|    The mentality 
              of unmarried mothers and their children was considered a significant 
              social problem, as well as a particular risk in adoption, during 
              the first several decades of the twentieth century. Influenced by 
              eugenics, many Americans suspected 
              that unmarried mothers were either morally delinquent or mentally 
              deficient. They endorsed policies, such as institutionalization 
              and sterilization, designed to control reproductive behavior. Mental 
              testers and developmentalists were among those who believed that 
              science offered solutions to social problems. They probed the intelligence, 
              age, occupation, education, family background, and even the leisure 
              activities of unmarried mothers. Such studies were often linked 
              to nature-nurture research 
              as well as to the urgent question of illegitimacy. 
              As this excerpt by a Minnesota state psychologist suggests, professionals 
              worried about the public costs of female-headed families and about 
              their ominous reproductive potential long before they agreed that 
              adoption might be a positive option for either unmarried mothers 
              or their children. 
            The Research Bureau of the State Board of Control of Minnesota 
              last year conducted a psychological study of a group of unmarried 
              mothers. . . . 
            Eighty-two of the unmarried mothers, or 23,84 per cent, had I.Q.’s 
              under 75—that is, would be classified as feebleminded. This 
              percentage is 4.6 times as large as the corresponding percentage 
              among the school children, of whom only 5.18 per cent had I.Q.’s 
              under 75. The percentage of border-line cases (I.Q.’s 75-84) 
              is 2.09 times as large among the unmarried mothers as among the 
              school children–24.42 per cent as compared with 11.65 per 
              cent. On the other hand, the percentage of dull cases (I.Q.’s 
              85-94) is only 0.8 times as large among the unmarried mothers as 
              in the school children; the average (I.Q.’s 95-104) 0.5 times 
              as large; the bright (I.Q.’s 105-114) 0.3 times as large; 
              and the very bright (I.Q.’s 115-124) 0.6 times as large. The 
              percentage of superior cases (I.Q.’s over 125) is 1.25 times 
              as large among the unmarried mothers, but the group is so small 
              that this figure is probably not significant. . . . 
            AGE 
             The median age of the entire group was twenty years, and the age 
              having the greatest number of cases was eighteen. Seventeen and 
              seven-tenths per cent were less than eighteen years old, and 55.2 
              per cent were less than twenty-one years. Relating this to the intelligence, 
              we find that the younger they are, the brighter they are, as shown 
              in the following summary: 
             From 15 to 19 years average I.Q. is 92.0 
              From 20 to 24 years average I.Q. is 90.5 
              From 25 to 29 years average I.Q. is 85.2 
              From 30 to 34 years average I.Q. is 74.0 
              35 and over average I.Q. is 63.6 
             Interpreting these figures, we made the deduction that many of 
              the brighter girls are delinquent because of the impulsiveness or 
              emotional instability of youth, and need only the sobering effect 
              of years to solve their problems. If this is so, does it not seem 
              that the ideal social work would be to get in touch with these girls 
              before they became delinquent? The facts seem to show also that 
              so far as learning from age is concerned, the feebleminded remain 
              forever young and therefore in constant need of supervision and 
              protection. . . . 
            The burden to the state.—In 1924 there were 1,065 
              illegitimate births reported in Minnesota. About 50 per cent of 
              all illegitimate children reported are supported by the state for 
              at least four years. According to these facts, there are about 500 
              of these children added each year. This makes a constant number 
              of about 2,000 who are being supported continually by the state. 
              Computing from the five-dollar-a-week-board basis, which is a very 
              rough computation, the state is paying half a million dollars every 
              year for the support of these illegitimate children. And this does 
              not tell half the tale. In the first place, a great many births 
              are not reported to the state, but later these ldren become dependents. 
              Secondly, a large number of those who are dependent the first four 
              years of their lives are not adoptive and remain charges all their 
              lives in one institution or another. It seems that it would be more 
              economical for the state, first, to support more club houses and 
              neighborhood houses where girls would be housed better, entertained 
              better, and supervised better; second, to employ more social workers 
              and visiting teaching; and third, to spend more money for the detection 
              and care of the feebleminded. 
            RECOMMENDATIONS 
             First, that every unmarried mother be given a mental test as the 
              first step in the effort to understand her as an individual. 
             Second, that the ones found to be feebleminded be prevented, if 
              possible, either by segregation, close supervision, or sterilization, 
              from having any more children. 
            Third, that more ways and means be provided for reaching young 
              girls before they have become delinquent. 
            Fourth, that the county superintendents, the social workers, and 
              the churches of the small towns and country districts watch our 
              for their girls leaving school to see what they do and where they 
              go. 
            Fifth, that the churches, social workers, and teachers do not overlook 
              the girls who are living at home, as they are just as apt to become 
              delinquent as the girls who have left home. 
             |