children

loz_scotland · Post by **loz_scotland** » Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:40 am

Hi,
I wonder if people have any thoughts or knowledge about this ?
My ancestor Thomas Pirrie had 4 children to his second wife I have never been able to find any children for his first marriage which was to a Janet Beveridge the marriage lasted from 1865 until Janets death in 1875. I have just noticed that on the 1871 census (paisley) Janet and Thomas have a 2 month old child living with them named Isabella Taylor and her relationship is described as "nursing" so would Janet have been a wet nurse to her ? and if so would Janet not have had to have given birth herself ? there are definately no children to be found on Scotlands people and as it is after compulsory registration (Ithink) then it does not look like they had offspring or would a stillbirth be a possibility ?

many thanks
Laura

nancy · Post by **nancy** » Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:00 am

Hi Laura,funnily enough I came across this last yr,but when seeing child had different name my cousin and me thought it was just someone looking after a baby

Cheers Nancy

WilmaM · Post by **WilmaM** » Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:40 am

To be a 'wet nurse' in those days [before artificial hormones etc etc] she would have been pregnant and given birth, either as a still birth or late miscarriage.

Poor Janet may very well have been unable to carry a child full term, but was at least able to help out another little mite by nursing them if her own mother was unable to [or dead].

Have you looked around for wee Isabella's parents? or found her in a later census?
That could give you a clue as to the situation.

A cursory look at the IGI shows she was a child of Thomas Taylor & Catherine Colquhoun. They seem to have had 2 daughters Isabella being the youngest. And there are 3 marriages for a Thomas Taylor after 1871.
And Scotland's People shows a death in 1870/71 for a Catherine Taylor /Colquhoun.

Post by **joette** » Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:55 pm

I have heard anecdotal evidence for woman who have never been pregnant or given birth being able to breastfeed without the aid of synthetic hormones.

I can't quite work out how but some theories are that some women have the ability to trigger certain hormones without having actually being pregnant or ever having been so.It seems the presence of a crying hungry baby is enough to trigger the flow!

Off course this may have been "stories" to protect reputations!

StewL · Post by **StewL** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:08 am

Hi Joette
I recall reading about sympathetic lactation when I was doing my Children and Family studies at uni. Unfortunately I lost all of my readings and notes from that course (or most anyway) so I can't find a source. All I can vaguely remember is that it can happen when a baby is left without its birth mother, and females (of course

) hormones kick in.
Why do babies look like they do? So that if they are left alone someone will take over

Wet nursing was very common around the period we are looking at.

Post by **emanday** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:39 am

OK, so now I'm going to shock you (well, maybe a wee bit).

Many years ago one of my cats simply disappeared two weeks after her kittens were born. The other feline girls didn't seem interested in helping out so I prepared to start the 2 hourly feeds with powdered milk from the vet.

Picture if you will, 3am, me in my PJ's staggering about with mini bottles only to discover that one of the cats was happily nursing the kits!

HIS NAME WAS SMOKEY! And, yes, he was producing milk very successfully. Even the vet confessed he'd never seen it before, but had heard of it. Unfortunately, although Smokey reared the kits very well, with a bit of early weaning help from me, it did seem to cause a bit of a hormone problem for the rest of his life. Nothing serious, but he had to have testosterone injections every 6 months or so to "balance him out".

Ain't nature wunnerful!

Post by **SarahND** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:43 am

Wow, Mary

Hats off to Smokey! =D> That story has a happier ending than my in-law's male turkey who kept going all broody and wanting to sit on eggs. Poor thing couldn't get up the body heat necessary to actually hatch them, although he wouldn't budge from the nest...
Thanks for the great story!
Cheers,
Sarah

Post by **Merlot** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:42 am

Oh well done Smokey.

Great story Mary nature really is amazing.

Merlot

Rach · Post by **Rach** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:13 pm

What a lovely story to read on a cold, winter's day.
When our daughters were young we went twice to a farm to stay. The first year their cat was called Smokey. The second year it was Smokeless

Rae

loz_scotland · Post by **loz_scotland** » Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:20 pm

Well I never thought my post would bring such amazing information as lactating tom cats !. I had never thought about finding out about Isabella , Right enough she was the child of Thomas Taylor and Elizabeth Colquhoun born 15/1/1971 at 11.30 am and Catherine died same day at 1.30 pm cause of death childbirth. So it seems Janet was indeed wet nursing her.

Laura