Victorian 'Baby Farming' Is A Deeply Unsettling Piece Of Forgotten History
Of all the dreadful things that have happened throughout history, only a few are actually taught in schools. The existence of "baby farms" isn't one of them. Baby farms existed in the darkest corners of Victorian-era England, and though thousands of victims emerged as a result, hardly anyone remembered them...until now. The real story behind baby farms is finally coming out, and it's just as terrible as you'd expect.
In Amelia's arms...
On a foggy night in England, a woman named Amelia Dyer crept alongside the River Thames. She moved quickly and quietly; from afar, it may have looked like she was on a late-night stroll. But those who looked closer were in for the shock of a lifetime: In Amelia's arms was a dark, huddled mass...
Toxic fumes
Amelia Dyers' story began in the 1800s. During this time, many cities were rapidly expanding. Industrialization was the law of the land, and everyone who lived in cities were inhaling polluted air. The toxic air wreaked havoc on people's lungs, but children were especially vulnerable. And in England, the baby boom was going strong.
The ultimate sacrifice
At a time when birth control and women's rights were virtually nonexistent, many women found themselves pregnant with unwanted children. These women were truly in a bind. You see, living in a densely populated area gave women more job opportunities, but it meant sacrificing their family's health.
A new kind of care system
Rich women had another option. They could simply make the baby somebody else's problem. If a wealthy woman fell pregnant, she could send the baby to another home, where someone would raise her child for a fee. Those who couldn’t afford this option, however, had to rely on a new kind of care system.
Baby farming
Baby farms were care centers, mostly in the country, where women believed their children could live a better life. Childcare was thought to be a woman's responsibility, so baby farms were nearly all managed by women. The arrangement between the city mom and the baby farm manager was bound by money.
An odd arrangement
The lower-class moms paid baby farmers to care for their unwanted children. It was an odd arrangement, but on the surface, it seemed like a decent solution for those who couldn’t afford to send their child to a home of their own, like rich women in the city.
Some caretakers tried their best
Unfortunately, unlike the rich women, the lower-class women’s children were often cared for by untrained nurses. Even though they didn’t have any formal training with childcare, there were baby farmers who did their best to care for the children in their homes. Raising kids wasn’t easy, but they did what they could.
Greedy ambitions
Not everyone was so charitable, however. Some women simply took in children for the money, leaving children to their own devices as soon as they could walk. These poor children grew up malnourished and in cheap clothing. And as it turned out, these neglectful women looked like Mary Poppins compared to other caretakers.
The shocking truth
On the truly evil side of this industry, baby farmers with zero morals uncovered an “easier” way to maximize their profits: they would kill the children. These monstrous caretakers saw it as a business tactic. The quicker the child "disappeared," the more children they could bring in, and the more money they could make.
Lost to history
With so little oversight and regulation, many evil people involved in baby farming got away with murder. We don't know their names to this day. Thankfully, investigators managed to incarcerate a few of the most prolific killer baby farmers. One of those infamous baby farmers was Margaret Waters.
The Brixton Baby Farmer
Better known as the Brixton Baby Farmer, Margaret joined this industry when her husband died in 1864. Her baby farm was an intermediary for adoption. For £10, Margaret would take the child and re-home them with an adoptive family — at least, that's what she advertised.
Margaret's horrific deeds
Margaret's advertisements ended up being much different from reality. After taking in a child, Margaret would simply deprive them of food. To make the children not feel their hunger, Margaret fed them opiates. After weeks without food, the kids would die. That's when Margaret would jump to action.
No longer undetected
Margaret placed the bodies in brown paper bags and left them outside. This may sound weird (what doesn't in this story?), but the paper bag burial was actually a common way of disposing of corpses in the 1800s. That said, Margaret's barbaric actions didn't go undetected for too long.
Comeuppance
Margaret was caught in 1870 after she murdered John Walter Cowen, 17-year-old Janet Tassie Cowen’s son. She was hanged for this crime, making her the first English woman to be tried and killed for being a violent baby farmer. Margaret was only charged with the murder of little John Walter Cowen...
The violence continued
But in reality, it’s estimated that she killed at least 19 other children. Margaret’s conviction inspired the Infant Life Protection Act of 1872, which forced boarding houses with more than two children under one year old to publicly register their baby farms with parish workers. Still, this act didn't stop other baby farming incidents from occurring.
Finchley Baby Farmers
There were still plenty of atrocious baby farmers around who were making plenty of money from women in need, like Amelia Sach and Annie Walters. In the early 1900s, Amelia and Annie created a place for young pregnant women to give birth. Then, they would find a new home for the kids...
A terrible fate
Of course, that’s not how it actually worked. Amelia charged the women for giving birth, their baby’s placement, and an extra bonus that would go to the adoptive family. Once the women left, Annie took the children, killed them with chlorodyne, and dumped their bodies into the River Thames.
The worst was yet to come
Their landlord caught them, and Amelia and Annie were hanged for their crimes in 1903. They killed more than 12 children. They were far from the last people to be caught murdering the children they were supposed to care for. What they did was vile, but the worst was yet to come.
Back to Amelia Dyer
One of history’s most prolific baby farmers and serial killers was Amelia Dyer — her last name fit her utter disregard for human life. Amelia wasn’t caught until 1896. While active, her baby farming scheme was similar to the other murderers in this story: she pretended to care for and re-home unwanted children for a fee.
The embodiment of evil
Amelia was a widow with a nursing background who, starting in the 1860s, began obtaining children for £10. Once they arrived, she either starved them to death or used “Mother’s Friend,” an opiate-based syrup, to subdue them. Eventually, she strangled them. In 1879, a doctor reported Amelia, since so many children had died in her home.
She couldn't be stopped
Shockingly, Amelia was only sentenced to six months of labor for the mysterious happenings around her baby farm. This didn’t stop her. Amelia liked the money and didn’t mind what she was doing to get it. Once she was free, she constantly moved her business and began dumping her young victims into the River Thames.
How many victims?
It was after one of Amelia's depraved late-night trips to the River Thames that a child's body was recovered from the water. The corpse was eventually linked back to Amelia, who was hanged for the murder. Much like Margaret, however, Amelia's actual death toll was much higher than anyone at the time could have imagined.
An unbelievable total
It’s believed that Amelia murdered more than 400 babies. 400! After so much murder, lawmakers eventually realized that childhood adoption had to be better regulated. In the process of doing this, however, a dark truth was revealed about Victorian society.
Downright deadly
Many women ultimately sent their children to baby farms because they simply couldn't afford to raise them themselves. It's almost understandable why some young mothers sent their kids to what they hoped would be a better life in the country: 20th century cities were, after all, downright deadly...
Mary Mallon
And no one knew this better than Mary Mallon. Like most New Yorkers in the early 1900s, Mary Mallon was an immigrant. She arrived in New York from Ireland in 1883, and she sought work doing the one thing she enjoyed: cooking. It wasn’t long, though, before she started to notice a worrying trend.
-375w.jpg)
Sudden illnesses
Weeks into every cooking job, the families she worked for would be struck by concerning symptoms: high fevers, splitting headaches, and terrible digestive woes that left them weak and exhausted. But Mary, curiously, never got sick.
-375w.jpg)
Ice cream with peaches
She hopped from house to house, which is how she started working for the Warren family. Days after they ate Mary's ice cream with peaches, it happened again: Each member of the family got sick. This time, however, Mary’s employer didn’t chalk it up to fate.
Struck by typhoid
Instead, Mr. Warren hired an investigator to find out why his family was suddenly suffering from typhoid, an uncommon disease for their part of Oyster Bay, Long Island. George Soper, the investigator, slowly tracked the illness’ path.
-375w.jpg)
An Irish cook
In each household affected by typhoid, there was a common thread: an Irish cook. The problem was, as Soper searched for the cook, he learned something alarming about her history. This mysterious Irish cook, it turned out, had a habit of skipping town.
Mary's secret
Mary Mallon always left her employment as soon as a case of typhoid fever broke out, often conveniently forgetting to leave a forwarding address. By the time Soper found her working in the household of another family, he realized something terrible about Mary.
-375w.jpg)
How did it spread?
Soper didn’t yet have proof, but time would prove his hunch right: Mary Mallon was the first asymptomatic carrier of typhoid to be identified in the United States, and it wasn’t difficult to figure out how she spread it to countless people.
Wash your hands
Typhoid usually spreads because the carrier didn’t take the right hygienic precautions, such as washing their hands after going to the bathroom. When a cook, who touches the food of every household member, neglects to wash their hands, the results can be messy...
-375w.jpg)
Fatefully bad decision
And that’s exactly what happened with Mary. Whether it was because of her own exhaustion as an overworked cook or plain carelessness, it’s likely that Mary didn’t wash her hands before making meals for her employers — a fatefully bad decision.
Cold food spreads bacteria
Soper deduced that Mary’s employers couldn’t have contracted typhoid from her hot meals, because the high cooking temperatures would’ve killed the deadly bacteria. That’s when they identified the real source: Mary’s famous ice cream served with peaches.
Going downtown
Soper gave Mary the cold, hard facts. All seven families she’d worked for had contracted typhoid fever, and one little girl had even died. Even with this knowledge, Mary refused to be tested for typhoid ... until the police showed up at her door.
.v1-375w.jpg)
Forced to give samples
The cook was shoved into an ambulance and taken to Willard Parker Hospital. For the next four days, a restrained Mary was forced to provide urine and stool samples, which yielded scary results: She was filled with typhoid bacteria.
-375w.jpg)
Born with typhoid
While in the hospital, the dirty truth about Mary’s typhoid was finally pieced together. She was probably born with typhoid and had unknowingly transmitted it to countless people throughout her life. There was no telling how many more people she'd infect…
She never washed her hands
Unless the doctors were able to cut it off at the pass, that is. When Mary admitted that she hardly ever washed her hands, the authorities sentenced Mary to a short quarantine on North Brother Island.
Forced quarantine
While in quarantine, Mary refused to have her gallbladder removed, even though it was probably the source of her typhoid. She also refused to stop working as a cook if and when she returned to the mainland. With that, Mary earned herself a very unflattering nickname.
-375w.jpg)
"Typhoid Mary"
To the public, she became known as “Typhoid Mary." Everyone was content to have her safely quarantined on North Brother Island, but Mary herself was miserable. She suffered from a nervous breakdown and complained that the doctors treated her like a “guinea pig."
-375w.jpg)
Mary in denial
All the while, Mary never believed that she was the reason all those people got sick. Despite this stubbornness, after two years on North Brother Island, the New York Commissioner of Health told Mary she could return to society on one condition.
-375w.jpg)
Return to society
He forced Mary to sign an affidavit promising that she would never work as a cook again. She agreed and returned to New York City, where she successfully faded into the crowd...until, a few years later, a group of hospital workers suddenly fell ill.
-375w.jpg)
Mysterious Irish cook returns
Various restaurants, hotels, and spas also reported outbreaks of typhoid. It didn’t take long for Soper to notice a common thread with each outbreak: an Irish cook, sometimes named Mary Brown or Mary Breshof, always left a string of illness in her wake.
.v1-375w.jpg)
Caught in the act
In 1915, Soper found Mary cooking for Sloane Hospital for Women, where 25 people were infected and 2 died of typhoid. With that, Mary was taken into custody and forced back to North Brother Island. This time, though, it was an extended stay.
-375w.jpg)
Lifelong quarantine
This extended stay ended up lasting Mary for the rest of her life. For 23 years, she lived alone in a cottage on North Brother Island, where she could cook all she wanted without hurting others. By the time she died in 1938, there were big changes on the mainland.
50 potential deaths
By then, other asymptomatic typhoid carriers had been identified, making Mary’s forced confinement the subject of controversy to this day. Some estimate that Mary may have caused — whether intentionally or not — 50 deaths. And to think, it all started with a bowl of ice cream...
_-_Flickr.jpg){kind=link}
No comments: