases to be compulsory. They would be (1) to help the mother before and after the birth of the child; (2) to seek out the father and urge a voluntary acknowledgment of his paternity, and, when this cannot be gained, to see that the law is rightly administered so that full alimony may be obtained; (3) to watch over the interests of the child and see that the decisions of the Court are carried out without interference from the mother.
The kind of help given would have to be varied and must be made suitable to each individual case, but every child would be a ward of the guardians in the district in which it lived, and would be regularly visited. I would suggest further that there should be placed over these visiting-guardians a Government-appointed, permanent, highly salaried official--a kind of over-guardian-parent or Consultant, who would supervise the work of the ordinary guardians in difficult cases, and advise as to the best means of administering the law. This high official ought, in my opinion, to be a woman.
Such a scheme as I have outlined (briefly and, I know, inadequately) would achieve the three-fold purpose of (1) safeguarding the child, (2) guiding and helping the mother, (3) fastening responsibility on the father. If wisely administered by guardians, acting with sympathy and understanding, it could hardly fail to achieve the desired result of protecting the child. Every illegitimately born child would be placed in a position of safety.
As a preliminary step, and pending legislation, it would be an excellent plan if groups of interested people, or societies, were to form local representative committees to appoint voluntary Visiting-guardians. By this means the plan could be tried, and some kind of responsible and authoritative guardianship at once undertaken. We ought to do this now, for death and suffering to the little children are going on while we delay.
There is no more for me to say.
The saving of these little ones is a plain duty upon me and upon you, my readers. Let us clear hardness from our minds and sentiment from our hearts; both will equally lead us astray. The child is the real care of the State and of us all; it is the child who is dependent; the child who has been sinned against; the child we have to protect. Save these babies from death and from life that is worse than death; give these children a right start in life. Let no illegitimately born child be able to say in after years, "I have called and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand and no man regarded."
FOOTNOTES:
[151:1] Freud.
[153:1] The illegitimate percentage of total births for the first half of 1918 was 6 per cent., in 1914 it was 4.24 per cent.
[154:1] See article by Havelock Ellis. _The New Statesman_, May 25th, 1918. Also Prinzing, whom Ellis quotes.
[158:1] In an article which appeared in _Maternity and Child Welfare_, in 1918, I first brought this question forward: the article was in answer to a discussion which had previously taken place in that useful and excellent little journal on the Unmarried Mother and her Child. I shall use some portion of what I then said in this essay, because I think my arguments would be weakened if I tried to re-write them.
[161:1] I do not include the father here, because under the English law the mother is the only parent.
[166:1] See Pamphlet issued by the _National Council for the Unmarried Mother and her Child_, page 8.
[169:1] These and similar statements are brought forward as reason for keeping mother and child together. I need scarcely say they leave me unmoved.
[170:1] See an excellent article on "The Love Child In Germany and Austria," _English Review_, June, 1912.
[175:1] Article on "The Illegitimate Child," _Maternity and Child Welfare_, September, 1917. One of the articles I was asked to answer.
[175:2] This is the plan advocated by the National Council for Unmarried Mothers.
[187:1] Some years ago the city of Leipsic started an admirable scheme by which illegitimately born children automatically became the wards of officially appointed guardians.
[188:1] An excellent scheme has been drawn up and issued as a pamphlet by "The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children"--Occasional Papers V. _Illegitimate Children_.
_Sixth Essay_
FORESEEING EVIL[193:1]
BEING CONCERNED WITH Pa.s.sIONATE FRIENDSHIPS, AND HOW RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT MAY BE ESTABLISHED IN s.e.xUAL RELATIONSHIPS OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE.
"A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself, but the simple pa.s.s on and are punished."--Pro. x.x.xvii. 12.
I
All over the world women are restless; perhaps, in no direction is this shown more alarmingly than in the att.i.tude of many modern girls toward marriage and motherhood. There is dissatisfaction brewing in s.e.xual matters as well as in every other department of life, and only the hypocrites cry "Peace" when there is no peace.