THE CASE OF TWO WOMEN

When the child is born--again it is only its welfare which should be

thought of by the mother, and not what custom or family opinion would

enforce. To me it seems that no mother ought to undertake any of the

so-called duties of a mother that she is incapable of performing to

the advantage of the child, who would be better cared for by employing

highly trained service. She should only force herself to do her best

in uncongenial tasks if circumstances make it impossible for her to

obtain a better nurse or teacher for her infant than she herself could

be. She must constantly keep _the end_ in view, so as to stamp out

prejudice and out-of-date methods; especially she should guard against

making the child suffer for her own fads and experiments. I believe I

shall better illustrate what I mean by "keeping the end in view" if I

give a few concrete examples, instead of trying to explain in the

abstract.

Here is one example.

There were two women of my acquaintance, one of whom had an exquisitely

obedient, perfectly brought-up little girl of five who was her

constant thought, and a baby of two months. This mother could afford

an excellent nurse, and left all the physical care of the infant to

her, concentrating her intelligence upon wise general supervision, and

upon the training of the little girl whose dawning character was her

study. The other mother had two very ill-behaved, disobedient children

of five and seven, and a baby of three months. She spent her time

washing and dressing the infant, fussing over it and caressing it from

morning to night, and interfering with the paid nurse, who well knew

her duties. She was also quite indifferent to her appearance, and

wearied her husband to death with her over-domesticity. But she felt

herself to be a perfect and affectionate wife and mother, and strongly

censured the other woman when she admitted that she had never washed

or dressed her baby, and was even rather nervous when she held it in

case she should hurt its tender neck and head. But the proof that the

first woman was a true and good guardian of God's gift to her was in

the finely trained little girl, and the proof of the second woman's

undevelopment from the animal stage was in her concentrated and, in

the circumstances, unnecessary preoccupation with the infant, to the

entire neglect of the character training of the elder children. Had

they both been so poor that actual physical care of the infants

devolved solely upon each mother, the first would have used all her

intelligence to discover the sensible and common-sense way to carry

out her duties, and the second would have continued using any obsolete

method she had been accustomed to, while she lavished silly fuss and

attention upon the baby.

Three Things · 第 18 / 27 题