American Studies 251/Human Development 540:

Children and Families in the United States

 

Professor Emily D. Cahan

Wheelock College, fall, 2002, Tuesdays 4:00 – 6:30

Longwood 12; Ext. 2166

e-mail: ecahan@wheelock.edu

Home phone:  781-648-3261  (9:00 A.M. – 9:00 P.M. only, thank you.)

Office Hours: By appointment.

 

Purpose and Introduction 

 

This course is an introduction to the ways in which Americans have thought about children, families, and government  – how children should be raised to be good citizens, protected from harm’s way, punished for wrongdoings, helped if troubled, cared for if otherwise left alone, protected from abuse, and in other ways served (sometimes well, sometimes not-so-well) by the practices of adults and public policies.   This course examines the history of expertise about children in American history.  Who were the experts in child-rearing in earlier times and what did they think?  Who are they now?  Numerous institutions such as orphan asylums, orphan trains, Child Guidance Clinics, the Juvenile Court, and Head Start have emerged to serve children’s interests.  We will read, think, discuss, and write about the strengths and weaknesses of these and other institutions.  An examination of the past always brings to light our values in the present moment.  In that sense, this course is about the present as much as it is about the past. We will read, talk, and write about how adults have defined and redefined what’s “good” for children.  What are children’s “best interests” and how do we know?  We will look at the slow but steady growth in the role of government in children’s lives by looking at the changing relationships over time between children, families, and government, mindful of variations in class, race, and gender.

 

A FEW OBJECTIVES OF THE COURSE. At the end of the course, students should be able to:

 

·        Learning to analyze and critically evaluate ideas, arguments, and different perspectives.

·        Identify, describe and critically evaluate some of the major trends and themes in the history of children, families and public policy in  U.S. history.

·        Write an analytical paper using both primary and secondary sources that balances evidence with historical argument.

·        Read more incisively and with more purpose.

·        Speak in an articulate manner about history and children.

·        Appreciate and understand the differences between primary sources and secondary sources as different kinds of evidence for historical analysis.

·        Appreciate the roles that social class, gender, and race have played in the delivery of professional services for children and families. 

 

Class Formats: 

 

     The principle methods of instruction are informal lectures, group discussions, in and out of class exercises, and presentation and discussion of a few videotapes. An additional source for your instruction will emerge from your written assignments and the feedback you receive from both the instructor.  Our work and our enjoyment of this class depends upon many factors, the most important of which is the creation and maintenance of a trusting and non-threatening environment in which all students participate with the confidence that their views will be respected by all other students.  Some of the material we will read may evoke strong reactions; you need to contain your passion with reason and consideration for others.  Speaking out of turn, interrupting others, and other indications of inconsiderate treatment of fellow students will not be tolerated. 

 

     The instructor expects that all written work will represent the best possible writing from each student and will be conducted with thoroughness, care, commitment and in full compliance with the Wheelock College Honor Code of Academic Honesty as described in the Student Handbook. Plagiarism is a serious offense.  To plagiarize is to steal the work of others and present it as your own.  Plagiarism can involve direct quotes but also includes use of someone’s ideas without attributing credit.  You must cite quotations as well as close paraphrasing of the work of others. 

 

A Few Words About History

     One can  argue that historical understanding is achieved through evidence, interpretation, and ultimately a kind of empathy.  Just as you must sometimes adjust your own perspective in order to understand a young child’s point of view so must you “decenter” (Piaget) from your own point of view in understanding others so  you must “decenter” from the present moment in order to appreciate the past and its meanings. In reading, thinking, and speaking about history, you must ask yourself “why did these people in the past think and do what they did?  What did they think they were doing?  What were the consequences – intended and unintended?”  And THEN you may exercise your own critical analysis of the events of the past and any interpretations of that past that you might have.  Just like every other academic discipline, history relies on evidence and interpretation to construct claims of truth.  Ultimately, we learn about ourselves and how we came to be who we are when we look back to our predecessors. You will learn about both the professional traditions of the human services and the ideologies that supported professions and practices with children and families.

 

You do many things when you read or write about history. You learn about what happened in the past as well as how other people have written about the past.  History IS NOT  a dry chronology of events (though dates are often important and chronologies are sometimes useful).  The “records” or “facts” of the past are first found in all sorts of primary documents – letters, diaries, clinical records, congressional testimony, the words and deeds of people from the past, and any other source that informs you directly (without the mediation of an interpretation) about the past.  In the historian’s hands, that past is interpreted – made meaningful in any one of several ways.  You will do the same thing as professional historians do when they write using evidence from primary sources in order to tell a story about who, what, when, where, and why.

 

Please note:  For every class, I have provided a short forecast of the readings and a list of questions.  These questions serve three purposes:  1) to raise particular important issues to help guide you through the reading; 2) to provide questions to which you may address your Reaction Papers, and, 3) to provide springboards for our class discussions. 

 

 

COURSE REQUIREMENTS.

 

     Specific requirements for this course include:

 

1) Reading.  You are required to prepare, in a serious and thoughtful manner, for every class by completing the required reading and being ready to respond to it in class.  In order to transform learning into an interactive process, all students must do the required readings prior to each class.  Recommended readings are listed so that interested students may explore the topic in more depth and detail.  Note that we will read a combination of primary texts (original sources that historians then interpret) and secondary sources (historical interpretations). This course is an opportunity to hone your skills in active reading – reading with a purpose that will help you to read some readings very carefully and skim other some other readings.

      I strongly encourage you to work with a classmate or two outside of class to talk about the readings. Keep in mind:  learning is a collaborative experience!  You learn best by teaching each other!  These collaborations may include on-line discussions of course materials (stay tuned).

 

2.)  Writing assignments: All writing assignments are to be completed in a timely fashion.

 

     1. Reponse Essays. All students will submit a total of five  Reponse Essays distributed across the semester. You may choose whatever specific topics you wish to write about from within the range of the course material.   The questions posed for each class suggests some conceptual structure to your papers. 

     What is a Response Essay?  These 5-6 page essays are intended to help you understand and think about what you have read and what we discuss.  They should describe key ideas from the assigned readings, address at least some of the questions posed on the syllabus, and raise issues for further discussion.  The key to writing these essays is to combine summary with evaluation or judgment.   In order to do so, you must write with historical perspective. i.e. a perspective that places your topic in its historical context.  For example, Puritan child-rearing practices will likely strike you as being harsh, even cruel or abusive to children from your present point of view.  But in their own times, these practices made sense in the culture of Puritan New England.  Be very careful, or at least conscious of the possibility that you may be projecting your own values onto the values held in past times.  In doing, you are not responding with true historical perspective. 

     In these essays you will present evidence from the readings to build arguments that support your conclusions. You may also comment on anything in the readings that struck you as especially interesting, odd, confusing, provocative, offensive, wise, shortsighted, or otherwise notable.   If you do so, explain why you found what you’re discussing as interesting, offensive, etc.

     In terms of content, the Response Papers may take one of several forms within the basic format of an essay. You might want to respond to some suggested questions that I pose for each class; you might agree or disagree with the argument presented in your readings and discuss why you agree or disagree; you might draw out of certain implications of a given argument, ideology, or social policy; you may write a letter to the editor of your newspaper on a policy-related matter related to our reading.   While some summarizing is necessary to structure your paper, these essays must balance summary with reflection, judgment, and evaluation. You might want to conclude your essay by asking yourself “How did this reading change the way I think about a particular aspect of childhood?  What new issues did the readings raise that I have never before considered?”  When appropriate, you may include reflections on your own experiences as they relate to the historical issues we are studying.

 

Your written work will be evaluated along several dimensions or standards: 1) All papers should show a coherent  balance between evidence, interpretation, and judgment. 2)   All papers must be written in a manner consistent with the style and mechanics of standard, formal English.  3)  All papers must use relevant quotations or close paraphrasing from the readings to support your argument. 4) All papers must contain citations to those readings that you quote. 5)  References to the works quoted are to be listed either at the end of the paper or on a separate page.  4) All papers must be turned in on time.  

 

 

     2.  Final Exam.  The exam will be in two parts.  You will be given some identifications or short answer questions. The second part of the exam will be in essay format.  You will be given a choice of essays.  These questions will be designed to test your understanding of larger themes or course material by making connections and comparisons across readings and perhaps across time periods.  Major themes may include:  the importance of mothers; the emergence of a federal investment in child welfare; historical changes in child-rearing advice; adoption; juvenile justice; child guidance, etc. 

 

FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS ONLY: Your final paper (10-15) pages) will be an extension of one of your Response Essays.  This paper is an extension, in length and depth of one of your shorter papers.  For this final paper, you are required to use sources outside of the required readings (e.g. consult some of the recommended reading or do some library research on your topic).    Due:  December 9.

 

 

 

3) Attendance. Attendance is critical to your own success and enjoyment of the course.  You are required to attend all class meetings. In the event of illness, family crisis, etc. that requires you to miss class, please inform the instructor as soon as you can in advance and in writing about your absence. A student who misses a class must take the responsibility to check with other students for any special announcements that might have been made during the class missed. No student may miss more than three class meetings during the semester and receive full credit in this course.

 

 

4) Participation.  As mentioned above, active participation is the key to true and even joyful learning.  We all must try to create an environment in which everyone will feel comfortable sharing ideas, comments about the readings, questions, doubts, confusing issues, explanations and insights. Such an atmosphere is necessary to create a true learning community.    In addition, students are encouraged to look out for and bring to our attention a newspaper or magazine article, a report of a television news story or program or any other media coverage of  issues related to children, families, and the government. 

 

Grading: The evaluation of each student will be based on active, meaningful, and sincere participation in class discussion and on the quality of the written assignments. Your papers will be graded on the basis of both content and mechanics as well as the quality of your evidence and argumentation.  You are all encouraged to take advantage of the many resources at Wheelock designed to support your writing.  Specifically, your grades will be determined by:

 

Response Papers:  40%

Preparation for and Participation in class: 40%

Final Exam:  20%

 

    

DISABILITY SUPPORT SERVICES

 

   Students with disabilities needing academic accommodations should notify the instructor as soon as possible. Students are also encouraged to

contact the Coordinator of Disability Services (ext. 2304). To receive academic accommodations at Wheelock College students must be registered with the Disability Services Office. The Coordinator of Disability Services can assist any student in the process of determining appropriate accommodations.

 

 

TEXTBOOKS

 

   Books are available at the Harvard Medical Coop (333 Longwood Avenue, Boston, across the street from the Children’s Hospital (phone: (617) 499-3300). 

 

Required:

Muncy, R. (1991)  Creating a female dominion in American reform, 1890-  1935.   New York: Oxford Univ. Press.  ISBN 0195057023

 

Recommended:

Coontz, S. (1992/2000)The Way We Never Were. New York: Basic Books.

 

Jones, Kathleen (1999)  Taming the troublesome child: American families, child guidance, and the limits of psychiatric authority.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0674868110

 

In addition to the texts cited above, a Reading Packet will be made available for purchase from the instructor.


Schedule of Classes, Readings, and Written Assignments

 

 

Tuesday, September 9. Introduction to Course, Class, and Classmates.

 

The history of children and families is a new and thriving field of study.   Just two years ago, a new scholarly group, the Society for the History of Children and Youth was founded.  The articles listed below provides you with an introduction to how and why one studies both history and the history of children and families by pioneers in the field.  The Lerner piece is an extremely thoughtful commentary on the value of understanding history in shaping our own identities.

 

Recommended:

 

Ariés, P. (1962)  Centuries of Childhood: A social history of family life.  New York: Vintage Books, pp. 33-38.

 

Demos, J. (1986)  Past, Present, and Personal: The family and the life course in American history. New York: Oxford. Chapter 1:  Digging up family history: Myths, Realities, and Works-in progress. 

 

Lerner, G.  (1997) “Why history matters.” In History Matters.  New York: Oxford University Press., pp. 199-211.

 

In class exercise:  Where do we see the presence of local, state, and federal government in the lives of children today?

 

Tuesday, September 16.  Children, Families, and Community in a Young Nation.

 

Family life in Colonial America differed in profound ways from family life in contemporary America.  Rules for behaving and roles for boys, girls, fathers, and mothers were very different.  Families and communities were governed by Puritan law that was, in turn, shaped by a strict reading of religious (Protestant) teachings.  Many of the beliefs and practices of the Puritans with regard to children strike us now as harsh, even cruel and their expectations of children seem unrealistic.  However, a true understanding of Puritan practices and beliefs demands that we understanding not just what they thought and practiced but WHY and HOW their beliefs shaped their practices.  This kind of insight crucial to what we call “historical perspective.” 

 

 

Questions: How would your life have been different if you lived in the Colonial period?  Why?  What was the role of fathers, mothers and the community in caring for the child?  Whose responsibility was the child?  What did “family privacy” mean to the Puritans?

 

 

Demos, J. (1973)  Infancy and Childhood in the Plymouth Colony.  In Gordon, M. (Ed.) The American Family in Social/Historical Pespectives..  New York: St. Martins, 180-191. 

 

Bremner. R. (ed.) (1970)  Selections from Children in the Colonial Family.  In Children and Youth in America: A Documentary History, Vol. I, Pp. 27-29; 32-39; 49- 54.   You may skim most of these selections, but do please read carefully the following:

     32 (begin with “Honor Thy Father…” – 34 (stop at Section 4)

     36 (begin with “The Trouble with the Younger Generation” – 38 (stop at section 3).

     39 (section 1, Legislation… - 40 (stop at section 2).

 

Webpage:  Digital History.  This is a wonderful site and contains many links to images, stories, and essays on the history of children and families.

Go directly to: Voices of children at: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/do_history/young_people/index.cfm;.  In the section on “voices of children before 1860” read through the selections on  Puritan Childrearing.  Bring a selection or two to class for discussion.

 

If you can’t go directly to this link, start with the general website for Digital History (see above) and follow links. Go to:  http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu. Follow the link to “Doing History Through” kids and teens; find link to “voices of children before 1860.”  Read through the Puritan selections and bring one or two to class.   Feel free to explore.

 

 

Recommended:

Demos, J. (1970) A little commonwealth: Family life in Plymouth Colony.  New York: Oxford University Press.  Foreword,  vii-xvii, Part Three: Themes of individual development, 100-105, 127-178; Conclusion, 179-190.

Morgan, E. (1944/1966) The puritan family: Religion and domestic relations in seventeenth-century New England.  New York: Harper and Row. Chapter 3, Parents and children, pp. 65-86; Chapter 6, The family in the social order, pp. 133-160.

Morgan, E. (1973)  The Puritans and Sex.  In Gordon (ed.), op. Cit.

Scott, D. and Wishy, B. (Eds.(1982)  America's Families: A documentary history.  Selections:  pp. 132-163.

 

 

Tuesday, September 23:  The Ascent of Mothers and Morality

In the latter half of the 19th century,  Horace Bushnell (1847-1861) sought to soften the harsh Puritan view of children and  by questioning and altering some basic assumptions about children’s nature.    The nineteenth century was one of tremendous change socially and economically.  People began to move from rural farms to new urban cities as factory industrialization began to replace home manufacturing of goods.  Fathers left the homestead to work in these new jobs that were often some distance from home.  Mothers stayed behind and cared for the children.  This “separation of spheres”  (so-called by the historian Nancy Cott) set the stage for establishing important and long-lasting themes in the way we think about mothers and children.  The distance we have moved since from this 19th century  “ideology of domesticity” is a matter of debate. 

     Nearing the end of the 19th century, many of the new and exciting cities were marked by the deepest divisions in social class ever seen in American history.  The gap between rich and poor was immense.  The photo journalist Jacob Riis helped to awaken America’s social conscience with his moving photographic portrayals of poor children and families in New York City. 

 

Questions:    How did the role of mothers change in the U.S. between the 17th Century and the Nineteenth Century?  What social and economic forces coincided with these changes? How did these changes affect the way people thought about child-rearing responsibility?  What did it mean for mothers to become the “moral center” of the family? 

             

Bushnell, H. (1847-1861)  Chapter 10: On Christian Nurture.  In P. Greven Jr. (ed.)  (1973) Child-rearing concepts, 1628-1861.  Ithaca, Illinois: F. E. Peacock Publishers, 137-181. You may skim parts of this reading.  Become familiar enough with the chapter as to be able to summarize it.

 

Sunley, R. (1974)  Early Nineteenth Century American Literature on Child Rearing.  In  Mead, M. and Wolfenstein, Childhood in Contemporary Culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 150-167. 

 

Welter, B. (1966)  The Cult of True Womanhood: 1820-1860. American Quarterly, vol. 18, issue 2, Part I (Summer), 151-174.  Read especially carefully.

 

In class video:  Scenes from “New York: A documentary history.”  American Experience Series, Public Broadcasting Network.

 

Recommended:

Bloch, R. (1978)  American Feminine Ideals in Transition: The Rise of the Moral Mother, 1785-1815.  Feminist Studies, vol. 4.  101-126.

Cott, N. (1977) The bonds of womanhood.  Chapter 2: Domesticity , pp. 63-100;  Recommended: Chapter 3: Education, pp.  101-125.

In Scott and Wishy (Eds.) Selections from  America's families: A documentary history.

From farms to factories, pp. 213-221

Wives and Husbands, 246-270

Home and Mother, 270-289

Child-rearing: The mission so sacred. pp. 290-308.

 

 

Tuesday, September 30. Early “Child Saving”:  The Orphan     Train Movement

 

Due: Response Paper 1

 

Conceived by Charles Loring Brace, leader of the new Charity Organization Society in New York, the orphan train movement was a great progressive response to the problems facing poor, urban children in New York.  In theory, the orphan trains “rescued” destitute city children and placed them in rural Midwest homes where they were surrounded by nature and protected from the evils of the city.  The reality was somewhat more complex.

 

Questions: What was the nature and purpose of the Orphan Train Movement?  To what social problem(s) was the Orphan Train project directed?   Who rode the trains?  What were some of the outcomes of the project?  In what ways did the Orphan Train Movement serve children well and in what ways did it serve children poorly?   What do we do now with the kinds of poor children served by the Orphan Trains?  What contemporary social programs still reflect the spirit of the Orphan Trains? 

 

 

Brace, C.L. (1872) Selections from  The dangerous classes of New York and Twenty Years’ work among them.  New York: Wynkoop & Hallenbeck. 

     Chapter IX:  Homeless Boys, 97-113

Chapter X:  Street Girls, 114-122

Chapter XX:  Providing Country Homes --  234-245.

 

Cook, J. (1995)  A History of Placing-out: The Orphan Trains.  Child Welfare, 181-193.  Reprint.

 

Hasci, T. (1995)  From Indenture to Family Foster Care: A brief history of Child Placing.  Child Welfare, 162-179.

 

 

Web assignment.  Go to the Adoption History Project site: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adoption/.  Follow the links to Orphan Trains:  Click on Time line, then click 1854, and then Orphan Trains.  Read some of the letters, choose a couple that interest you, and bring them to class.  This is a fantastic site for almost all things related to adoption – past and present.

 

In class video: The Orphan Trains

 

Recommended:

Antler, J. and Antler, S. (1979)  From child rescue to family protection: The evolution of the child protective movement in the United States.  Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 1, 177-204.

Finkelstein, B.  Casting networks of good influence: The reconstruction of childhood in the United States, 1790-1870.   In Hawes and Hiner,  111-135.  

Gordon, L. (1999)  The Great Arizona Orphan Abduction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

In Scott and Wishy (Eds.)   America's families: A documentary history,  Selections: Family, society, and state, pp. 379-387.

Smuts, A. (in press)  Chapter 1.  Introduction. In "Science disccovers the child, 1893-1935: A history of the early scientific study of children. New Haven: Yale University Press.  Available only from instructor. 

Smuts, A.  Chapter 2:  Save the child and you save the nation: The ideology of domesticity and the origins of social feminism. Available only from instructor. 

Zelizer, V. (1985)  Pricing the priceless child: The changing social value of children.  New York: Basic Books, Introduction: pp. 3-21; Chapter 4: From a Proper Burial to a Proper Education: The Case of Children’s Insurance, 113-137. 

 

 

Tuesday, October 7.  Child Study, Educated Mothers, and the Settlement House Movement

 

Towards the end of the 19th century, motherhood became a serious vocation.  The National Congress of Mothers represented Mother’s Clubs from around the nation and carried the message that mothers had to be educated in order to be “good” mothers.  Their education was to come in part from a first  science of childhood organized by G. Stanley Hall and known as the Child Study Movement.  The guiding idea – still with us today – of parent education is to use our scientific understanding of the child in order to create child rearing practices that will help to guarantee happy children and a civil society.  There were and remain  limits to this vision.

At the same time, all was not well in the new urban settings in which more and more children were living in dirty, urban streets and large numbers of European immigrants came to American cities.  Some socially conscious educated women were shocked by the new poverty and ignorance they saw and, in response began to find outlets for their concerns outside of the domestic sphere in the settlement house movement.  The chapter by Nasaw will introduce you to a variety of ideas and institutions associated with the movement to “save” children during the late 19th and early 20th centuries – a period known as the “Progressive” period when the child sciences began to contribute to the formation of  the welfare state.

 

Questions: What did “educated motherhood” mean?  Do mothers need the kind of “education” promoted by the National Congress of Mothers?  Do mothers need to know child science (developmental psychology)? Be familiar with at least a few of the institutions associated with “child saving.”

 

 

Rothman, S. (1978) Woman’s Proper Place: A history of changing ideals and practices, 1870 to the present.  New York: Basic Books.

Chapter 3: The Ideology of Educated Motherhood, 97-127.

 

National Congress of Mothers (1897, 1898, 1900) The Work and Words.  New York: Appleton.  Reprinted in Rothman, D. and Rothman, S. (eds.) (1987)National Congress of Mothers: The First Conventions. New York: Garland.  Selections:

National Congress of Mothers, 1897. First convention.  pp. 6-10, 165-171, 269-275.

National Congress of Mothers, 1898. Second convention, pp. 15-20.

National Congress of Mothers. 1899. Third convention, 195-201.

 

 

Wollons, R. (1990)  Women educating women: The Child Study Association as Women’s culture.  In Antler, J. and Biklen, S. (eds.)  Changing Education: Women as Radicals and Conservators.  New York: Suny.

 

Nasaw, D. (1985)  Chapter 10: The children and the child-savers.  In Children of the City: At work and at Play, pp. 138-157.  

 

Recommended:

Ashby, L. (1984)  Chapter 1: Dependent Children and “The Gospel of Child Saving” in the Progressive Era. . In Saving the Waifs: Reformers and Dependent Children, 1890-1917.   Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 3-37. 

 

Kuhn, A. (1947)  The mother’s role in childhood education: New England concepts, 1830-1860.  New Haven: Yale University Press.

Diehl, L. (1991)  Theodate Smith and Amy Tanner: Child savers of Clark University.  The Journal of Genetic Psychology, vol. 152, no. 3, 273-287

Schlossman, S. (1976) Before Home Start: Notes towards a history of Parent Education in America, 1870-1929.  Harvard Educational Review, vol. 46, no. 3,  436-467.

Schlossman, S. (1981)  Philanthropy and the Gospel of Child Development.  History of Education Quarterly., vol. 21, no. 3, 275-299. 

 

Tuesday October 14.  The Rise of a Female Dominion in Politics

 

Some of the leading and highly educated women associated with the settlement house movement sought political reform.  Their ambitions went beyond settlement work towards public policy.  This week, we begin to read a book about the creation of a “female dominion” in American politics.  This “female dominion” would lobby and eventually help to create the first government agency, the Children’s Bureau, centered on the concerns of mothers and children.  The struggle to create the Bureau was contentious, the work of the Bureau was well intended but ultimately flawed in many ways, and the fate of the Bureau is, in part,  a lesson in the power of patriarchy. 

     It is easy to feel overwhelmed by the number of names mentioned in this book.  Try to focus on the main characters that include:  Jane Addams, Ellen Starr, Julia Lathrop, Lilian Wald, and Florence Kelley.

 

Questions:  What are the Origins of the Children’s Bureau?  What were the arguments for and against establishing the Bureau. What did boll weevils have to do with the campaign for the Bureau? What were the goals of the Bureau and how did its staff attempt to reach those goals?   What does Muncy mean by the term “a female dominion?”

What is your impression of the letters (in Ladd-Taylor) written to the women of the Children’s Bureau?  Select one or two letters that moved you in some special way and think about why those letters did so.  Why did these women write to strangers for help?  What kind of information to today’s mothers seek?  From whom?

 

Required:

 

Muncy, R. (1991)  Creating a female dominion in American reform, 1890-1935.    

Introductlon

Chapter 1: Origins of the Dominion: Hull House, 1890-1910

Chapter 2: A Dominion Materializes: The Children’s Bureau, 1903-1917.

 

Bremner selections. Bremner. R. (ed.) (1970)  Selections from Children in the Colonial Family.  In Children and Youth in America: A Documentary History, Vol. II, Parts 1-6.  I: The Children’s Bureau, pp. 751-775.  This reading contains actual congressional debates on the Children’s Bureau.  It should help you to consolidate the arguments made in favor of and against establishing the Children’s Bureau.

 

Ladd-Taylor, M. (1986) Selections from Raising a baby the government way: Mothers' letters to the Children's Bureau, 1915-1932.  New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. ix-x; 47-57; 61-69; 71-94; 99-108; 115-126; 127-141; 147-161.  This may look like a long reading but it goes very quickly.  

 

 

In class video: The Women of Hull House.

 

 

Recommended:

Knight, L. (1996)  Jane Addams and the Settlement House Movement.  New York: Greenwood.

Phillips, J. (1974)  The Education of Jane Addams.  History of Education Quarterly, vol. 14, issue 1, 49-67.

 

 

Tuesday, October 21 :   The Rise and Fall of a Female Dominion. This is a long reading assignment.  Once again, try not to get bogged down in names.  Read quickly and for meaning. 

 

Questions: Who staffed the Bureau and what were their backgrounds? How would you characterize the greatest achievements the Bureau made?  The worst blunders?  What happened such that the Bureau eventually lost its power and status in the federal government?  What lessons do you draw for today from the rise and fall of the Children’s Bureau?  Should we bring the Bureau back into the front stage of children’s politics?  What would it look like?

 

 

Muncy, R. (1991)  Creating a female dominion in American reform, 1890-1935. 

      

Chapter 3: Staffing the Dominion: The School of Social Service Administration, 1903-1930.

Chapter 4: Consolidation and Expansion of the Dominion: The Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Act, 1918-1924.

Chapter 5: Contraction and Dissolution of the Female Dominion: Federal Child Welfare Policy, 1924-1935.

Conclusion.

 

 

In class debate: As you know by now in 1912, in and amongst much debate,  the Children’s Bureau received from Congress a broad mandate to “investigate and report upon all matters pertaining to the welfare of children and child life among all classes of our people.”

 

In groups to be determined in class, you will prepare an in class debate on the Children’s Bureau.  Use evidence for your arguments from the readings. Review the arguments about the Bureau from last week from Bremner. Read Muncy carefully in order to capture the debate between those who argued for the formation of the Bureau and those who argued against forming the Bureau. The Bremner selections will provide good evidence for both sides of the debate. 

          1) In class: 20 minute preparation for both groups.

2) Each group will present their evidence and argument for 10 minutes. Make sure that everyone in your group has an opportunity to contribute.  (total 20 minutes)

          3) 10 minute preparation of rebuttal arguments.

          4. Each group rebuts (argues against opponents’ arguments) for 5 minutes.  (total: 10 minutes)

          5) Class discussion.  A chance to talk about the quality and power of argumentation on both “sides.”  What arguments most persuaded you one way or the other.

 

In assigning “parts” to your peers, you may choose to “play” particular historical actors who either promoted or tried to defeat the creation of the Children’s Bureau.  For example, a student may play the part of someone from the Bremner documentary history.

 

Recommended:

Addams, J. (1910/1962)  Twenty Years at Hull-House.  Selections in Pease, (ed.) The Progressive Years: The Spirit and Achievement of American Reform.New York: Brazillier, 58-97.

Ladd-Taylor, M. (1991)  Hull House Goes to Washington: Women and the Children’s Bureau.  In Frankel, N. and Dye, N. (eds.)  Gender, class, race and reform in the Progressive era. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. 110-126.

Zigler, E. and Muenchow, S. (1985)  A room of their own: A proposal to renovate the Children's Bureau.  American Psychologist, 40, No. 8, 953-959.

 

Tuesday, October 28.  The Juvenile Court.

 

Due: Response Paper 2

 

The juvenile court was one of many progressive innovations made during the Progressive Era.  The premise on which the juvenile court rested was that children under a particular age should not be held accountable for crimes committed in the same manner or degree to which adult offenders are held.   At the same time, there was a class of crimes associated with juveniles.  An interesting set of issues surrounds the definition of juvenile offenses – what got girls and boys into trouble?  How different now… or not?

 

 

Questions:  What was so special about Judge Ben Lindsey?  How did he differ from his predecessors in his approach to juvenile crime? According to Schlossman and Wallach, how was juvenile delinquency defined differently for boys and girls during the Progressive era.  How did the “punishments” for juvenile crimes differ for boys and girls.  How were ideas about eugenics and  “race suicide”  reflected in the practices of female sexual delinquents?

 

 

Levine, M. and Levine, S. (1992)  Helping Children: A Social History. New York: Oxford University Press.  Chapter 8: Judge Ben Lindsey and the Denver Juvenile Court: An Institution of Human Relations, 115-141.

 

Schlossman, S. and Wallach, S. (1978)  The crime of precocious sexuality: Female juvenile delinquency in the Progressive Era.  Harvard Educational Review, vol. 48, no. 1.

 

Odem, M. and Schlossman, S. (1991)  Guardians of virtue: The juvenile court and female delinquency in early 20th century Los Angeles.  Crime and Delinquency, vol. 37, no. 2. April, 186-203.

 

Bremner, R. (ed.) (1971)  Children and Youth in America: A documentary history. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Vol II: 1866-1932, Parts one through Six, pp. 502-523. 

 

 

Recommended:

Addams, J. (1912)   Jane Addams Addams Indicts and Ancient Evil.  In Hofstadter, R. (ed.) (1963)  The Progressive Movement, 1900-1915.  Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.  87-92. (repeats)

Bremner, Section on Juvenile Delinquence, vol. II, parts 1-6.

Schlossman, S. (1977)  Love and the American Delinquent: The Theory and Practice of “Progressive” Juvenile Justice, 1825-1920. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Schlossman, S. (in progress)  In the Voices of Delinquents: Social Science, The Chicago Area Project, and a Children’s Culture of Casual Crime and Violence.  To appear in Grant, J., Cahan, E. and Beatty, B. (Eds.) Science in Service of the Child: Education, Child Welfare, and Parenting in Twentieth-Century America,

 

 

Tuesday, November 4. Troublesome Children.

In the 1920s and 1930s, Child guidance clinics sponsored by philanthropy to support the work of the juvenile court.   Over time, the population served and the kinds of services provided by the Clinics changed dramatically. 

 

 

Questions:   How did Child Guidance change from its early days in the 1920s to its later days a decade later?  What was the role of gender, social class, and race in the kinds of services offered to children and mothers?  What were the different roles of the psychiatrist, psychologist, and social worker at the clinic? Where are the child guiders today?  Did parents (or children) always accept the guidance offered?   How does the “mother blaming” of the clinics reflect  the 19th century ideology of domesticity.

 

Levine, M. and Levine, S. (1992)  Helping Children: A Social History. New York: Oxford University Press.  Chapter 9: The Child Guidance Clinic: A Product of the 1920s., 142-173.

 

Horn, M. (1993 ) Inventing the problem child: “At Risk” Children in the Child Guidance movement in the 1920s and 1930s.  In Wollons, R. (ed.) Children at Risk in America: History, Concepts, and Public Policy. Albany: S.U.N.Y. 

 

Jones, K. (1998) “Mother made me do it”: Mother-blaming and the Women of Child Guidance.” In  Ladd-Taylor and Umansky (eds.) “Bad” Mothers: The politics of blame in the twentieth century. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 99-124.

 

Caplan, P. (1998)  Mother-Blaming.  In Ladd-Taylor, M. and Umansky, L. (eds.) “Bad” Mothers: The Politics of Blame in twentieth century America. New York: New York University Press, 127-144. 

 

In class video:  Refrigerator Mothers

 

 

 

Tuesday, November 11:  Holiday. 

 

Tuesday, November 18: Woe to the Parents Who Turn to the Experts. 

 

Due: Response Paper 3

 

American parents (especially mothers) have, over the course of the 20th century been advised on all matters related to childrearing.  Throughout the 20th century, books on child rearing advice literature flooded libraries and book stores  with contradictory messages.  Such is the conclusion of Hurlbert in her recent and widely reviewed book Raising America.  We can only sample this plethora of advice and wonder about what it all means. What kinds of concerns underlie the vastly different kinds of child rearing advice?

 

 

Field assignment:  Ask your parents or, even better, your grandparents if they consulted any books about child rearing when they were raising their children.   Who did they ask when they weren’t sure what to do with a child?   Relatives may be an important source. If they turned to professional advice (Dr. Spock or other child rearing literature, advice from a doctor, etc.), how did they use the advice?  How did they know what to “use” and what not to “use’? 

 

Questions: How does Spock differ from Watson? However offensive some of the advice literature may appear to you, you need to imagine a social context in which some of the older advice made sense. The Harris article should help you with this historical context. 

 

Three Classics on Child Rearing.  In Scott and Wishy (Eds.) (1982)  America's families: A documentary history,¨New York: Harper and Row, 528-538. 

 

Watson, J. B. (1928)  Fears of Children and the Love of Mothers.  In Kessen, W. (ed.) The Child.  New York: Wiley.

 

Harris, B. (1984)  Chapter 6:  “Give me a dozen healthy infant…” John B. Watson’s popular advice on childrearing, women, and the family.  In Lewin, M. (ed.) In the shadow of the past: Pschology portrays the sexes.  New York: Columbia University Press,  126-154

 

Wessel, M., Singer, D. Warshaw, J,. Solnit, A., Coffin, W. S.  (1998)  The

Spock Legacy.  Yale Alumni Magazine. Summer, 32-39. 

 

Weiss, N. (1985)  Mother, the Invention of Necessity: Dr. Benjamin Spock’s Baby And Child Care.   In Hiner, R. and Hawes, J. Growing up in America, 282-303. 

 

 

 

In class video:  On Spock

 

 

Recommended:

Cahan, E.D. (1991) Science, practice, and gender roles in early American  child psychology.   In F. Kessel, M. Bornstein, and A. Sameroff (Eds.)  Contemporary constructions of the child: Essays in honor of William Kessen.  Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.. pp. 225-249. 

Geboy, M. (1981)  Who is listening to the experts?  The use of child care materials by parents.  Family Relations, vol. 30, no. 2, 205-210.

Grant, Julia (1994) Caught between common sense and science: The Cornell Child Study Clubs.  History of Education Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 433-452. 

Grant, J. (1998)  Raising Baby by the Book: The Education of American Mothers. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hawes, J. (2000) Child Science and the Rise of the Experts.  In Fass, P. and Mason, A. Childhood in America, 61-63.

Mechling, J. (1975) Advice to historians on advice to mothers.  Social History, vol. 9, #11, 44-63.

Schlossman, S. (1981)  Philanthropy and the Gospel of Child Development. In History of Education Quarterly, 21, pp.275-299.

Senn, M. (ed) (1977)  Chapter 2: Woe to the Parents Who Turn to the Experts.  In Speaking Out for America’s Children.  New Haven, Yale University Press.

Skinner, B. F. (1945)  Baby in a Box.  Ladies’ Home Journal,  October.

Zuckerman, M. (1975)  Dr. Spock: The confidence man.  In Rosenberg, Charles (Ed.)  The family in history,  179-207.

 

 

 

Tuesday, November 25. Creating Families:  The History of Adoption in America

We have already learned about some forms of adoption in America  -- in particular, child indenture and the orphan train program.  For this class, we will think more generally about the issues surrounding adoption – namely, how do we transform non-biologically related children into members of a family when our traditional notions of family depend upon biological relations?   What criteria should agencies use in determining an appropriate matches between parents and their adopted children?

 

For class: Bring an “adoption story” to class.  Talk to someone who adopted a child or was an adopted child.  Find out how and in what ways was/is the adopted child similar to or different from the adopting parent – race, ethnicity, temperament, etc.  How old was the child when adopted?  Did the parents have any special concerns?  How did the child feel about being adopted?  When and how was the child told of his/her adoption?  

 

 

Gill, Brian Paul. (2002) Adoption agencies and the search for the ideal family.  In Carp, E.W. (ed.)  Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 160-180.  

 

Berebitsky, J. (2002)  Rescue a child and save the nation: The social construction of adoption in the Delineator, 1907-1911. In Carp, E.W. (ed.)  Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 124-139.

 

Recommended:

Herman, E. (2001)  Families made by science: Arnold Gesell and the technologies of modern child adoption.  Isis, v. 92: 684-715.

 

    

Tuesday, December 2.  Science And Hope:  A Case Study in the Formation of Child and Family Policy

 

Due: Response Paper 4

 

Forecast: In 1965,  Head Start was created by the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) to provide preschool experiences for poor children.  It was a time when science and hope merged to form social policy for children and families. Zigler and Valentine provide some perspective from the “top down” – from the child development researchers and policy makers down to program specifics.  The Greenberg selections provide a “bottom-up” perspective from the people and politics of rural Alabama. The story of the group in Mississippi illustrates the  politically charged environment of Head Start in a poor, racist state

 

 

 

Questions:  What was/is the purpose of Head Start?  How did the social context surrounding Head Start affect its design?  How was Head Start related to the War on Poverty?

 

Zigler, E., & J. Valentine (Eds.) (1979).  “Head Start, A Retrospective View:  The Founders”.  Chapter 3  in Project Head Start:  A legacy of the War on Poverty (pp. 43-134).  New York:  The Free Press.  (BROWSE)

Greenberg, P.  (1990). Selections from The devil has slippery shoes:  A biased biography of the Child Development Group of Mississippi (CDGM): A story of maximum feasible poor parent participation   Washington, DC:  Youth Policy Institute.  (Original work published 1969).

White, S.H., Foreword.

Chapter I. The Challenging question, pp. 3-17.

Chapter 2: The Dream begins to move, pp. 18-22.

Chapter 3:  “The Funny-named” psychologist and the well-known communist, pp. 23-25. 

Chapter 4:  The last minute rush, pp. 29-33

Chapter 5: OED’s proud of its pet dragon, pp. 34-35.  From Dream to Dragon in Sixty-Eight Days.”

 

Video (in class):  The American Experience:  The War on Poverty and Headstart.  A powerful and important “text” on Headstart and the War on Poverty.

 

Recommended: 

Haskins, R. (1989)  Beyond metaphor: The efficacy of early childhood education. American Psychologist, 44, 274-282.

 Stipek, D., Valentine, J. and Zigler, E. (1979)  Project Head Start: A critique of theory and practice.  In Zigler, E. and Valentine, J.  (1979) Project Head Start: A legacy of the war on poverty.  , 477-494. 

White, S. H., & Phillips, D. W. (2001).  Designing Head Start: Roles played by developmental psychologists.  In Featherman, D. and Vinovskis, M. (eds.) Social science and policy-making.  Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 83-119.

Zigler, E.,  Styfco, S. and Gilman, E. (1993) (Eds.) Head Start and Beyond: A national plan for extended childhood intervention.  New Haven: Yale University Press. 

Zigler, E. and Styco, S. (1996)  Head Start and early childhood intervention: The changing course of social science and social policy.   In Zigler, E. Kagan, S., and Hall, N. (Eds.)  Children, families, and government: Preparing for the 21st century.  New York:  Cambridge Univ. Press, 132-155. 

 

 

Tuesday, December 9.   The Politics of Childhood. 

 

Forecast:  Children cannot advocate for themselves in national politics.  They depend upon the good will and decency of adults to take their best interests to heart and act accordingly.  The political movement among professionals and policy makers to support children’s interests is generally referred to as the “Children’s Cause.”  But children have always played a back seat to other, more powerful political constituencies.  The readings for this last class provide some perspective on why children are not a political priority in the U.S. as well as highlighting features of programs we know to work well.

 

 Why are government services for children so scattered?  Why is the  “Children’s Cause” so fragmented between different interest groups?  How would you fix it?  What priorities would you make in helping the nation’s children and how would you do it?  Does history matter? Can history help?

 

Demos, J. (1986)  History and the formation of social policy towards children: A case study.  In Past, Present, and Personal: The family and the life course in American history. New York: Oxford. 

 

Finkelstein, B. (1985)  Uncle Sam and the children: A history of government involvement in child rearing.  In Hiner, N. and Hawes, J. (Eds.)  Growing up in America, Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 255-268. 

 

Steiner, G. (1981)  Many causes with many votaries.  In The futility of family policy, 193-216.

 

Schorr, L. (1988)  The lessons of successful programs.  In Within our Reach:  Breaking the cycle of disadvantage.  256-283.

 

 

Recommended:

Cahan, E.D. (1997, Fall) On the uses of history for developmental psychologists or, On the social necessity of history.  Ann Arbor, Michigan: Society for Research in Child Development,  Newsletter, vol. 40, no. 3.

Levine, M. and Levine, A.  (1992)  Chapter 14: Social change and helping.  In Helping children: A social history, 242-246. 

Senn, M. (1977) Can scientific knowledge help frame our social policies for children?  In Speaking out for America's children,  99-120.

White, S.H. (in press) Developmental Psychology as a Science of Personal and Societal Design.  2001 Heinz  Werner Lectures.  Worcester: Clark University Press.

Steiner, G. (1981)  The European way?  In The futility of family policy.  177-192.

White, S.H. (1996)  The relationships of developmental psychology to social policy.  In Zigler, E., Kagan, S., and Hall, N. (Eds.) Children, families, and government: Preparing for the 21st century.  New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.  409-426. 

 

 

Due: Friday, December 12.  Response Paper 5 due in instructor’s mailbox or under door of Longwood 12.  Make sure your name and instructors’ name is on cover page.