Child mortality

[philipsearching]

I know these figures are not unusual, but they remain painful.

One of my Gt-Gt-grandmothers recorded her offspring (born between 1875 and 1897 in Bermondsey) on the 1911 census.  Of 15 children born alive 9 died (aged from 1 day to 7 years).  To add to her woes 3 of her 5 surviving sons were killed in the Great War and her only surviving daughter lost 4 out of 8 infants.

[William Abraham Akese-Mackay]

Painful indeed but grateful that you came through one of the lines

[Erato]

It always seems to me that the death rate was much, much higher in urban environments.  I suppose that was due to unclean water and infectious diseases in an overcrowded environment.  In rural areas, even without much access to medical care, the children seem to have fared better.  Here are some families in my tree all from rural areas in the northern United States:

#1.  7 children born 1831-1845, 1 died age 8.
#2.  6 children born 1861-1881, 1 died age 6.
#3.  5 children 1838-1849, no deaths
#4.  10 children born 1838-1854, no deaths
#5.  14 children born 1857-1885, 2 deaths in childhood
#6.  6 children born 1874-1886, 1 died age 6 mos.
#7.  9 children born 1845-1860, no deaths
#8.  7 children born 1876-1892, 1 death in infancy

6/64 children died before adulthood = 9%.

[Jomot]

We really do forget how fortunate we are... how someone lives through that amount of heartbreak is unimaginable.   

My husbands Great Grandmother also had 16 children of which thankfully only 2 died in infancy - though quite how so many survived is a small miracle in itself given that in 1891 they were a family of 8 living in 2-rooms, and by 1911 had only 'progressed' as far as 12 people (8 of which were by then adults) living in 4-rooms.  They were from a small mining village and life must have been incredibly tough and then, as you say, along came the war.......

[bibliotaphist]

One of my three-greats grandfathers outlived all nine of his children through a mixture of infant mortality and early deaths through accidents. Can't imagine what that must have felt like.

[Billyblue]

Infant mortality was so common in 'olden days' and even now in third world countries, that people possibly became more immured to it than we are today when babies are expected to live.

About 10 years ago when I worked in a children's hospital, a doctor who had come here as a refugee from the Middle East chaos - when I queried why people had big parties for a one-year-old who wouldn't have known what it was all about - said it was to celebrate the fact that the child had survived its first year, when so many died without reaching that milestone!  Brought me up with a jolt.

Dawn M

[philipsearching]

It always seems to me that the death rate was much, much higher in urban environments.  I suppose that was due to unclean water and infectious diseases in an overcrowded environment.

Poor sanitation, poor diet, poor air quality, overcrowding aiding the spread of disease, lack of affordable medical care - and various other factors (including ignorance and poverty) took a heavy toll among the urban poor in those times.  Britain did not suffer famine - unlike Ireland where the urban poor and the rural population suffered terribly when potato crops failed.

Hard times, indeed.

[Guy Etchells]

What many seem to forget is families from rural backgrounds had a wealth of experience in animal husbandry.
Knowing how to birth and successfully rear animals was a great help in birthing and rearing humans as well.
That adds to the other advantages of living in a rural setting.
Cheers
Guy

[Nanna52]

It is sad to say that it was a fact of life.  My grandfather was the youngest of eleven born (1877) on the goldfields.  Two were lost as babies, one twelve and one seventeen.  Even those who reached adulthood struggled.  His oldest sister died at the age of 26 having had four babies in five years, only one of whom survived to her first birthday.  My grandfather died at 41 leaving a widow and 18 month old daughter.