Jump to content

User:Kabkzb/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Additions under the headline: Renaissance to 20th century

      I would like to add to the existing paragraph under the Renaissance to the 20th century from this :

Wet nursing was reported in France in the time of Louis XIV, the early 17th century. It was commonplace in the British Isles: For years it was a really good job for a woman. In 17th- and 18th-century Britain a woman would earn more money as a wet nurse than her husband could as a laborer. And if you were a royal wet nurse you would be honored for life.[6] Women took in babies for money in Victorian Britain, and nursed them themselves or fed them with whatever was cheapest. This was known as baby-farming; poor care sometimes resulted in high infant death rates. Dr Naomi Baumslag[17] noted legendary wet-nurse Judith Waterford: "In 1831, on her 81st birthday, she could still produce breast milk. In her prime she unfailingly produced two quarts (four pints or 1.9 litres) of breast milk a day."[6] The English wet-nurse in Victorian England was most likely a single woman who previously gave birth to an illegitimate child, and was looking for work in a profession that glorified the single mother.[18] English women tended to work within the home of her employer to take care of her charge, as well as working at hospitals that took in abandoned children. The wet-nurse's own child would likely be sent out to nurse, normally brought up by the bottle, rather than being breastfed. Fildes argues that "In effect, wealthy parents frequently 'bought' the life of their infant for the life of another."[19] Wet-nursing in England decreased in popularity during the mid-19th century due to the writings of medical journalists concerning the undocumented dangers of wet-nursing. Valerie A. Fildes argued that “Britain has been lumped together with the rest of Europe in any discussion of the qualities, terms of employment and conditions of the wet nurse, and particularly the abuses of which she was supposedly guilty.”[20] According to C.H.F. Routh, a medical journalist writing in the late 1850s in England, argued many evils of wet-nursing, such as wet-nurses were more likely to abandon their own children, there was increased mortality for children under the charge of a wet-nurse, and an increased physical and moral risk to a nursed child.[21] While this argument was not founded in any sort of proof, the emotional arguments of medical researchers, coupled with the protests of critics of the practice slowly increased public knowledge and brought wet-nursing into obscurity, replaced by maternal breastfeeding and bottle-feeding.[22] 

      to the following:

==France==[edit]

Wet nursing was reported in France in the time of [[Louis XIV]], the early 17th century. In 18th century France, approximately 90 percent of infants were wet nursed, mostly sent away to live with their wet nurses. (source?) The high demand for wet nurses coincided with the low wages and high rent prices of this era, which forced many women to have to work soon after childbirth. This forced mothers to have to send their infants away to be breastfed and cared for by wet nurses even more poor than themselves. With the high demand for wet nurses, the price to hire one increased as the standard of care decreased. This led to many infant deaths. In response, rather than nursing their own children, upper class women turned to hiring wet nurses to come live with them instead. In entering into their employers home to care for their charges, these wet nurses had to leave their own infants to be nursed and cared for by women far worse off than themselves, and who likely lived at a relatively far distance away. The Bureau of Wet Nurses was created to serve two purposes.(when, by who, and why was it created?) It supplied parents with wet nurses, as well as helped lessen the neglect of charges by controlling monthly salaryy paymenst to wet nurses. In order to become a wet nurse, women had to meet a few qualifications including a good physical body with a good moral character. Wet nurses were often judged on their age, their health, the number of children they had, as well as their breast shape, breast size, breast texture, nipple shape and nipple size, since all these aspects were believed to affect the quality of a woman’s milk(source?). In 1874, the French government introduced the Roussel Law, which “mandated that every infant placed with a paid guardian outside the parents’ home be registered with the state so that the French government is able to monitor how many children are placed with wet nurses and how many wet nursed children have died.”(Source?)[edit]

==England==[edit]

Wet nursing was commonplace in the British Isles. For years, wet-nursing was a well-paid, respectable and popular job for many lower class women in England. In 17th- and 18th-century Britain, a woman would earn more money as a wet nurse than her husband could as a labourer. Royal wet nurse held special regard for life.[6] Women took in babies for money in Victorian Britain, and nursed them themselves or fed them with whatever was cheapest. This was known as baby-farming; poor care sometimes resulted in high infant death rates. Dr Naomi Baumslag[17] noted legendary wet-nurse Judith Waterford: "In 1831, on her 81st birthday, she could still produce breast milk. In her prime she unfailingly produced two quarts (four pints or 1.9 litres) of breast milk a day."[6] It was common for upper class women to hire wet nurses to breastfeed their children. The English wet-nurse in Victorian England was most likely a single woman who previously gave birth to an illegitimate child, and was looking for work in a profession that glorified the single mother.[18] There were two types of wet nurses in Victorian England. There were wet nurses who were on poor relief and struggled to sufficiently provide for themselves or their charges, and then there were professional wet nurses who were well paid and respected. Up until the 19th century, most wet nursed infants were sent far from their families to live with their wet nurse for up to the first three years of their life. (source) As many as 80 percent of wet-nursed babies who lived with their wet nurses, died during infancy, which led to a change living conditions. English women tended to work within their employers homes to take care of her charge, as well as working at hospitals that took in abandoned children. The wet-nurse's own child would likely be sent out to nurse, normally brought up by the bottle, rather than being breastfed. Fildes (who is this person, qualifications?) argues that "In effect, wealthy parents frequently 'bought' the life of their infant for the life of another."[19] Wet-nursing in England decreased in popularity during the mid-19th century due to the writings of medical journalists concerning the undocumented dangers of wet-nursing. Valerie A. Fildes argued that “Britain has been lumped together with the rest of Europe in any discussion of the qualities, terms of employment and conditions of the wet nurse, and particularly the abuses of which she was supposedly guilty.”[20] According to C.H.F. Routh, a medical journalist writing in the late 1850s in England, argued many evils of wet-nursing, such as wet-nurses were more likely to abandon their own children, there was increased mortality for children under the charge of a wet-nurse, and an increased physical and moral risk to a nursed child.[21] While this argument was not founded in any sort of proof, the emotional arguments of medical researchers, coupled with the protests of critics of the practice slowly increased public knowledge and brought wet-nursing into obscurity, replaced by maternal breastfeeding and bottle-feeding.[22][edit]

==United State==[edit]

Colonists from England had brought with them to North America the practice of wet nursing. Since the arrangement of sending infants away to live with wet nurses was the cause of so many infant deaths, by the 19th century, Americans adopted the practice of having wet nurses live with the employers in order to nurse and care for their charges. This practice consequently raised the death rate for the biological infants of wet nurses. Many employers would have only kept a wet nurse for a few months at a time since it was believed that the quality of a woman’s breast milk would lessen over time.e Since there were not any official records kept which pertained to wet nurses or wet nursed children in the United States, we(who is we? the general populace? historians? all?) lack the knowledge of precisely how many infants were wet-nursed, for how long they were wet-nursed, whether they lived at home or else where while they wet-nursed, as well as how many wet-nursed babies lived or died. The only evidence which exists, pertaining to wet-nursing in the United States is found in help wanted ads in newspapers, through complaints about wet nurses in magazines, and through medical journals which acted as employment agencies for wet-nurses. In the Souternh United States, it was a very common practice for slaves to become wet nurses to their owner’s children. Some slaves had to leave their own children in order to wet nurse and raise their owner’s child until that child was old enough to attend school, however in some instances, the slav'es child and the owner’s child would be raised together in their younger years.[edit]

==In Hospitals== (where?)[edit]

Wet Nurses were often hired to work in hospitals so that they could nurse premature babies, babies who were ill or babies who had been abandoned. During the 18th and 19th centuries, congenital syphilis was a common cause of infant mortality in France. Mercury was used to treat syphilis, however it could not be safely administered to infants. In 1780, began the process of giving mercury to wet nurses who could then transmit the treatment to the infants with syphilis through their milk in the act of breastfeeding.[edit]

Kabkzb (talk) 20:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Kabkzb

Changes Under the Headline "Reasons"[edit]

  I'd like to add the following few changes to the piece written under the headline: Reasons.

There was increased need for wet nurses under circumstances when the rates of, infant abandonment by mothers, and maternal death during childbirth, were high. Some women choose not to breastfeed for social reasons. Many of these women were found to be of the upper class, for them, breastfeeding was considered unfashionable, in the sense that it not only prevented these women from being able to wear the fashionable clothing of their time but it was also thought to ruin their figures. Mother’s also lacked the support of their husbands to breastfeed their children since hiring a wet nurse was less expensive than having to hire someone else to help run the family business and/or take care of the family household duties in their place. Some women chose to hire wet nurses purely to escape from the confining and time consuming chore of breastfeeding. Kabkzb (talk) 05:10, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Kabkzb

I would like to add the following changes under headline Current Attitudes in Developed Countries[edit]

Dating back to the Roman times and up until the present day, philosophers and thinkers alike have agreed that the important emotional bond between mother and child is threatened by the presence of a wet nurse. Kabkzb (talk) 20:54, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Kabkzb

Hi Kimeesha, I just changed a bit of the sentence structure here and there and tried to make some new headers. You seem to lack citations but I feel like you've added some much needed sections. My computer is being weird as I'm doing this so I hope I didn't drastically alter something by accident! ~~~~

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kabkzb/sandbox&oldid=712775141"