Testimony Before the United States Senate on S. 1842

STATEMENT OF MRS. MARGARET SANGER, PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL LEGISLATION FOR BIRTH CONTROL INC.; DIRECTOR, BIRTH CONTROL CLINIC RESEARCH BUREAU, NEW YORK CITY

Mrs. SANGER. Mr. Chairman, this bill, S. 1842, concerns, in my estimation, the 32,612,792 women of child-bearing age in this country. I believe that it concerns that number of women, because every woman, when she becomes of adult age, naturally looks forward to the time when she may be married and become a mother. There are 20,441,719 married women of child-bearing age in this country.

I have had the privilege of coining the term by which this bill is likely to be known, "birth control" legislation. I would like to say that birth control means the control of the birth rate, by means that prevent conception. It does not mean that it interferes with the development of life; it does not mean that it interrupts the process of life nor that it takes life. The prevention of conception is not any more an interference with the process of life than remaining single or living in continence or celibacy. In the control of the birth rate we do not mean that we must limit the birth rate. It means to control the size of the family, but it does not mean limit it to 1 or 2 or to any specific number of children. We want the first consideration to be of the health of the mother; then the consideration of the health of the children that are already here; then consideration of the father's ability to earn a living for his family and the standard of the living that the parents wish to maintain for the cultivation and the education of the family. I would just like to make that definition clear for that is what we are talking about in using the term "birth control," as it may be used by other speakers.

Some years ago as a trained nurse, I found that I could not discuss this question with mothers; that I was unable to get information to assist them, even after they had been told by the doctors that another baby would cost them their lives. We found that the main thing in the way of doing that was sections 211 and 245 of the Penal code, passed by the Congress 61 years ago.

Mr. Chairman, in looking over the record and the history of that law and the way it was placed upon the statute books, I contend and believe that Congress at that time never intended that persons should be deprived of knowledge by which they could reasonably rear and care for their children. The whole law and all the discussion around it at that time, as we find it in the record, has relation to obscene literature coming to this country that was being circulated among young people. The intention of the law was to stop the circulation of indecent literature, and the prohibition of information to prevent conception never was intended in the sense of its rightful use. I cannot believe that any Congress then or today would want to deprive mothers of knowledge they rightfully should have for the benefit of the family and really for the benefit of the community and the country.

The law as it is set forth in sections 211 and 245 makes no exception. It does not exempt the medical profession or permit them to use the mails or common carriers. It make no exception for scientific or medical literature, to permmit such to go through the mails or by common carriers. We feel that the United States mails should be opened for information on this subject to those qualified to make proper use of it for the good of the country

I have here, Mr. Chairman, the laws to which this bill pertains and a small leaflet that we brought forth on Federal interference with the administration of State laws, with which we contend this law does interfere; and also a brief summary of the State laws which allow an exempton to the medical profession and a general exemption in certain cases. In New York State, through my spending 30 days in jail, I was able to have a court decision that interpreted one of the laws of our State, by which the physician could give information for the "cure and prevention of disease." Many of the other States have similar laws. Some of the States give the right to anyone; other States allow teaching of the subject in medical colleges and universities, and so on.

If you will permit it, I would like to place this in the record, as indicating what has been done in the way of Federal interference with the administration of these State laws.

Senator Logan. You may do so.

(The statement of the present law and summary of the State law referred to was marked "Exhibit B"; and the pamphlet entitled "Federal Interference with the Administration of State Laws," was marked "Exhibit C"; both of which appear at the close of the statement of this witness.)

Mrs. Sanger. Because of these State laws and under the authority and the right of State laws, people who are interested in this subject and are connected with social and civil work in the communities have established over 150 of what we call "birth-control clinics" throughout the country. Those are legally established centers, but they have to bootleg their supplies from New York and Chicago, where the large manufacturing concerns are located. That is the situation today, and it is a situation that, to my mind, is very reprehensible and that we hope to change through this bill, S. 1842, by allowing the physicians, licensed clinics, and hospitals the right to use the United States mails and common carriers for that legitimate and rightful purpose.

Section 211 also makes it a crime for anyone to tell anyone else where such information may be obtained. In other words, these clinics that are legally established in various States not only have to bootleg their supplies but also bootleg any proper modern information than concerning contraception. Many of the doctors have no more information than the people had 40 or 50 years ago, which should belong in the ark. In order to get any new, scientific information, they have to bootleg it. Most physicians do not like to put themselves in that position.

Mr. Chairman, I have had a million letters from women in this country, from the time I began this campaign of education up until about 4 years ago. I have had a million personal letters about the hardships of some of these women. I have had to jeopardize my freedom, run the risk of a $5,000 fine and five years in prison for violating section 211, by telling these women where in their own States they could obtain that which they were legally entitled to under their own State laws.

That is what we are fighting for. We want to do away with this bootlegging. Representative Pierce told you about that article in the New Republic called "Birth Control's Business Baby." He did not ask you to put it in the record. With your consent, I would like to leave it for the record, because it does show the things we are trying to do away with; that these things are surreptitiously done; that the manufacturers of commercial products are producing them at very high prices because of the laws which have created this situation.

Senator Logan. That may be incorporated in the record.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit I", and is printed in full at the close of the statement of this witness.)

Mrs. Sanger. There is no particular avenue or direction for these people to go in which to get the right information. They have to go to the drug store and have it whispered over the counter that this or that will do. And we know from our recent research that many of these products are not effective. We have purchased 100 so-called "contraceptives" and put them through scientific tests. We put them through laboratory tests and had clinical tests, and submitted them to physicians, and we found that 43 out of the 100 were practically of no use whatever. Purchasing those things has caused many women serious injury. We have not gone into that very thoroughly yet, because we have just tested them as to their efficaciousness, and 43 out of 100 were of no use. It means a fraud is being perpetrated upon the public. This is a brief statement of the results of our research that I would like to have go into the record.

Senator Logan. That may be incorporated in the record.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit E", and is printed in full at the close of the statement of this witness.)

Mrs. Sanger. If I may stress this, by way of a little explanation when we talk about the question of preventing contraception we claim there are three methods of preventing conception. The first is continence. No one objects to continence. We have no objection whatever to certain religious orders claiming that is the only method the church can sanction. There is nothing in the law against it. They may practice it, and we say that this is their own affair, their own individual right.

The next is sterilization. Sterilization is for people who have to responsibility toward parenthood or toward children. It is becoming more and more prevalent, as you know from reports from England, Germany, and other countries. We have in this country over 24 states that have sterilization laws, allowing certain authorities to advise sterilization in special cases where there are transmissible diseases or certain transmissible ailments. That is not a part of our provision.

Then there is the chemical or the mechanical means of contraception, which is one that places in the hands of the parties involved the legal right to use means to prevent contraception, and it is around that group that most of the discussion seems to be centered.

There is nothing mandatory about this bill. We are not imposing any method upon anybody. We are not claiming that every family must obtain this information, but we do say for those who wish to use some means they should have the legal right to do it, and those who wish to use one particular means or no means at all should not have the right to impose that upon the whole community. We claim that we have a perfect right to use such method as our Physician indicates is the right one for the individual.

As we have stated, we are making no claim that any one means or method is a panacea for all. Various women differ. They differ as to the number of children, and their physical conditions become different. The economic situation is also different. We want to place the giving of information in the hands of those who can disseminate it properly, so that those desiring it may receive instructions and necessary scientific advice from those who are qualified to give it. It is just the same as the 10-cent pair of glasses in a 10-cent store. That is no way for people who need to have them to have glasses fitted. We want this subject removed from the 10-cent store and the gasoline stations and placed in the hands of those who are qualified in every way to explain the relations of parenthood properly.

Mr. Chairman, we have had to go through many difficulties in connection with this subject since 1914. Some of us have served time in jail, We have been arrested time and again, just because we wished to exercise the right of freedom of speech and help educate those who were in need of help. We have been able to get some decisions from the courts that have in a way interpreted these laws in different ways, especially in the States. Members of Congress have said to us:

You will never get anything through Congress. Why do you not go to jail and get your court decision?

I say Congress should be ashamed to compel us to go to such extremes and to resort to such methods for our laws. Why should we have to go to the courts to have our laws made? That is what Congress is for. People have a right to look to Congress and to bring these questions before it. We should not have to go to the expense of lawsuits and go to courts to have our laws made. I think you will all agree with that.

Now, then, as to the clinics: There are 157 birth-control clinics in this country. I have a statement here of the number of those clinics and the location, but I do no know whether I can put that in the record or not. There may be some question of a violation of section 211.

Senator Logan. That may be filed with the committee, and we will treat it as a privileged communication.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit F", and is filed with the committee.)

Mrs. Sanger. I want to talk a little about the waste of life, a fact which brought me into this cause more than anything else. First, I was to refer to the terrific number of abortions that are going on, which is a colossal number. I think we can show from the record that it runs over a million a year, and that does not begin to tell the story. There is the waste of women's lives, the waste of child life, and the terrible suffering of women. No woman can keep her health and continue to go through these operations with increasing pregnancy every year, especially when it is done surreptitiously. The condition of those nervous and unhealthy women is something really beyond our belief or understanding, and it is terrible that we should have to make it necessary for the women of America to go into these dangerous conditions and live under those conditions which I would call an underworld of suffering. It seems to me to be a state of barbarism.

Dr. Woodbury, of the United States Children's Bureau, published some very interesting data where he clearly shows that too short an interval between childbirths markedly affects the infant death rate. Where the interval between births is 3 years, the infant death rate is 80.5 per 1,000 births; when the interval is 2 years, the rate is 98.6; and when it is only 1 year, the infant mortality goes up to 146.7. Certainly that is a very striking increase.

In homes, for instance, where the average number of persons per room is less than 1, the infant death rate is 52.1; where it is 2 or more persons per room the death rate is 135.7. Furthermore, in families where the per capita income from the father's earnings was less than $50 the infant mortality rate was 215.9, as compared with a rate of only 60.5 where the per capita amount averaged #400 or over. These figures clearly and strikingly indicate the influence of family over-crowding upon family well-being.

I would like to read this little thing about Jimmy. Nobody wanted Jimmy, but he was born anyhow, and died three weeks later. His mother was sick with worry before he came. Childbearing in 1925, 1927, 1929, and 1931 had left her in miserable health, with bad varicose veins. his father was a $25-per-week mechanic working part time. Which of us, under such circumstance, would look forward to the birth of Jimmy? The community did not want him. Philadelphia's relief burden in 1932 was approximately $11,000,000.

Yet this community gave his mother prenatal care, which amounted to $6.75. A social agency boarded his 4 brothers and sisters over 13 weeks, at a cost of $170.50. His mother was in the hospital 20 days, at a cost of $80. The layettte for the baby cost $7. He contracted meningitis at home and was given medical care and nursing by the city, at a cost of $15.25. He died and was buried free by the community, which cost $30. So his short and painful life cost the community $309.50.

Ask yourself, was it fair for Jimmy to be born at this time, with no chance for a happy childhood? Was it fair to his brothers and sisters when the father made enough money for food only, with no money for rent or clothing? Was it fair to the community which is now supporting over 70,000 families?

We believe that a child's first right is to be wanted. We believe that hunger and fear cannot create a wholesome home for a baby. We believe that during this crisis the community cannot now keep in health and decency the children who are here.

I also have some interesting statistics submitted by Prof. Joseph J. Spengler, University of Arizona, in relation to conditions in Colorado, to which I should like to call attention to very briefly.

In Weld County, Greeley, Colorado, the county commissioners pay for birth-control supplies. The cost of supplying the patient with birth-control supplies is approximately $1.50. The cost of the indigent woman either through a confinement case or through a miscarriage, which averages about once a year, in each case was $50 for hospitalization, nursing, and pre-natal and post-natal care. This is the actual cost to the county and does not include the cost of caring for the child later.

The county estimated that there are about 200 such cases yearly, making a total cost of $10,000 per year. For $300 it was possible then to save $10,000.

We wish to point out, however, since this clinic is a branch of the Denver clinic, and obtains birth-control supplies from the Denver clinic, that we find the country breaking the Federal laws by having birth-control supplies shipped through the mails.

I have just two or three letters here that I would like to call you attention to. The first is from Corydon, KY., and reads as follows:

 you will only tell me I will do anything in the world for you I can.

PleasI read your address in the Evansville Press, and I wonder if you could help me any. I have two children. My mother has 10. I am only 20 years old, I live in fear all the time for I never know when I will get that way again. My oldest child is hairlipped and we want it fixed; part of it has been fixed but haven't the money to do any more. My husband only makes $10 a week so you see it is all we can do to live. I will never forget it if you will tell me how to keep from having children. I will tell my mother; her youngest child is younger than mine. It is terrible; ife.

Yours truly.

This woman could have been sent to Louisville where there is a birth-control clinic. We could have had a social worker take her there. It would pay the people of Kentucky to pay her carfare to that point and take care of her. In order to try to save that woman I had to jeopardize my freedom and run the risk of a $5,000 fine to tell her where she could go to get decent information to protect herself.

Here is another letter from Memphis along the same lines, which I should like to read:

In regard to Birth-control bill S. 1842, how I wish all those people, priest and all that are so bitter against birth control, had to have babies every 9 months and know what it is to see little children hungry and cold, not to say anything about the slave life the poor mother is living and the suffering she goes through. I will do all I can for the cause. I haven't any money--we are sure having a struggle these days to make ends meet. Only hope the bill goes through for we poor women need help if anything or anybody does.

I worry so much. I have such a hard time. Oh, I don't want any more babies--am half crazy - am half tempted to leave my husband, but then how would I get along, and there are the children, and we all love one another, and he doesn't want any more babies either, so write my, dear unseen friend.

Here is one from Maxwell, Iowa. I should also like to read this into the record:

I have been married 10 years and during that time have given birth to 5 children: 3 girls and 2 boys. After the third one was born, I suffered a severe breakdown in health. It weakened my heart and stomach to such an extent that I am unable to do a big day's work. Whenever I do, I am so tired and exhausted I cannot sleep for hours. I have lain awake many and many a night, so tired my heart just pounded and thumped. Oh, but it is terrible. No one knows what it is like unless they have it to go through with. The children are so close together. They are all just like babes yet and are so noisy and fight and fuss till I am almost crazy. The oldest one died, so I have only four living but that is enough. I did not act right when the last one was born. I just had to gasp for breath and had such a strangled feeling. If we had lots of money I might get along better than I do, but my husband is a laboring man and there is no money to pay expensive doctor fees and laundry bills, and so forth. If I could do something harmless to keep from raising any more children my husband and I both would consider it a godsend. e cannot take proper care of the ones we have, let alone any more. My baby is 2 months old and I want to find out something to do before I have the chance to get pregnant again.

Miss Sanger, if you know of anything to help me stop all this, please inform me, for I am getting desperate. I have been tempted to commit suicide many a time. If I had good health, it would not be so bad but I wish you could see me. I married when I was 16. I will be 27 my next birthday and I look older than my husband and he is 35. And I feel older than I look. Everybody speaks about how tired I look and I am tired. So tired, nervous, and worn out I feel like I could drop in the floor and die without a single shudder.

What would this law do? In the first place, it would place the proper responsibility for the giving of information upon the medical profession and hospitals where women go to have their babies, and to these maternal wards in the hospitals. It would give the poor women, who are unable to go to the hospital, the opportunity to go to some member of the medical profession, who has a right to judge such matters. If she could go to the hospital to have her baby, she should be able to get proper information there. It gives the poor woman the right that only the well-to-do have had.

We should like to do more than this law asks for, and I hope before long we can ask for more an appropriation for this work in various States, especially in mountainous sections where women have a difficult time getting to a hospital. We would like to have regular Federal birth-control clinics, maternal-health clinics, where these women may get advice and where they may get proper attention. We hope before long that we may ask for just such an appropriation from the Federal Government.

In closing, may I saw there are many aspects of this question that are beyond our scope to deal with today. in my estimation, the placing of information in the hands of qualified persons and permitting them to give out such information would be very beneficial. I would like to see such information given out, regardless of whether there is overpopulation or underpopulation; regardless of whether there is a high birth rate or a low birth rate; regardless of whether there is going to be more or less baby carriages or baby bottles sold.

Regardless of all these commercial and material interests, I would like to see the mothers themselves receive consideration, and we must trust the mother that she is, going to use that advice, not only for the benefit of her child and her family but for the benefit of the community and the country. I believe that we should consider, under the Constitution of this country, that every woman should have the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and I ask you favorable consideration of this legislation. [Applause]

Senator Logan. Thank you, Mrs. Sanger.