The practice of putting caps on infants is happily going by; and perhaps it may be thought unnecessary for me to dwell a single moment on the subject. But as the practice still prevails in some parts of the country, it may be well to bestow upon it a few passing remarks.
Many mothers have not considered that the circulation of the blood in young infants is peculiarly active; that a large amount of blood is at that period carried to the head; that in consequence of this, the head is proportionably hotter than in adults; and that from this source arises the tendency of very young children to brain-fever, dropsy in the head, and other diseases of this part of the system. But these are most undoubted facts.
Hence one reason why the heads of infants should be kept as cool as possible; and though a thin cap confines less heat than a thick head of hair does when they are older, yet they are less able to bear it. The truth is, that nature furnishes a covering for the head, just about as fast as a covering is required, and the child's safety will permit.
At the present day, few persons will probably be found, who will defend the utility of caps, any longer than till the hair is grown. The general apology for their use after this period, and indeed in most instances before, is, that they look pretty. "What would people say to see my darling without a cap?"
But when the head is kept, from the first, totally uncovered, the hair grows more rapidly, dandruff and other scurfy diseases rarely attack the scalp; catarrh, snuffles, and other similar complaints, and above all, dropsy in the head, seldom show themselves; and the period of cutting teeth, that most dangerous period in the life of an infant, is passed over with much more safety.
"Nothing but custom," says a foreign writer, "can reconcile us to the cap, with all its lace and trumpery ornaments, on the beautiful head of a child; and I would ask any one to say candidly, whether he thinks the children in the pictures of Titian and Raffaelle would be improved by having their heads covered with caps, instead of the silken curls—the adornment of nature—which cluster round their smiling faces. If there were no other reason for disusing caps for infants, but the improvement which it produces in theappearanceof the child, I would maintain that this is a sufficient inducement." And I concur with him fully.
As to the notion—now I hope nearly exploded—that it is necessary to cover up the "open of the head," as it is called, nothing can be more idle. This part of the head requires no more covering than any other part; and if it did, all the dress in the world could not affect it in the least, except to retard the growth of the bones, which, in due time, ought to close up the space; and this effect, anything which keeps the head too hot might help to produce. Of the folly of wetting the head with spirits, or any other medicated lotions, and of making daily efforts to bring it into shape, it is unnecessary to speak in the present chapter.
The hats worn in this country are almost universally too warm. But if it is a great mistake in adults to wear thick, heavy hats, it is much more so in the case of children.
The infant in the nursery, as we have already seen, needs no covering of the kind. It is absolutely necessary that the head should be kept as cool as possible; and absolutely dangerous to cover it too warmly. At a later period, however, the danger greatly diminishes, because the circulation of the blood becomes more equal, and does not tend so much towards the brain.
Still, however, the head is hotter than the limbs, especially the hands and feet; and I cannot help thinking that the hair is the only covering which is perfectly safe, either in childhood or age; except in the sunshine or in the storm. There may be—there probably is—some danger in going without hat or bonnet in the hot sun; though I have known many children, and some grown persons, who were constantly exposed in this way, and yet appeared not to suffer from it.
But this may be the proper place to state that we are ever in great danger of deceiving ourselves on this subject. If the individuals who follow practices usually regarded as pernicious, while their habits in other respects are just like those of other persons around them who have similar strength, &c. of constitution,—if these individuals, I say, were wholly to escape disease, through life, or if they were to be so much more free from it, and live to an age so much greater than others as to constitute a striking and obvious difference in their favor, we might then safely argue that the practices which they follow are at least without dangers, if not of obvious advantage. But when we see them beset with ills, like other people, it is not safe to pronounce their habits favorable to health, since it is impossible to know whether some of the ills which they suffer are not produced by them.
These remarks are applicable to the disuse of any covering for the head in the sun and in the rain. For you will find those who adopt this practice from early infancy,[Footnote: I say, from early infancy; because we may adopt the best habits in mature years, after our constitutions have been broken up by error and vice, without effecting anything more than to keep us from actually sinking at once. Indeed, in most cases we ought not to expect more.] subject to as many diseases as those around them with similar constitutions, but with habits somewhat different; and as our diseases are generally the consequences of our errors in one way or another, it is impossible to say with certainty that some of them might not have arisen from exposure of the head.
I should not hesitate, therefore, to advise all mothers to put a light hat or bonnet on the heads of their children, whenever they are to be exposed to the direct rays of the summer sun, or to the rain. And as we cannot always foresee when and where these exposures will arise, and as it is believed that these coverings, if light, will never be productive of much injury while we are abroad in the open air, it will follow that it is better to wear than to omit them.
But while I contend for their use as consistent with health and sound philosophy, I must not be understood as admitting the use of such hats as are worn at present, even by children. They are, as I have said before, too hot. What should be substituted, I am unable to determine; but until something can be supplied, which would not be half so oppressive as our common wool hats, I should regard it as the lesser evil to omit them entirely. The danger of going bare-headed, if the practice is commenced early, we know from the customs of some savage nations, can never be very great.
The same reason for avoiding the use of any covering for the head, in early infancy, is a sufficient reason for covering the feet well. For just in proportion as the blood is sent to the head in superabundance, and keeps up in it an undue degree of heat, just in the same proportion is it sent to the feet in toosmalla quantity, leaving these parts liable to cold. Now it is a fundamental law with medical men, that the feet ought to be kept warmer than the head, if possible; especially while the child is very young, and exposed to brain diseases.
So long, therefore, as children are young, and unable to exercise their feet, stockings ought to be used, both in summer and winter; but I prefer to have them short, unless long ones can be used without garters. Everything in the shape of a garter or ligature round the limbs, body, or neck of a child, except a single body-band, already mentioned in another chapter, ought forever to be banished.
It has often been objected, I know, that stockings will make the feet tender. But as no child was ever hardened bycontinuedand severe cold applied to any part of the body, but the contrary, so no one was ever made more tender by being kept moderately warm. Excess of heat, like excess of cold, will alike weaken either children or adults; but there is little danger of heating the feet and legs of infants too much during the first year of infancy.
It is also said that stockings are apt to receive and retain wet. But as I shall show in another place that wet clothes should be frequently changed, this objection would be equally strong against wearing coats and diapers.
As to shoes, there is some variety of opinion among medical men. A few hold that they cramp the feet, and prevent children from learning to walk as early as they otherwise would. If it were best for children that they should learn to walk as early as possible, the last objection might have weight. But it seems to me not at all desirable to be in haste about their walking. Indeed, I greatly prefer to retard their progress, in this respect, rather than to hasten it.
As to the first objection, that shoes cramp the feet too much, nearly its whole force turns upon the question whether they are made of proper materials or not. There is no need of making them of cow-hide, or any other thick leather. The soles are the most important part. These will defend the feet against pins, needles, and such other sharp substances as are usually found on the floor; and the upper part of the shoe, so long as the wearer remains in the nursery, may be made of the softest and most yielding material—even of cloth. Infants' shoes should always be made on two lasts, one for each foot.
The philosopher Locke held, that in order to harden the young, their shoes ought to be "so that they might leak and let in water, whenever they came near it." There may be and probably is, no harm in having a child wet his feet occasionally, provided he is soon supplied with dry stockings again; but it is hazardous for either children or adults to go too long in wet stockings, and especially to sit long in them, after they have been using much active exercise. I am in favor of good, substantial shoes and stockings for people of all ages and conditions, and at all seasons; and believe it entirely in accordance with sound economy and the laws of the human constitution.
The custom of using ten or a dozen pins in the dressing of children, ought by all means to be set aside. They not only often wound the skin, but they have occasionally been known to penetrate the body and the joints of the limbs. So many of these dreadful accidents occur, and where no accident happens, so much pain is occasionally given by their sharp points to the little sufferer, who cannot tell what the matter is, that it is quite time the practice were abolished.
Do you ask what can be substituted?—The following mode is adopted by Dr. Dewees in his own family, as mentioned in his work on the "Physical and Medical Treatment of Children," at page 86.
"The belly-band and the petticoat have strings; and not a single pin is used in their adjustment. The little shirt, which is always made much larger than the infant's body, is folded on the back and bosom, and these folds kept in their places by properly adjusting the body of the petticoat: so far not a pin is used. The diaper requires one, but this should be of a large size, and made to serve the double purpose of holding the folds of this article, as well as keeping the belly-band in its proper place; the latter having a small tag of double linen depending from its lower margin, by which it is secured to the diaper, by the same pin.
"Should an extraordinary display of best 'bib and tucker' be required upon any special occasion, a third pin may be admitted to ensure the well-sitting of the 'frock' waist in front;—this last pin, however, is applied externally; so that the risk of its getting into the child's body is very small, even if it should become displaced."
The writer from whom the last two paragraphs are taken, says be has seen needles substituted for pins; and relates a long story of a child whose life was well nigh destroyed in this manner. It underwent months of ill health, and many moments of excruciating agony, before the cause of its trouble was suspected. Sometimes its distress was so great that nothing but large doses of laudanum, sufficient to stupify it, could afford the least relief. At last a tumor was discovered by the attending physician, near one of the bones on which we sit, and a needle was extracted two inches long. The needle had been put in its clothes, and, by slipping into the folds of the skin, had insinuated itself, unperceived, into the child's body. It is pleasing to add, that, although the little sufferer had now been ill seven or eight months, and had endured almost everything but death,—fever, diarrhoea, and the most excruciating pain,—it soon recovered.
This shocking circumstance is enough, one would think, to deter every mother or nurse, who becomes acquainted with it, from using needles in infants' clothes. Happy would it be, if, in banishing needles, they would contrive to banish pins also, and adopt either the plan of Dr. Dewees, or one still more rational.
On the subject of changing the wet clothing of a child, there is a strange and monstrous error abroad; which is, that by suffering them to remain wet and cold, we harden the constitution. The filthiness of this practice is enough to condemn it, were there nothing else to be said against it.
It is insisted on by many, I know, that as water which is salt, when it is applied to the skin, and suffered to remain long, while it secures the point of hardening the child, prevents all possibility of its taking cold, it hence follows, that wet diapers are not injurious. But this is a mistake. Every time an infant is allowed to remain wet, we not only endanger its taking cold, but expose it to excoriations of the skin, if not to serious and dangerous inflammation. In short, if frequent changes are not made, whatever some mothers and nurses may think, they may rest assured, that the health of the child must sooner or later suffer as the consequence.
Nor is it enough to hang up a diaper by the fire, and, as soon as it is dry, apply it again. It should be clean, as well as dry. Let us not be told, that it is troublesome to wash so often. Everything is in a certain sense troublesome. Everything in this world, which is worth having, is the result of toil. Nothing but absolute poverty affords the shadow of an excuse for neglecting anything which will promote the health, or even the comfort of the tender infant.
Of the impropriety and danger of suffering wet clothes to dry upon us, I shall speak elsewhere; as well as of the evil of suffering children to remain dirty,—their skins or their clothing.
Whatever tends to disturb the growth of the body, or hinder the free exercise of the limbs, during the infancy and childhood of both sexes is injurious. And as every mother has the control of these things, I have thought it desirable to append to this chapter a few thoughts on the particular dress of each sex. I begin with that of boys.
"Nothing can be more injurious to health," says a foreign writer, "than the tight jacket, buttoned up to the throat, the well-fitted boots, and the stiff stock." And his remarks are nearly as applicable to this country as to England. The consequences of this preposterous method of dressing boys, are diminutive manhood, deformity of person, and a constitution either already imbued with disease, or highly susceptible of its impression.
No part of the modern dress of boys is more absurd, than the stiff stock, or thick cravat. It is not only injurious by pressing on thejugularveins, and preventing the blood from freely passing out of the head, but, by constantly pressing on the numerous and complex muscles of the neck, at this period of life, it prevents their development; because whatever hinders the action of the muscular parts, hinders their growth, and makes them even appear as if wasted.
It would be a great improvement, if this part of dress were wholly discarded; and when is there so appropriate a time for setting it aside, asbefore we began to use it; or rather while we are under the more immediate care of our mothers?
The use of jackets buttoned up to the throat, except in cold weather, is objectionable; but this is very fortunately going out of fashion.
Boots, if used at all, should fit well; to this there can be no possible objection. What the writer, whom I have quoted, referred to, was probably the tight boot, worn to prevent the foot from being large and unseemly; but producing, as tight boots inevitably do, an injurious effect upon the muscles, a constrained walk, and corns.
What can be more painful, than to see little boys—yes,littleboys—boys neither fifteen, nor twenty, nor twenty-five, walk as if they were fettered and trussed up for the spit; unable to look down, or turn their heads, on account of a thick stock, or two or three cravats piled on the top of each other—and only capable of using their arms to dangle a cane, or carry an umbrella, as they hobble along, perhaps on a hot sun-shiny day in July or August?
But this evil, you who are mothers, have it very generally in your power to prevent, if you are only wise enough to secure that ascendancy over your children's minds which the Author of their nature designed. At the least, you can prevent it for a time—the most important period, too—by your own authority. This you will not need any urging to induce you to do, if you ever become thoroughly convinced of its pre-eminent folly.
The same general principles which should guide the young mother in regard to the dress of boys, are equally important and applicable in the management of girls. The whole dress should, as much as possible, hang loosely from the shoulders, without pressing on the body, or any part of it. This, I say, is the grand point to be aimed at; and this is the only great principle, whatever some mothers may think, which will lead to true beauty of person, and gracefulness of gesture.
There is, however, a slight difference to be made between the dress of girls and that of boys. The greater delicacy of the female frame requires that the surface of the body should be kept rather warmer, as well as better protected from the vicissitudes of the atmosphere.
But is this the fact? Is not the contrary true? While boys in the winter are clad in warm woollen vestments, covering every part of their trunk, many portions of the female frame, and especially many parts of their limbs, are left so much exposed, that in cold weather you scarcely find a girl abroad, who appears to be comfortable.
Nay, they are not only uncomfortable abroad, but at home; and if I were to present to mothers in detail, a tenth of the evils which their daughters suffer from not adopting a warmer method of clothing, I should probably be stared at by some, and laughed at by others. All this, too, without speaking of going out of warm concert rooms, theatres, ball rooms and lecture rooms, into the night air, or out of school rooms and churches, to walk home with measured and stiffened pace, lest the sin unpardonable of walking swiftly or RUNNING,—that active exercise which health requires, which youthful feeling prompts, and which duty ought to inspire,—should unwarily be committed.
The tremendous evils of confining the lungs have been adverted to at sufficient length. In reference to that general subject, I need only add, that if the chest be not duly exercised and expanded, the liver, the lungs, the stomach, digestion, absorption, circulation and perspiration, are all hindered. And even so far as the various internal organs of the bodyareactive, they act at a great disadvantage. The blood which they "work up," is bad blood, and must be so, as long as the lungs do not have free play. Hence may and do arise all sorts of diseases; especially diseases of OBSTRUCTION; and such as are often very difficult of removal.
What can be a more pitiable sight than some modern girls going home from school or church in winter? Thinly clad, the blood is all driven from the surface upon the internal organs, and what remains is so loaded with carbon, which the lungs ought but cannot discharge, that her skin has a leaden hue; her teeth chatter; her very heart is chilled in her panting, frozen bosom; she cannot run, and if she could, she must not, for it would be vulgar! Every mother should shrink from the sight of such a picture.
Physiology of the human skin. Of checking perspiration. Diseases thus produced. "Dirt" not "healthy." How the mistake originated. "Smell of the earth." Effect of uncleanliness on the morals. Filthiness produces bowel complaints. Changing dress for the sake of cleanliness.
No mother will ever pay that attention to cleanliness which its importance to health and happiness demands, till she perceives its necessity. And she will never perceive that necessity till she has studied attentively the machinery of the human frame—and especially its wonderful covering.
The skin is pierced with little openings orpores, so numerous that some have reckoned them at a million to every square inch. At all events, they are so small that the naked eye can neither distinguish nor count them; and so numerous, that we cannot pierce the skin with the finest needle without hitting one or more of them.
When we are in perfect health, and the skin clean, a gentle moisture or mist continually oozes through these pores. This process is calledperspiration; and the moisture which thus escapes, thematterof perspiration.
Perspiration may be checked in two ways. 1. by filth on the skin; 2. by what is commonly called taking cold—for taking cold essentially consists in chilling the skin to such a degree as to stop, for some time, the escape of this moisture. Most persons have doubtless observed, that in the first stages of a cold, they frequently have a very dry skin. Whereas, when we are in health, the skin usually feels moist.
Our health is not only endangered, and a foundation laid for fevers, rheumatisms, and consumptions, by stopping the pores of the skin with dirt, or anything else, but there is also danger from another and a very different source.
The blood, in its circulation through the body, is constantly becoming impure; and as it thus comes back impure to the heart, is as constantly sent to the lungs, where it comes in close contact with the air which we breathe, and is purified. But this same purifying process which goes on in the lungs, goes on, too, if the skin is in a pure, free, healthy condition, all over the surface of the body. If it is not—if the skin cannot do this part of the work—an additional burden is thus laid on the lungs, which in this way soon become so overworked, that they cannot perform their own proportion of the labor. And whenever this happens, the health must soon suffer.
The strange belief, that "dirt is healthy," has much influence on the daily practice of thousands of those who are ignorant of the human structure, and the laws which govern and regulate the animal economy. It has probably originated in the well-known fact, that those children who are allowed to play in the dirt, are often as healthy—and evenmorehealthy—than those who are confined to the nursery or the parlor.
Now, while it is admitted that this is a very common case, it is yet believed that the former class of children would be still more vigorous than they now are, if they were kept more cleanly, or were at least frequently washed. It is not the dirt which promotes their health, but their active exercise in the open air; the advantages of which are more than sufficient to compensate for the injury which they sustain from the dirt. That is to say, they retain, in spite of the dirt, better health than those who are denied the blessings of pure air and abundant exercise, and subjected to the opposite extreme of almost constant confinement.
There is something deceitful, after all, in the ruddy, blooming appearance of those children who are left by the busy parent to play in the road or field, without attention to cleanliness. If this were not so, how comes it to pass that they suffer much more, not only from chronic, but from acute diseases, than children whose parents are in better circumstances?
I am the more solicitous to combat a belief in the salutary tendency of an unclean skin, because I know it prevails to some extent; and because I know also, both from reason and from fact, that it is a gross error.
It is, however, true, that years sometimes intervene, before the evil consequences of dirtiness appear. The office of the vessels of the skin being interrupted, an increase of action is imposed on other parts, especially on those internal organs commonly called glands, which action is apt to settle into obstinate disease. Hence, at least when aided by other causes, often arise, in later life, after the source of the evil is forgotten, if it were ever suspected, rheumatism, scrofula, jaundice, and even consumption.
There is a strange notion abroad, that thesmellof the earth is beneficial, especially to consumptive persons. I honestly believe, however, that it is more likely to create consumption than to cure it. Besides, in what does this smell consist? Do the silex, the alumine, and the other earths, with their compounds, emit any odor? Rarely, I believe, unless when mixed with vegetable matter. But no gases necessary to health are evolved during the decomposition of vegetable matter; on the contrary, it is well known that many of them tend to induce disease.
I am thoroughly persuaded that too much attention cannot be paid to cleanliness; and the demand for such attention is equally imperious in the case of those who cultivate the earth, or labor in it, or on stone, during the intervals of their useful avocations, as in the case of those individuals who follow other employments.
I must also protest against the doctrine, that the smell or taste of the earth, much less a coat of it spread over the surface, and closing up, for hours and days together, thousands and millions of those little pores with which the Author of this "wondrous frame" has pierced the skin, can have a salutary tendency.
The opinion has been even maintained, that uncleanly habits are not only unfavorable to health, but to morality. There can be no doubt that he who neglects his person and dress will be found lower in the scale of morals, other things being equal, than he who pays a due regard to cleanliness.
Some have supposed that a disposition to neglect personal cleanliness was indicative of genius. But this opinion is grossly erroneous, and has well nigh ruined many a young man.
I am far from recommending any degree of fastidiousness on this subject. Truth and correct practice usually lie between extremes. But I do and must insist, that the connection between cleanliness of body and purity of moral character, is much more close and direct than has usually been supposed.
But to return to the more immediate effects of cleanliness on health. There is one class of diseases in particular which, in an eminent degree, owe their origin to a neglect of cleanliness. I refer to the bowel complaints so common among children during summer and autumn. Except in case of teething, the use of unripe fruits, or theabuseof those which are in themselves excellent, it is probable that more than half of the bowel complaints of the young are either produced or greatly aggravated by a foul skin.
The importance of washing the whole body in water will be insisted on in the chapter on Bathing; it is therefore unnecessary to say anything farther on that subject in this place, except to observe that whether the washings of the body be partial or general, they should be thorough, so far as they are carried. There are thousands of children who, in pretending to wash their hands and face, will do little more than wet the inside of their hands, and the tips of their noses and ears unless great care is taken.
Few things are more important than suitable changes of dress. There are those, who, from principle, never wear the same under-garment but one day without washing, either in summer or winter; and there are others who, though they may wear an article without washing two or three successive days, take care to change their dress at night—never sleeping in a garment which they have worn during the day.
It is a very common objection to suggestions like these, that they will do very well for those who have wealth, but not for the poor;—thattheyhave neither the time nor the means of attending to them. How can they change their clothes every day? we are asked. And how can they afford to have a separate dress for the night?
There must be retrenchment in some other matters, it is admitted. In order to find time for more washing, or money to pay others for the labor, the poor must deny themselves a few things which they now suppose, if they have ever thought at all on the subject, are conducive to their happiness—but which are in reality either useless or injurious. Something may be saved by a reasonable dress, as I have already shown. Other items of expense, which might be spared with great advantage to health and happiness, and applied to the purpose in question, will be mentioned in the chapter on Food and Drink.
Danger of savage practices. Rousseau. Cold water at birth. First washing of the child. Rules. Temperature. Bathing vessels. Unreasonable fears. Whims. Views of Dr. Dewees. Hardening. Rules for the cold bath. Securing a glow. Coming out of the bath. Local baths. Shower bath. Vapor bath. Sponging. Neglect of bathing. The Romans. Treatment of children compared with that of domestic animals.
Some of the hardy nations of antiquity, as well as a few savage tribes of modern times, have been accustomed to plunge their new-born infants into cold water. This is done for the two-fold purpose of washing and hardening them.
To all who reason but for a moment on this subject, the danger of such a practice must be obvious. So sudden a change from a temperature of nearly 100° of Fahrenheit to one quite low, perhaps scarcely 40°, must and does have a powerful effect on the nervous system even of an adult; but how much more on that of a tender infant? We may form some idea of this, by the suddenness and violence of its cries, by the sudden contractions and relaxations of its limbs and body, and by its palpitating heart and difficult breathing.
Every one's experience may also remind him, that what produces at best a momentary pain to himself, cannot otherwise than be painful to the infant. In making a comparison between adults and infants, however, in this respect, we should remember that the lungs of the infant do not get into full and vigorous action until some time after birth; and that, on this account, the hold they have on life is so feeble, that any powerful shock, and especially that given by the cold bath, is ten times more dangerous to them than to adults, or even to infants themselves, after a few months have elapsed.
It is surprising to me that so sensible a writer as Rousseau generally is on education, should have encouraged this dangerous practice; and still more so that many fathers even now, blinded by theory, should persist in it, notwithstanding the pleadings of the mother or the nurse, and the plainest dictates of common sense and common prudence.[Footnote: Nothing is intended to be said here, which shall encourage unthinking nurses or mothers in setting themselves against measures which have been prescribed by higher authority,—I mean the physician. There are cases of this kind, where it requires all the resolution which a father, uninterrupted, can summon to his aid, to administer a dose or perform a task, on which he knows the existence of his child may be depending: but when the thoughtless entreaties of the mother or nurse are interposed, it makes his condition most distressing. Mothers, in such cases, ought to encourage rather than remonstrate. They whodo not, are guilty of cruelty, and—perhaps—of infanticide.]
A child plunged into cold water at birth, by those whose theories carry them so far as to do it even in the coldest weather, has sometimes been twenty-four hours in recovering, notwithstanding the most active and judicious efforts to restore it. In other instances the results have been still more distressing. Dr. Dewees is persuaded that he has "known death itself to follow the use of cold water," in this way—I believe he meansimmediatedeath—and adds, with great confidence, that he has "repeatedly seen it require the lapse of several hours before reaction could establish itself; during which time the pale and sunken cheeks and livid lips declared the almost exhausted state" of the infant's excitability.[Footnote: "Dewees on children" p. 72.]
We need not hesitate to put very great confidence in the opinion here expressed; for besides being a close and just observer of human nature, Dr. D. has had the direction and management, in a greater or less degree, of several thousands of new-born infants.
Nothing, indeed, in the whole range of physical education, seems better proved, than that while some few infants, whose constitutions are naturally very strong, are invigorated by the practice in question, others, in the proportion of hundreds for one, who arelessrobust, are injured for life; some of them seriously.
Nor will spirits added to the water make any material difference. I am aware that there is a very general notion abroad, that the injurious effects of cold water, in its application both internally and externally, are greatly diminished by the addition of a little spirit; but it is not so. Does the addition of such a small quantity of spirit as is generally used in these cases, materially alter the temperature? Is it not the application of a cold liquid to a heated surface, still? Can we make anything else of it, either more or less?
I do not undertake to say, that the cold bath may not be so managed in the progress of infancy, as to make it beneficial, especially to strong constitutions. It is its indiscriminate application to all new-born children, without regard to strength of constitution, or any other circumstances, that I most strenuously oppose. Of its occasional use, under the eye of a physician, and by parents who will discriminate, I shall say more presently.
Our first duty on receiving a new inhabitant of the world is, to see that it is gently but thoroughly washed, in moderately warm soft water, with fine soap. Special attention should be paid to the folds of the joints, the neck, the arm pits, &c. For rubbing the body, in order to disengage anything which might obstruct the pores, or irritate or fret the skin, nothing can be preferable to a piece of soft sponge or flannel. Though the operation should be thorough, and also as rapid as the nature of circumstances will permit, all harshness should be avoided. When finished, the child should be wiped perfectly dry with soft flannel.
While the washing is performed, the temperature of the room should be but a few degrees lower than that of the water; and the child should not be exposed to currents of cold air. If the weather is severe, or if currents of air in the room cannot otherwise be avoided, the dressing, undressing, washing, &c., may be done near the fire. And I repeat the rule, it should always be done with as much rapidity as is compatible with safety.
Here will be seen one great advantage of simplicity in the form of dress. If the more rational suggestions of our chapter on that subject are attended to, it will greatly facilitate the process of washing, and the subsequent daily process of bathing, which I am about to recommend to my readers.
This washing process is also an introduction to bathing. For it should be repeated every day; but with less and less attention to the washing, and more and more reference to the bathing. How long the child should stay in the bath, must be left to experience. If he is quiet, fifteen minutes can never be too long; and I should not object to twenty. If otherwise, and you are obliged to remove him in five minutes, or even in three, still the bathing will be of too much service to be dispensed with.
Nothing should be mixed with the water, if the infant is healthy, except a little soap, as already mentioned. Some are fond of using salt; but it is by no means necessary, and may do harm.
The proper hour for bathing is the early part of the day, or about the middle of the forenoon. This season is selected, because the process, manage it as carefully as we may, is at first a little exhausting. As the child grows older, however, and not only becomes stronger, but appears to be actually refreshed and invigorated by the bath, it will be advisable to defer it to a later and later hour. By the time the babe is three months old, particularly in the warm season, the hour of bathing may be at sunset.
The degree of heat must be determined, in part, by observing its effect on the child; and in part by a thermometer. For this, and for other purposes, a thermometer, as I have already more than hinted, is indispensable in every nursery. Our own sensations are often at best a very unsafe guide. There is one rule which should always be observed—never to have the temperature of the bath below that of the air of the room. If the thermometer show the latter to be 70°, the bath should be something like 80° perhaps with feeble children, rather more.
Great care ought always to be taken to proportion the air of the room and the water of the bath to each other. If, for example, the temperature of the room have been, for some time, unusually warm, that of the water must not be so low as if it had been otherwise. On the contrary, if the room have been, for a considerable time, rather cool, the bath may be made several degrees cooler than in other circumstances. But in no case and in no circumstances must awarmbath—intended as such, simply—be so warm or so cold, as to make the child uncomfortable; whether the temperature be 70°, 80°, or 90°.
It is hardly necessary to add, that in bathing a young child, the vessel used for the purpose should be large enough to give free scope to all the motions of its extremities. Most children are delighted to play and scramble about in the water. I know, indeed, that the contrary sometimes happens; but when it does, it is usually—I do not sayalways—because the countenances of those who are around express fear or apprehension; for it is surprising how early these little beings learn to decipher our feelings by our very countenances.
Some of our readers may be surprised at the intimation that there are mothers and nurses who have fears or apprehensions in regard to the effects of the warm bath; but others—and it is for such that I write this paragraph—will fully understand me. I have been often surprised at the fact, but it is undoubted, that there is a strong prejudice against warm bathing, in many parts of the country. In endeavoring to trace the cause, I have usually found that it arose from having seen or heard of some child who died soon after its application. I have had many a parent remonstrate with me on the danger of the warm bath; and this, too, in circumstances when it appeared to me, that the child's existence depended, under God, on that very measure. Perhaps it is useless in such cases, however, to reason with parents on the subject. The medical practitioner must do his duty boldly and fearlessly, and risk the consequences.
But as I am writing, not for persons under immediate excitement, but for those that may be reasoned with, it is proper to say, that in medicine, the warm bath is so often used in extreme cases, and as a last resort, even when death has already grasped, or is about to fix his grasp on the sufferer, that it would be very strange if many personsdid notdie, just after bathing. But that the bathing itself ever produced this result, in one case in a thousand, there is not the slightest reason for believing. [Footnote: Let me not be understood as intimating that, the general neglect of bathing, of which I complain so loudly, ischieflyowing to this unreasonable prejudice, though this no doubt has its sway. On the contrary, I believe it is much oftener owing to ignorance, indolence, and parsimony.]
There are many more whims connected with bathing, as with almost everything else, which it were equally desirable to remove. Some nurses and mothers think that if the child's skin is wiped dry after bathing, it will impair, if not destroy, the good effects of the operation. Others still, shocking to relate, will even put it to bed in its wet clothes; this, too, from principle. Not unlike this, is the belief, very common among adults, that if we get our clothes wet—even our stockings—we must, by all means, suffer them to dry on us; a belief which, in its results, has sent thousands to a premature grave—and, what is still worse, made invalids, for life, of a still greater number.
I am aware, that in rejecting the indiscriminate cold bathing of infants, I am treading on ground which is rather unpopular, even with medical men; a large proportion of whom seem to believe that the practice may be useful. But I am notwhollyalone. Dr. Dewees—of whose large experience I have already spoken—and some others, do not hesitate to avow similar sentiments.
The objections of Dr. Dewees to cold bathing are the following. 1. There often exists a predisposition to disease, which cold bathing is sure to rouse to action. Or if the disease have already begun to affect the system, the bath is sure to aggravate it. 2. Some children have such feeble constitutions that they are sure to be permanently weakened by it, rather than invigorated. 3. To those in whom there is the tendency of a large quantity of blood to the head, lungs, liver, &c., it is injurious. 4. In some, the shock produces a species of syncope, or catalepsy. 5. Thereaction, as shown by the heat which follows the cold bath, is, in some cases, so great as to produce a degree of fever, and consequent debility. 6. It never answers the purposes of cleanliness—one great object of bathing—so well as the warm bath. 7. It is always unpleasant or painful to the child; especially at first. 8. It sometimes produces severe pain in the bowels.
This is a very formidable list of objections; and certainly deserves consideration. There is one statement made by Dr. D. in the progress of his remarks on this subject, in which I do not concur. He says—"The object of all bathing is to remove impurities arising from dust, perspiration, &c., from the surface; that the skin may not be obstructed in the performance of its proper offices."
But the object of cold bathing, with many, is toharden; consequently it is not true that cleanliness is theonly object. If he means, even, that cleanliness is the onlylegitimateobject of all bathing, I shall still be compelled to dissent.
If the cold bath could be used, always, by and with the direction of a skilful physician, I believe its occasional use might be rendered salutary. And although as it is now commonly used, I believe its effects are almost anything but salutary, I do not deny that if its use were cautiously and gradually begun, and judiciously conducted, it might be the means of making children who are already robust, still more hardy and healthy than before, and better able to resist those sudden changes of temperature so common in our climate, and so apt to produce cold, fever, and consumption.
Cold bathing, in the hands of those who are ignorant of the laws of the human frame—and such unfortunately and unaccountably most fathers and mothers are—I cannot help regarding as a highly dangerous weapon; and therefore it is, that in view of the whole subject, I cannot recommend its general and indiscriminate use.
If there are individuals, however, who are determined to employ it, in the case of their more vigorous children, and without the advice or direction of their family physician, I beg them to attend to the following rules or principles, expressed as briefly as possible.
In no ordinary case whatever, is the cold bath useful, unless it is succeeded by that degree of warmth on the surface of the body which is usually called aglow. This is a leading and important principle. The contrary, that is, the injurious effects of cold bathing—itsimmediatebad effects, I mean—are shown by the skin remaining pale and shrivelled after coming out of the bath, by its blue appearance, and by its coldness, as well as by a sunken state of the eyes, and much general languor.
To secure this point—I mean the GLOW—it is indispensably important to begin the use of cold water gradually; that is, to use it at first of so high a temperature as to produce only a slight sensation of cold, and to take special care that the skin be immediately wiped very dry, and the temperature of the room be quite as high as usual. Afterward the water may be cooled gradually, from week to week, though never more than a degree or two at once.
It will probably be unsafe to commence this practice of cold bathing—even in the case of the most robust children—until they are at least six months of age.
The appropriate season will be the middle of the forenoon, the hour when the system is usually the most vigorous, and at which we shall be most likely to secure a reaction. At first, twice or three times a week are as often as it will be safe to repeat it. Some writers recommend it twice a day; but once is enough, under any ordinary circumstances.
The method at first is, to give the infant a single plunge. Afterward, when he becomes older, and more inured to it, he may be plunged several times in succession.
On taking him out of the bath, the skin should be wiped perfectly dry, as in the case of the warm bath, and with the same or an increased degree of attention to other circumstances—the temperature of the room, the avoiding currents of air, &c. He should next be put in a soft, warm blanket, and be kept for some time in a state of gentle motion; and after a little time, should be dressed.
I have already mentioned the importance of avoiding the manifestation of fear, when we bathe a child; and the caution is particularly necessary in the administration of the cold bath. Some writers even recommend, that during the whole process of undressing, bathing, exercising, and dressing, singing should be employed. There is philosophy in this advice, and it is easily tried; but I cannot speak of it from experience.
There is one thing which may serve to calm our apprehensions—if we have any—of danger; which is, that though the child's lungs are feeble at first, from their not having been, like the heart, accustomed to previous action, yet when they get fairly into motion and action, and the child is a few months old, they are probably as strong, if not stronger, in proportion, than those of adults.
Bathing in cold water should never be performed immediately after a full meal. Neither is it desirable to go to the contrary extreme, and bathe when the stomach has been long empty; nor when the child's mental or bodily powers are more than usually exhausted by fatigue.
Although I have given these rules for those who are determined to use the cold bath with their children, yet, for fear I shall be misunderstood, I must be suffered to repeat, in this place, that, uninformed as people generally are in regard to physiology, I cannot advise even its moderate use. On the contrary, I would gladly dissuade from it, as most likely, in the way it would inevitably be used, to do more harm than good.
There is no sort of objection to what might be called local bathing with cold water. If the child's head is hot at any time, the temples, and indeed the whole upper part of the head, may be very properly wet with moderately cold water—taking care to avoid wetting the clothes. But avoid, by all means, the common but foolish practice of putting spirits in the water.
A tea-spoonful of cold water cannot be too early put into the mouth of the infant. The object is to cleanse or rinse the mouth; and the process may be aided by wiping it out with a piece of soft linen rag. If a part or all of the water should be swallowed, no harm will be done. This practice, commenced almost as soon as children are born, has saved many a sore mouth.
There are other forms of bathing besides those already mentioned; among which are the shower bath, the vapor bath, and the medicated bath. The shower bath—for which purpose the water is commonly used cold—is but poorly adapted to the wants of infants. The shock is much greater than the common cold bath, and more apt to frighten; and fear is unfavorable to reaction, or the production of a genial glow.
The vapor bath is much better; and probably has quite as good an effect as the common warm bath. The trouble and expense of procuring the necessary apparatus is somewhat greater, however, as a mere bathing tub costs but little, and can be made by every father who possesses common ingenuity. But whatever may be the expense, it is indispensable in every family; and whenever the pores of the skin are obstructed, a vapor bathing apparatus is equally desirable.
The medicated vapor bath is sometimes used; but I am not now treating of infants who are sick, but of those who are in a state of health.
The common warm bath is sometimes medicated by putting in salt. This, of course, renders the water more stimulating to the skin; but except when the perspiration is checked, or the skin peculiarly inactive from some other cause—in other words, unless we are sick—it is seldom expedient to use it.
There is one substitute for the bathing tub, in the case of the cold bath. I refer to the use of a wet cloth or sponge, applied rapidly to the whole surface of the body. When this is done, the skin should be wiped thoroughly dry immediately afterwards, as in the case of complete immersion.
The application of either a cloth or a sponge, filled with warm water, to the skin, in this manner, even if continued for several minutes together, is less efficacious than a continuous immersion. I repeat it—no family ought to be without conveniences for bathing in warm water daily. I speak now of every member of the family, young and old, as well as the infant; and I refer particularly to the summer season: though I do not think the practice ought to be wholly discontinued during the winter.
It will still be objected that this care of, and attention to the young, in reference to health—this provision for bathing daily, and care to see that it is performed—can never be afforded by the laboring portion of the community. But I shall as strenuously insist on the contrary; and trust I shall, in the sequel, produce reasons which will be satisfactory.
The great difficulty is, to convince parents that these things are vastly more productive of health and happiness to their children—more truly necessaries—than a great many things for which they now expend their time and money. There is, and always has been—except, perhaps, among the Jews, in the earliest periods of the history of that wonderful nation—a strange disposition to overlook the happiness of the young. It is not necessary to represent this dereliction as peculiar to modern times, for we find traces of the same thing thousands of years ago.
The Roman emperors—Dioclesian in particular—could make provision for bathing, to an extent which now astonishes us; but for whom? For whom, I repeat it, was incurred the enormous expense of fitting up and keeping in repair accommodations for bathing at once 18,000 people? For adults; and for adults alone. I do not say that children were not admitted, in any case; but I say they were not contemplated in these arrangements. Nothing was done—not a single thing—that would not have been done, had there been no child under ten years of age in the whole empire.
And what better than this do WE, now? We make provision for the happiness of the adult. The most indigent person will find time and money to spend for the gratification of his own senses, his pride, or his curiosity; but his children—they may be overlooked! Or, if he has an eye to the future happiness of his child, he conceives that he is promoting it in the best possible degree, by endeavoring to lay up a few dollars for his use, after his character is formed—at a period, as it too often happens, when money will do him little good, since it can neither purchase health, peace of mind, nor reputation.
Far be it from me to say, that the poor—ground into the dust as they are, by the force of circumstances operating with their own concurrence, to make them ignorant, vicious, or miserable—can do for their children all that is desirable. By no means. But they have it in their power to do much more than they are at present doing. They have it in their power, at least, to use the same good sense in the management of the human being that they do in that of a pig, a calf, or a colt, or even a young vegetable. No parent, let him be ever so poor, is found in the habit of neglecting either of these in proportion to its infancy, and of exerting himself only in proportion as it grows older. Common sense tells him that the contrary is the true course; that however poor he may be, he will be still poorer, if he do not take special pains with the young animal, to rear it and with the young vegetable, to give it the right direction, by keeping down the weeds, and pruning and watering it. And I say again, that however deserving of censure the wealthy of a Christian community may be in not directing the ignorant and vicious into the right path, and in not expending more of their wealth on those who are poor, in elevating their minds and their manners, and promoting their health, still the latter are inexcusable for their present neglect of their infant offspring, while they would not think of neglecting, on the same principle, the offspring of their domestic animals.