Midwifery and the diseases of women

by Joel Shew

There is in some cases policy on the part of the physician, which lies at the root of this matter. “Why, madam, you are too weak,” the fashionable pill-monger sagely says. “It will injure your constitution, and you cannot raise your child; you must have a wet-nurse.”

Now, all this is very easy for a man to declare. Some say it from ignorance, no doubt, and some from other motives; for physicians, although as a body of men they are as honest as any other, are yet sometimes selfish, and do that which is dishonest and wrong. The selfish doctor knows, of course, very well where his money comes from. He knows—if he is not an ignoramus—that the mother, if she does not nurse her child, is more apt to become sick, so that she will need his services; and, what is more, she is more apt to become pregnant, in which case he will look for another job at midwifery, which pays well.

I would have every one of you to understand that the health of the unnatural mother, who will not nurse her child, suffers from her not fulfilling the order of nature in giving suck. Her system must inevitably get harm from not allowing it to go through the period of lactation naturally. Her life of dissipation, too, is poorly calculated to contribute to health, compared with staying at home and fulfilling the order of nature, as God designed she should do. But she gets her reward even here. There is no period of woman’s life in which she has so great enjoyment, such perfect physical health, as when she is nursing the offspring of her own blood. Her shattered nerves and broken health are poor pay for the so-called enjoyments of a dissipated life.

But it will be said, there are cases in which it is impossible for a mother to fulfill the office of nursing. She may be physically unable; that is, she may not have any milk to give it; her health may be so feeble, and her constitution so much depraved, that it would not be admissible to do so. All this I admit; but such cases are the exception and not the rule.

What are we to think of the mother who voluntarily permits her child to nurse at another breast? How are we to regard the morals of such a mother—one who willingly allows another person to gain the affections of her child—for it always becomes more attached to the one who nurses it than to its own parent? Besides, too, the character of the one who suckles the child is, to a great degree, stamped upon it, and that indelibly, too. Is a mother, then, willing that the child shall take on the character of another, and of one whose disposition and mental peculiarities she probably knows nothing? For one, I cannot envy the man who has a wife that can willingly resign her child to another to nurse.

Rules for Nursing.—After the birth of the child, the mother having rested herself some hours from the pains and anxiety she has passed through, it should be put to the breast with the view of exciting the mammiferous glands to their proper and healthful action. This is better for both mother and child. It may be necessary to make the attempt a number of times, and perhaps for days before the lacteal secretion will be found to take place. But letting the child every now and then make the effort to get milk will be one of the most efficient means of inducing it to flow.

How often to Nurse the Child.—This is a question of great importance; great not less to the parent than the offspring, but one which is by for too much neglected.

It may not be possible to ascertain exactly at what periods it is best to give a child the breast; but one thing may be predicated with the greatest confidence, which is, that there should be a regularity in regard to it. To give the child the breast every half hour one day, and then, perhaps, the next, for the mother to go away for many hours, is certainly not a good practice.

I am led to believe, after having spent a good deal of thought on this subject, that to nurse a child once in about three hours, is perhaps as good a plan as can be fixed upon. Some have regarded four hours as a proper period; but one thing I am satisfied of, that the three hour rule is a good one; there is far more danger of nursing the child too often than there is from the opposite extreme.

It is common, I believe, for mothers to allow the child to take the breast during the night time. I am of the opinion that this practice, likewise, is not a good one. How much do you become fatigued, worn down, as it were, many of you, by allowing the child to take the nipple as often as it chooses in the night? In such cases, how much better you perceive it would be, to rest during the proper hours, so that when the morning comes, instead of being unrefreshed and stupid, you feel buoyant and elastic as a deer.