unwed pregnancy -- 2/3/2026

03 Feb 2026

unwed pregnancy -- 2/3/2026

0 COMMENTS

Today's selection-- from Abortion by Mary Fissell. The traumas of unwed motherhood in Victorian Britain:

“Unwed pregnancy had long been relatively common in Britain, not least because sexual relations were a normal part of courtship. If a woman got pregnant, there was substantial local pressure on the couple to get married. In smaller communities, everyone knew who had been seeing whom, and local officials as well as family members made it clear to the man where his responsibilities lay. If he refused, he was liable for child support payments and medical care for his lover's childbirth and convalescence. In those cases where a woman was unwilling to admit who the father was, and the community was unsure, the local midwife was on the case. She interrogated the mother during labor, because it was thought that a woman dare not lie when she was at risk of losing her life.

“However, the forced-marriage solution to illegitimacy did not always work. Women were not always able to marry the father of their child, particularly when they worked as domestic servants, as many did. In Victorian Britain, servants were not just for the rich. Even artisans and shopkeepers usually had a young woman or two living with them to do the domestic work. In the country, agriculture depended upon the work of many young male and female laborers. Agricultural households could be hotbeds of adolescent sexuality, as it was not uncommon for three, four, or more unrelated teens to be living under one roof, usually in close quarters. Again and again, masters took advantage of their female servants, and when such a young woman became pregnant, she knew she would be cast out of the house by her mistress without a second thought.

“By the latter half of the eighteenth century, the system of premarital sex followed by hasty weddings had broken down, especially in London. The metropolis was a magnet for young men and women seeking better wages and some urban excitement. In London, there was little community pressure on a young man to marry his pregnant lover. The city was huge: a million people by 1800, tripling by 1860. A man could melt into the shadows without any difficulty. Some did marry, but many women were left in the lurch. Historians estimate that by the early nineteenth century, over half of all first births in London had been conceived out of wedlock, some unmarried, some rushed to the altar. By 1850, the rate of illegitimacy in London was higher than it had ever been. It would not reach the same levels again until the 1960s. So Eliza Wilson's plight was not unusual.

“Londoners knew that young women were at risk of unwed motherhood and had begun to build a fragile and imperfect safety net for them. The Foundling Hospital, built in 1739, offered women the chance to leave a baby whom they could not keep. An infant would be wet-nursed and then cared for, trained in a useful trade. Unlike similar institutions on the Continent, it was not anonymous. In France and Italy, Catholic-run foundling hospitals worked like the ‘firehouse laws’ of the United States today. A woman could leave a baby safely and anonymously, no questions asked. Many included a ‘tour,’ or a horizontal wheel that pivoted from outside the building to inside, like a giant lazy Susan. A woman placed a baby on the wheel, rang a bell, and fled. The hospital staff, hearing the bell, rotated the wheel into the building and retrieved the baby.

“The London Foundling Hospital, dependent upon donations, did not want to look as if it were supporting irregular sexual liaisons, so made its intake process much more difficult than those of similar Catholic institutions on the continent. By the early nineteenth century, women needed to prove that they had been in a committed relationship, headed toward marriage, before the hospital would consider taking a baby. Letters of recommendation and investigations were part of the process. Eliza Wilson had no chance here.

1753 engraving of the Foundling Hospital building, now demolished

“In the late eighteenth century, a poorer woman might be able to deliver her baby in a new institution, the lying-in hospital. These women became so-called teaching material as these hospitals instructed both male doctors and female midwives. Only two of the five London lying-in hospitals would admit a single woman, again afraid of appearing to foster extramarital sexual relations. For those two, women usually needed to demonstrate that their pregnancy had resulted from a premarital relationship gone wrong. Eliza Wilson did not fit this model, nor could she risk dismissal from her employment as a seamstress when her condition became known.

“Women became doubly disadvantaged in the 1830s and '40s. First, it became ever easier for men to disappear. The advent of train travel in the 1830s and regular transatlantic ship service from the 1820s, followed by steamships in the 1840s, meant that there were multiple ways for unwilling fathers to get away. In 1840, a ticket in steerage from Liverpool to New York City might cost a month's wages for a factory worker or three months' for a manual laborer. If a man didn't have the funds, some companies would take no money down in return for a period of indentured labor upon arrival. Ships left Liverpool weekly. By the end of the decade, steamship travel had made transatlantic trips even faster and cheaper.

“Probably more significant than improvements in transportation, however, were changes in the local welfare system brought about by the 1834 New Poor Law. Before then, poor pregnant women could count on help from local authorities, as they were the ones who pressured reluctant fathers into marriage or extracted child-support payments and money for the midwife. The system was far from perfect. Women were only entitled to support in the parish in which they were legally settled, and employment contracts were often written to ensure a woman could not gain settlement where she was working. In practice, poor women often only had a settlement in the parish where they had been born, often far from where they were living and working as adults.

“But the New Poor Law made things much worse. The law was intended to discourage anyone from asking for relief. No longer would those in need remain in their homes. Instead, to get help, they had to be incarcerated in workhouses, which the laboring classes quickly understood as prisons for poverty.

“Under the so-called Bastardy Clause, men were freed from any paternal responsibility whatsoever. They were not chased for child support or made to marry, but their pregnant partners were locked up in workhouses. Some women resisted the workhouse at all costs. In Newcastle in 1843, Margaret Wheatley, a twenty-two-year-old single woman, refused medical help from Poor Law authorities although she lacked money for a midwife. She died in childbirth. Shame and imprisonment were strong deterrents”