We welcome any query on Who When Where. If you have previously posted it on another forum (including the old WDYTYA forum), please state this in your opening post - this will save people redoing the research which has been done before: they can look at it and possibly go further with it.

Children in care system (Victorian era)

Got any useful ideas for us or for other members? Of course you do! Share them here!
Post Reply
VALLMO9
Posts: 757
Joined: 13 Jun 2020, 21:28

Children in care system (Victorian era)

Post by VALLMO9 »

Whilst researching young relatives of my grandmother who'd been briefly put into care, I stumbled across online case histories of late Victorian children. I won't mention the website as some later case files relate to living people.

However, I just wanted to offer this tip: When searching for a young ancestor who's "vanished" from the family home, it's worth considering he/she may have been taken into the care system. Particularly if you know said ancestor came from a troubled or unfortunate family situation.

This might include: poverty, illegitimacy, drunken or abusive family members, disability, abandonment, neglect, foster care, and exposure to prostitution and theft.

And if one does locate a newspaper report mentioning a child being removed from a troubled/unfortunate family situation, chances are the newspaper details will pale in comparison to the actual tragic circumstances (as per the application for care).

One situation I repeatedly saw was children in care being sent from pillar to post around England and occasionally Wales. Transferred from one institution to another, sometimes ending up in domestic service or work in yet another part of the country.

Example: One young girl from London was born in the workhouse, and had been found living with prostitutes. She was also deaf. At age 10 she was put in the care system. From London she was sent to a home for girls in Hertfordshire. Several years later she goes into domestic service. Six months later she's back in London for treatment in various hospitals. A year later she's transferred to a convalescent home in East Sussex for two months. Then she's back in London and put in a home for girls; followed by another lengthy hospital stay. Finally she's placed in a home for girls in west Yorkshire for 18 months. Then she's put back into domestic service, but 7 months later, she's returned to the home for girls. She's only 17. No details given for her from that point on.

Another young girl was put into care, due to her mother taking drugs. Bear in mind this was circa 1885! At age 11, the girl was deemed "unruly" and placed in another home for girls in west Yorkshire. A year later she's sent to a lunatic asylum (age 12), as she was considered a danger to other children. Sadly, no case notes on her after being placed in the lunatic asylum.

Then there are the poor souls in care who don't even make it to adulthood. Some die from TB, others from long-term disability complications. Some older children and teenagers have "exhaustion" for cause of death. And in most instances, these deaths occurred in other parts of the country, due to their in-care or domestic service situation at the time.

So when researching a young ancestor who's done a "disappearing act" do consider the possibility they were in the care system, and may have ended up elsewhere in England or Wales. One thing's for certain: some children in care were like 'moving targets' every few months. And usually between census years. Just to make searching for them even more difficult.
Last edited by VALLMO9 on 08 Sep 2021, 00:11, edited 1 time in total.
Norfolk Nan
Posts: 506
Joined: 16 Jun 2020, 11:54
Location: A Londoner lost in Norfolk

Re: Children in the care system (Victorian era)

Post by Norfolk Nan »

A very sad situation for all involved, Mo, but unfortunately it's no better today. It's a shocking fact that children get moved about frequently to suit the service rather than the service supporting the individual. Shameful.
VALLMO9
Posts: 757
Joined: 13 Jun 2020, 21:28

Re: Children in the care system (Victorian era)

Post by VALLMO9 »

I wasn't trying to suggest this care system organisation failed certain children, or allowed some to slip thru the cracks. According to the case summaries I read, not all children in care went from pillar to post. Some quickly ended up with a foster parent(s), but most went to a care home (usually in another part of the country). I suppose it all depended on the child's disability, progress made, and the availability in the care system at the time.

I just want to make researchers aware that some case files still exist, should they suspect a child/teenager in their family tree was taken into care during the late Victorian era.

Reading the case file summaries was fascinating albeit tragic. Every case summary presented the "story behind the story". Gold dust insight to a family researcher. Some parents were experiencing extreme poverty and weren't equipped to look after a disabled child. Other parents (including "evil" step-parents) exploited the vulnerable child and subjected them to abuse and neglect, etc. One disabled child in particular was routinely beaten if she didn't sell enough match sticks each day. Very disturbing stuff.

What amazed me was children with polio put into domestic service -- some as young as 10 years old. I do wonder what sort of work they were given in a household, given their condition.

Speaking of foster parents, one lady took in a "troubled" teenage girl. It didn't take long for the foster parent to hand the girl back. Reason: the teenager had taken to stealing money from the woman. I guess no one told the teenager "don't bite the hand that feeds..."

Apparently many existing case files include extensive documentation relating to the child's journey thru the care system. In fact, some files also include a photo of the child/teenager! Obviously one would need to apply to see a case file. What I saw online were only case summaries.

Several years ago I recall a family researcher (on another forum) who disputed a newspaper report which mentioned their ancestors' involvement in very dodgy child neglect, etc. Yet the researcher wondered why the younger children didn't appear in the following census record a year after the reported incidents. It's not rocket science to work out the children may have been taken into care, is it?
Norfolk Nan
Posts: 506
Joined: 16 Jun 2020, 11:54
Location: A Londoner lost in Norfolk

Re: Children in the care system (Victorian era)

Post by Norfolk Nan »

It’s all fascinating in my opinion, if you can access the records in the first place! That’s the trick - to find the info and to gain access. Thanks for reminding us, Mo. :D
VALLMO9
Posts: 757
Joined: 13 Jun 2020, 21:28

Re: Children in the care system (Victorian era)

Post by VALLMO9 »

With my family, I'm fortunate that two of my granny's teenage cousins appear in the 1901 census at The Royal Albert Orphan School in Surrey. Without seeing their admission records, all I can do is speculate that their recently widowed mother couldn't provide for them at the time.
What I find fascinating is that the mother chose to keep her older (disabled) daughter at home with her and the youngest children. To some people, the more obvious child to put into care would've been the disabled child (who is one of my favourite people in my family tree).

Based on the two daughters joint baptisms in 1895 (ages 8 & 9), I think their mother was preparing them for admission to the Orphan School. Mother chose the right organisation, as one daughter later went into domestic service for the 6th Baron Boston in Buckinghamshire. :D
Norfolk Nan
Posts: 506
Joined: 16 Jun 2020, 11:54
Location: A Londoner lost in Norfolk

Re: Children in the care system (Victorian era)

Post by Norfolk Nan »

My great gran was put into a workhouse school with a couple of siblings when her parents separated- dad was a drunk and mum had had enough. She kept the eldest - a boy old enough to work at something - and the youngest, a baby. The middle three benefitted from being clothed and fed while being trained for work and eventually found jobs. They were there for several years and kept together as far as I can tell. In this case I assumed it was a pragmatic decision but who can really tell? The human heart is a funny old thing.
Post Reply