A Legacy of Caring
Page 3
— Vera Moberly
Staffing
A “lady superintendent” was in charge of the day-to-day running of the house, supported by an assistant known as the matron. At first, the superintendent’s salary was set at $10 a month. Over the years, it gradually increased and reached $50 a month by 1912. Among the superintendent’s responsibilities, she was to “[m]ake herself personally acquainted with the mothers, with a view to encouraging them to lead a new life that they may look upon her as a friend to be confided in.”
At first, the salaery of the superintendent of the Infants’ Home was set at $10 a month. Over the years, it gradually increased and reached $50 a month by 1912.
At first, the mothers did most of the work of the home in return for food, clothing and shelter for themselves and their children. Some of these mothers, often admitted to the home precisely because of their skills as cooks or needlewomen, were hired as paid employees. Over the course of time, however, the home hired two untrained nurses, a laundress, a seamstress and a caretaker. According to Moberly, “Petty jealousies among the staff were frequent and disrupting and there were continual changes in personnel. On several occasions, the superintendent and matron were called before the board in an effort to straighten out their quarrels.”
Medical care
The children’s medical care was a constant worry. Many were seriously ill, often close to death, and had been admitted to the Infants’ Home because, at that time, Toronto’s Hospital for Sick Children did not treat children under two years of age. The condition of the children in the shelter was aggravated by epidemics of whooping cough, measles, chicken pox, diphtheria and scarlet fever that constantly swept the home. In 1880, there was an epidemic of malaria. Such outbreaks meant that the institution was often closed to admissions, sometimes for several months at a time.
The condition of the children in the shelter was aggravated by epidemics of whooping cough, measles, chicken pox, diphtheria and scarlet fever that constantly swept the home.
During some of the epidemics, all of the children became ill and many died. Malnutrition was the greatest cause of death. Others included tuberculosis, respiratory diseases, congenital syphilis and the effects of the laudanum dispensed in many baby farms.
The agency’s managers paid serious heed to the prevalence of these epidemics and high rates of child mortality at the Infants’ Home. The workload was so heavy that, in March 1877, they decided it was necessary to appoint two additional doctors. A further two were added in October of that year. These doctors, who volunteered their time, were among the best pediatricians in the city, and they worked hard to save the lives of the children. The Infants’ Home also allowed these doctors to bring in students specializing in pediatric medicine. It thus became the first institution in the city to provide opportunities for students to gain experience in the practical skills of their profession.
The Infants’ Home’s doctors, who volunteered their time, were among the best pediatricians in the city, and they worked hard to save the lives of the children. The agency also allowed them to bring in students specializing in pediatric medicine. It thus became the first institution in the city to provide opportunities for students to gain experience in the practical skills of their profession.
At about this time, after a string of upsetting incidents, the appointment of a trained resident nurse was discussed. On one occasion, the person in charge of an infant fainted and fell on the child, breaking his leg. Another time, the night nurse fed the babies milk spiked with whiskey to keep them quiet. But a trained nurse was not appointed, because the board of managers thought that an untrained superintendent could not work with a qualified professional. It was not until 1911 that the board, “feeling that the time has come when this home should be placed upon the footing of a hospital,” appointed a trained nurse, Isobel Wilson, as superintendent.
Despite the board of managers’ hesitance to hire a trained nurse, it had, in 1877, changed the agency’s name to the Infants’ Home and Infirmary because it had decided that the organization should not be merely a refuge for destitute children but also a hospital for infants. It proved difficult to attain this goal for several years, but in 1888, with the death rate among the children still high, funds were raised to add an annex to the west of the main building to serve as isolation quarters during periods of infection.
The board of managers had, in 1877, changed the agency’s name to the Infants’ Home and Infirmary because it had decided that the organization should not be merely a refuge for destitute children but also a hospital for infants.
Admissions and discharges
Early on, the Infants’ Home could accommodate about forty-five infants and mothers at one time, but high infant mortality led to a similarly high rate of turnover. In all, 160 children were admitted during the first year of operation, of whom seventy-one died — an alarming death rate of 44 percent. Although the organization was able to reduce this percentage significantly in subsequent years, not until the introduction of foster family care in 1919 was the Infants’ Home able to reduce the death rate of children in its care to the provincial average.
Not until the introduction of foster family care in 1919 was the Infants’ Home able to reduce the death rate of children in its care to the provincial average.
Until then, the agency’s managers gave serious attention to the prevalence of epidemics in the home and its high rates of child mortality. The agency’s physicians played an important role by examining every child and mother seeking admission and recommending who should be received into the home. The annual report of 1877 cites one example:
Dear Madam, there is a family named Thomas living on Albert Street, the mother of whom is in very bad health and must go to the hospital. Three of the children are to go to the Boy’s Home, the youngest I have promised to aid. May I request that you will receive the little one in the Infants’ Home? He is sadly in want of food, proper clothing and a bath.
“Dear Madam, there is a family named Thomas living on Albert Street, the mother of whom is in very bad health and must go to the hospital. Three of the children are to go to the Boy’s Home, the youngest I have promised to aid. May I request that you will receive the little one in the Infants’ Home? He is sadly in want of food, proper clothing and a bath.”
— Infants’ Home physician of a mother and her baby
Photo reprinted with permission of City of Toronto Archives, SC1, Item 142.
Although foundlings were admitted as a matter of course, the process of admission for a mother with an infant was an ordeal. There was no certainty they would be accepted by the home — and often no alternative if they were not. According to Moberly:
The mother had to appear [before a committee of the board of managers] to tell her story and produce her marriage certificate and give details concerning her husband and relatives. If she was unmarried, she was asked about her family, immigration [status], residence, employment and religion and had to obtain a certificate from a doctor stating that the child was her first. Whenever the committee had any doubt as to the veracity of the story, they might delay admission until they were satisfied.
Should an unmarried woman become pregnant a second time, readmission was always denied because, according to the values of the period, the mother was judged immoral. If it was discovered after admission that the child was not the first one born out of wedlock, both mother and baby were discharged immediately without any inquiry as to where they would go.
Should an unmarried woman become pregnant a second time, readmission was always denied because, according to the values of the period, the mother was judged immoral. If it was discovered after admission that the child was not the first one born out of wedlock, both mother and baby were discharged immediately without any inquiry as to where they would go.
Overcrowding at the home was another frequent reason for admission to be denied. At least a thousand infants were turned away in the first five years of operation. The experience
of a mother and her infant Lucy in 1878, described in that year’s annual report, was not unusual.
When admitted, the baby’s father was dying of consumption in the hospital, the mother went out washing. Some charitable people gave her assistance and she took her baby out. Some time after, her husband died, and she reapplied again for the readmission of her child, but the home was overcrowded to such an extent that the managers were compelled to refuse admission, although the child was dying and the case a very distressing one.
The origins of this baptismal font are unknown. It belonged to Vera Moberley and was used to baptize children at the Infants’ Home.
While rationing the home’s resources could be upsetting, it was also treated dispassionately, as two further examples from the 1878 report testify:
Fred was admitted for a few days with his mother. As the home was overcrowded, they were both sent away. It was believed she had friends who could help her.
As the home was too crowded, after a few days Sarah was sent back to her mother as she was earning good wages and was able to provide for her elsewhere.
These examples bring into focus the paucity of other community resources for infants at the end of the nineteenth century.
Of the sixty-five children who were admitted in 1878, eighty-six percent were less than a year old. Of those, three-quarters were under the age of three months. What happened to them? According to that year’s annual report, “Nine infants were adopted, four were sent to the Girls’ Home, three to the House of Providence, 26 left for other institutions with their mothers and seven went to live with relatives. Twenty-three died. As for the mothers, a total of 44 were sent to their relatives or [referred for domestic service] and three were [expelled for breaking house rules].”
“Nine infants were adopted, four were sent to the Girls’ Home, three to the House of Providence, 26 left for other institutions with their mothers and seven went to live with relatives. Twenty-three died. As for the mothers, a total of 44 were sent to their relatives or [referred for domestic service] and three were [expelled for breaking house rules].”
— 1878 discharge statistics
Breast-feeding
At a time when breast-feeding was considered unfashionable among the privileged, the managers stuck tenaciously to their view that it, as well as wet nursing (breast-feeding another woman’s child in her absence), was essential to the saving of infant lives. The story of Walter’s short life from the 1878 annual report is an example of how many bottle-fed babies fared in those times:
At a time when breast-feeding was considered unfashionable among the privileged, the managers of the Infants’ Home stuck tenaciously to their view that it, as well as wet nursing (breastfeeding another woman’s child in her absence), was essential to the saving of infant lives.
Mother a wet nurse. The child had been [living at a baby farm] before coming to the home and as usual with bottle-fed children, was weak and wasted when admitted. Only lived a few weeks.
Infants’ Home and Infirmary Formula Recipe
1/2 lb [230 g]
Oswego Cornstarch
(Oswego is found better than other brands)
4 qt [3.9 L]
New milk (our own cow’s)
2 qt [1.9 L]
Water
3/4 lb [340 g]
Bright coffee sugar
It was because of these experiences that the agency’s medical report of 1879 stated that “Experience has been gained in the [bottle] feeding of infants. All of the patent foods have proved unsatisfactory and, with the exception of condensed milk, have been dispensed with.”
The importance that the Infants’ Home placed on breast-feeding “at nature’s font” was the reason the board of managers insisted that a mother must enter the home along with her baby. Mothers were required to stay at least four months and, if possible, to nurse and feed another child who was orphaned or whose mother’s whereabouts were unknown. Over time, the women became increasingly unwilling to act as wet nurses and the practice was dropped, although the insistence on a mother nursing her own child was maintained. But, this meant that some babies did require bottle feeding. The home had developed its own recipe for infant formula:
1/2 lb [230 g]
Oswego Cornstarch
(Oswego is found better than other brands)
4 qt [3.9 L]
New milk (our own cow’s)
2 qt [1.9 L]
Water
3/4 lb [340 g]
Bright coffee sugar
Boil milk and water together and add cornstarch already moistened with a little cold milk and sweetened with the bright coffee sugar, the whole to be boiled by steam heat over a brisk fire for 1/2 hour. To be fed hot — never cold. The reason for using steam heat is to avoid the possibility of the mixture ever acquiring a burnt taste.
As the recipe illustrates, the agency owned its own cow. This was later supplemented by milk from the city dairies. Sir John Ross Robertson, the publisher of the Toronto Telegram and a major benefactor of the Hospital for Sick Children, donated pasteurized milk for six months in the 1880s in an effort to convince the mothers of its worth.
Life at the Infants’ Home
The children who lived in the home were dressed in mouse-grey flannel rompers with scarlet bands at the neck and cuffs. Their days were spent largely in the day nursery, where they ate their meals and slept on the floor for their afternoon nap. In good weather, they played outdoors in the sand pit.
The care of each child was left largely to its mother or wet nurse. The women were provided with striped blue and white uniforms, covered by a large apron. Their hair had to be worn drawn into a tight bun and covered by a white mob cap.
The care of each child was left largely to its mother or wet nurse. The women were provided with striped blue and white uniforms, covered by a large apron. Their hair had to be worn drawn into a tight bun and covered by a white mob cap.
Cooking facilities were inadequate and meals on the scanty side. They might include a breakfast of oatmeal porridge, a lunch of meat and vegetables and a supper of bread and butter along with cheese or fruit. Tea was the regular beverage and occasional treats of ice cream were made available in the summer.
Only spasmodic attempts were made to introduce recreation, although morning and evening prayers were held each day, along with Sunday evening service and Wednesday Bible classes.
Given the adverse social attitudes toward unmarried mothers, this regime was well intentioned but, at the same time, demeaning. The women were not allowed to leave the grounds “owing to the general class of women in the home,” and keys were not given to staff except for special emergencies. The mothers were physically isolated from their families and friends, who were often unaware of their circumstances. Although visitors were allowed on Sundays, and later on Thursday afternoons as well, all mail was censored and might be withheld.
Mothers were often summoned before the board of managers for swearing, quarrelling or insubordination. Many were asked to leave on account of such behaviour. Others simply ran away.
Mothers were often summoned before the board of managers for swearing, quarrelling or insubordination. Many were asked to leave on account of such behaviour. Others simply ran away.
Not only did these women have to live by these strict rules but they also had to endure the ever-present threat of losing their babies to infectious diseases or because they were induced to allow them to be adopted.
Each woman was informed that her good conduct was necessary for the managers to recommend her to a family who might eventually employ her as a domestic servant. Although many of the mothers accepted such opportunities for work, especially when they were allowed to have their children with them, others opted for employment in factories and stores.
Although mothers who worked outside could board their infants at the home, the rule that non-working mothers had to stay for a fixed period of time, even if they did not have a living child, caused strong dissatisfaction among
the residents. Strict application of this rule eventually led to a lower rate of admission and consequent budgetary problems, because the home’s per capita revenue was reduced. It took years for the board of managers to recognize that this policy had failed and to rescind it.
Although mothers who worked outside could board their infants at the home, the rule that non-working mothers had to stay for a fixed period of time, even if they did not have a living child, caused strong dissatisfaction among the residents.
Advocacy and community development
The board of managers was progressive in its thinking and keenly interested in any approach that would improve the lives of the city’s children. The managers took a very broad interest in community problems, engaging in what today we would regard as advocacy and community development work.
The board of managers was progressive in its thinking and keenly interested in any approach that would improve the lives of the city’s children. The managers took a very broad interest in community problems, engaging in what today we would regard as advocacy and community development work.
One example was their success in getting the city to pass a bylaw in 1887 that required children’s boarding homes to be registered. This made it illegal to retain more than one infant (exceptions were made for twins, but not for other siblings) under twelve months of age in boarding homes unless the home was registered, the care providers were legal guardians of the children, or the home was receiving aid from — and therefore subject to inspection by — the province. As a result of these efforts, the province passed the Maternity Boarding Home Act of 1898, making the licensing of children’s boarding homes mandatory across Ontario.