The sexual life of woman in its physiological, pathological and hygienic aspects

by E. Heinrich Kisch

Only-Child-Sterility.

Until recently, only-child-sterility had received attention in England only, for the reason that it is comparatively common in that country; but this form of relative sterility is by no means rare with us (in Germany and Austria) also. I had a collection made in Austria of the number of children resulting from 2000 fruitful unions, and found that among these there were 105 marriages in which one child only had been born; thus the ratio of these marriages to those which proved fully fruitful was about 1 : 19. But the figures are untrustworthy, since abortions and deaths in infancy were not taken into account. Ansell found that in England, among 1767 fruitful marriages in which the mean age of the wives at marriage had been 25, there were 131 cases of only-child-sterility, giving a ratio of the latter to the fully fruitful unions of 1 : 13.

This form of relative sterility, in which the wife gives birth to one child, and thereafter remains barren, was referred by Matthews Duncan, either to a premature exhaustion of the reproductive capacity, the general bodily powers remaining unaffected, or else to a simultaneous weakening of the sexual powers and of the constitutional force in general. This explanation is a very inadequate one. The significant fact upon which an understanding of the nature of only-child-sterility must be based, is that the first delivery is the one which entails the greatest dangers to the mother, and that the subsequent sterility is attributable to the difficult delivery, and to the illnesses that follow in its train. In fact, only-child-sterility is observed chiefly after difficult deliveries, followed by long enduring inflammatory processes of the uterus and the uterine annexa, which seriously affect the woman’s reproductive capacity. It occurs especially in delicately organized, anæmic, scrofulous women, whose powers of resistance have been undermined by a single pregnancy and parturition. Finally, it is met with in women suffering from myoma uteri, a form of tumour which beyond others renders the recurrence of pregnancy difficult and unlikely. This form of sterility has been seen also in cases in which comparatively soon after the birth of her first child, the mother has suffered from typhoid, scarlatina, or some other severe infective fever, which appears in some way to interfere for the future with the development of normal ova. We must also take into consideration the fact that at the time of the wife’s first confinement, when the love which brought about the union has often already begun to diminish in intensity, the husband, finding too irksome the continence enforced upon him by his wife’s condition, is not unlikely to go elsewhere for temporary sexual gratification, and to acquire a venereal disease, which he subsequently transmits to his wife, and which is responsible for the latter’s future sterility. And we must not forget to take into account the adoption of means for the prevention of pregnancy after the first child has been born. Again, I saw three cases of only-child-sterility in which the husbands were respectively 24, 26, and 29 years older than their wives, and in these instances no profound search was needful for the discovery of the cause of the wife’s unfruitfulness; it was obvious that in each case the elderly husband’s reproductive powers had sufficed for the procreation of a single child, but had then been completely exhausted. My experience in the mysteries of sterility in women has informed me of yet another cause of only-child-sterility, met with in cases in which the only child was born after several years of unsuccessful marital intercourse. In most of these cases, the wife has finally been impelled to seek a substitute for her husband, whose reproductive powers have proved insufficient; having succeeded in obtaining the child she desires, the wife does not again wander in strange pastures, and consequently remains sterile.

According to Kleinwächter—who gives a somewhat wider significance to the term “only-child-sterility,” including as he does cases of premature interruption of the first and only pregnancy, since these even more frequently entail permanent sterilization—only-child-sterility is by no means rare. Among 1081 gynecological cases, he observed it in 90, that is, in 8.32% of the cases. In these 90 cases, there were 69 instances in which the sterility ensued upon full term delivery, and 21 instances in which it followed abortion or premature delivery. Kleinwächter, moreover, on the basis of his personal experience, supports my view of the importance of the sterilizing influence of the first delivery; but he has been unable to determine whether early marriage has any influence in the production of only-child-sterility.

Lier and Ascher also class as instances of only-child-sterility those cases in which a woman has had a single miscarriage, and subsequently remained sterile, since by this miscarriage the capacity of the woman for impregnation has been proved, and the question of capacity for full-term delivery has nothing to do with that of capacity for conception. As causes of this form of sterility, they lay especial stress upon puerperal infection, gonorrhoeal infection, perimetritis, tubo-ovarian tumours, etc.

Operative Sterility.

Finally, in order to complete the etiologically classified series of forms of sterility, we must allude to yet another variety of sterility which is due to the surgical direction of modern gynecology, viz., operative sterility. However much we may prize the gains we owe to modern operative gynecology, it cannot be denied that the new developments have brought many evils in their train. Not the least of these is operative sterility, due to operative procedures involving the female reproductive organs, by which, whether intentionally or unintentionally the reproductive capacity is destroyed. Doubtless, in certain severe organic diseases of the female reproductive apparatus, in which the use of the knife is indicated, the fact that by operating we are sterilizing the patient cannot even be taken into consideration; but many sins have been committed in this kind, and with a ready hand, and, be it openly admitted, with an easy conscience, many an eager operator has undertaken the destruction of a woman’s potentialities for motherhood, without having given the careful consideration that is demanded by the irreparable character of his undertaking. Happily, however, the time has nearly passed away, in which it could be said of many a gynecologist, that no ovaries and no Fallopian tubes were safe from his operative zeal, and from his desire to heap up a mountain of statistics.

Three operative measures very commonly undertaken at the present day are responsible for the production of operative sterility: ovariotomy, oophorectomy, and salpingotomy.

The removal of the ovaries, with the object of permitting to the women concerned unbridled sexual indulgence without risk of consequences, was performed, according to Strabo, by the ancient Egyptians and Lydians. The same practice is described by modern writers as occurring in Hindustan (Roberts), and in Australia (Miklucho-Mackay).

With a curative aim, the removal of the ovaries was first undertaken in the early years of the nineteenth century, although the operation had already been discussed as a possibility by leading physicians of the eighteenth century. The first ovariotomy for the removal of an ovarian tumour was performed by MacDowell in the year 1809. During the last three or four decades, the operation has become an extremely common one, and is performed by the surgeons of all nations. Removal of a single ovary, as long as the other ovary is healthy, does not necessarily lead to any impairment of fertility; but when both ovaries are removed, operative sterility is the necessary result. In order to avoid this, Schröder has recommended that a fragment, at least, of healthy ovarian tissue should be left behind, in order to preserve the reproductive capacity. In discussing the subject of impaired ovulation, we have already mentioned cases in which pregnancy has occurred after bilateral removal of the ovaries, a circumstance explicable only on one of two assumptions, either that a fragment of ovarian tissue was left behind, or else that a supernumerary ovary existed.