The Deviant Mother and Child: The Development of Adoption as an Instrument of Social Control

Abstract

The discourses that have informed the socio-legal progression of adoption through the twentieth century have, increasingly, shaped the construction of women's sexuality. In this paper I draw together the influences that, at the turn of this century, led to the perceived need for adoption legislation and examine the ideology informing its development. Interleaving my argument are the dominant themes of class, inheritance, and succession. I develop the construction of the innocent versus the infected mother and child, showing how society determined which children were acceptable for middle class 'salvation' and which were not. The changing standards by which the dangerous child and her mother were judged are examined along with the methods of imposing responsibility and punishment upon them. The work of Donzelot' informs the structure of the paper and whilst I question certain parts of his thesis, I have found it useful to draw upon specific concepts he developed. In particular, I explore the concept of 'children in danger' and 'dangerous children' and utilize his 'tutelary complex' to inform my analysis of state control and regulation of the deviant, working-class, unmarried mother and her equally dangerous child. In drawing upon current discourses surrounding new reproductive technology I identify analogies between these and the earlier discourses informing adoption. The first adoption legislation in England and Wales emerged in 1926, some years after that of most other English-speaking countries. Prior to such legislation, many children presumed abandoned or constructed as socially 'deviant' were, through the Poor Laws, separated from their parents (or, more accurately, their mothers) and institutionalized, fostered with families of similar class or 'exported' to colonies such as Canada and later New Zealand and Australia. Many informal adoptions took place but lack of any records makes the true extent of such placements unknown. The rise in philanthropic bodies, the emergence and professionalization of social work, and societal pressure, combined with the attitudinal and population changes caused by the 1914-18 war, converged to lobby the state for legalized