42. Excess of births over pregnancies due to plural births.
| Table XIV.—Distribution According to Number of Pregnancies and Age Groups of Married Mothers Classified by Nativity. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOTHER’S AGE AND NUMBER OF REPORTABLE PREGNANCIES. | ALL MOTHERS. | NATIVE MOTHERS. | FOREIGN MOTHERS. | |||
| Number. | Per cent. | Number. | Per cent. | Number. | Per cent. | |
| Total pregnancies | 1,491 | 100.0 | 816 | 100.0 | 675 | 100.0 |
| 1 | 339 | 22.7 | 234 | 28.7 | 105 | 15.6 |
| 2 | 283 | 19.0 | 173 | 21.2 | 110 | 16.3 |
| 3 | 214 | 14.4 | 111 | 13.6 | 103 | 15.3 |
| 4 | 186 | 12.5 | 94 | 11.5 | 92 | 13.6 |
| 5 | 147 | 9.8 | 65 | 8.0 | 82 | 12.1 |
| 6 | 94 | 6.3 | 37 | 4.5 | 57 | 8.4 |
| 7 | 83 | 5.6 | 38 | 4.7 | 45 | 6.7 |
| 8 | 54 | 3.6 | 23 | 2.8 | 31 | 4.6 |
| 9 | 33 | 2.2 | 13 | 1.6 | 20 | 3.0 |
| 10 and over | 58 | 3.9 | 28 | 3.4 | 30 | 4.4 |
| Under 20 years, total pregnancies | 89 | 100.0 | 66 | 100.0 | 23 | 100.0 |
| 1 | 74 | 83.1 | 55 | 83.3 | 19 | 82.6 |
| 2 | 12 | 13.5 | 10 | 15.2 | 2 | 8.7 |
| 3 | 3 | 3.4 | 1 | 1.5 | 2 | 8.7 |
| 20 to 24 years, total pregnancies | 461 | 100.0 | 261 | 100.0 | 200 | 100.0 |
| 1 | 178 | 38.6 | 114 | 43.7 | 64 | 32.0 |
| 2 | 156 | 33.8 | 86 | 33.0 | 70 | 35.0 |
| 3 | 77 | 16.7 | 42 | 16.1 | 35 | 17.5 |
| 4 | 39 | 8.5 | 14 | 5.4 | 25 | 12.5 |
| 5 | 10 | 2.2 | 4 | 1.5 | 6 | 3.0 |
| 6 | 1 | .2 | 1 | 0.4 | ||
| 25 to 29 years, total pregnancies | 395 | 100.0 | 199 | 100.0 | 196 | 100.0 |
| 1 | 57 | 14.5 | 45 | 22.6 | 12 | 6.1 |
| 2 | 74 | 18.7 | 46 | 23.1 | 28 | 14.3 |
| 3 | 95 | 24.1 | 40 | 20.1 | 55 | 28.1 |
| 4 | 75 | 19.0 | 40 | 20.1 | 35 | 17.9 |
| 5 | 56 | 14.2 | 17 | 8.5 | 39 | 19.9 |
| 6 | 22 | 5.6 | 7 | 3.6 | 15 | 7.7 |
| 7 | 14 | 3.5 | 4 | 2.0 | 10 | 5.1 |
| 8 | 2 | .4 | 2 | 1.0 | ||
| 30 to 39 years, total pregnancies | 466 | 100.0 | 245 | 100.0 | 221 | 100.0 |
| 1 | 30 | 6.4 | 20 | 8.2 | 10 | 4.5 |
| 2 | 39 | 8.4 | 29 | 11.8 | 10 | 4.5 |
| 3 | 36 | 7.7 | 25 | 10.2 | 11 | 5.0 |
| 4 | 63 | 13.5 | 33 | 13.5 | 30 | 13.6 |
| 5 | 75 | 16.1 | 40 | 16.3 | 35 | 15.8 |
| 6 | 60 | 12.9 | 24 | 9.8 | 36 | 16.3 |
| 7 | 56 | 12.0 | 28 | 11.4 | 28 | 12.7 |
| 8 | 51 | 10.9 | 23 | 9.4 | 28 | 12.7 |
| 9 | 23 | 4.9 | 8 | 3.3 | 15 | 6.8 |
| 10 and over | 33 | 7.1 | 15 | 6.1 | 18 | 8.1 |
| 40 years and over, total pregnancies | 80 | 100.0 | 45 | 100.0 | 35 | 100.0 |
| 2 | 2 | 2.5 | 2 | 4.4 | ||
| 3 | 3 | 3.8 | 3 | 6.7 | ||
| 4 | 9 | 11.3 | 7 | 15.6 | 2 | 5.7 |
| 5 | 6 | 7.5 | 4 | 8.9 | 2 | 5.7 |
| 6 | 11 | 13.8 | 5 | 11.1 | 6 | 17.1 |
| 7 | 13 | 16.3 | 6 | 13.3 | 7 | 20.0 |
| 8 | 1 | 1.3 | 1 | 2.9 | ||
| 9 | 10 | 12.5 | 5 | 11.1 | 5 | 14.3 |
| 10 and over | 25 | 31.3 | 13 | 28.9 | 12 | 34.3 |
| Table XV.—Distribution of Married Mothers by Losses Sustained, According to Nativity of Mother and Number of Possible Losses. | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NUMBER OF BIRTHS OR POSSIBLE LOSSES AND NATIVITY OF MOTHER. | DISTRIBUTION OF MOTHERS ACCORDING TO NUMBER OF LOSSES. | ||||||||
| Number of mothers. | 1 loss. | 2 losses. | 3 losses. | 4 losses. | 5 losses. | 6 losses. | 8 losses. | 10 or more losses. | |
| All mothers | 1,491 | 399 | 121 | 60 | 24 | 13 | 8 | 1 | 2 |
| 1 birth | 335 | 53 | |||||||
| 2 births | 277 | 67 | 10 | ||||||
| 3 births | 216 | 73 | 14 | 4 | |||||
| 4 births | 187 | 55 | 13 | 8 | 1 | ||||
| 5 births | 148 | 48 | 19 | 11 | 1 | 2 | |||
| 6 births | 96 | 44 | 13 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 7 births | 82 | 22 | 19 | 10 | 2 | 1 | |||
| 8 births | 54 | 18 | 8 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 2 | ||
| 9 births | 36 | 9 | 10 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 10 or more births | 60 | 10 | 15 | 4 | 13 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Native mothers | 816 | 199 | 59 | 19 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 1 | |
| 1 birth | 232 | 29 | |||||||
| 2 births | 170 | 36 | 5 | ||||||
| 3 births | 111 | 35 | 7 | 1 | |||||
| 4 births | 98 | 33 | 6 | 3 | |||||
| 5 births | 65 | 19 | 10 | 4 | |||||
| 6 births | 38 | 19 | 7 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 7 births | 37 | 10 | 8 | 3 | 1 | ||||
| 8 births | 21 | 8 | 5 | 3 | |||||
| 9 births | 15 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | ||||
| 10 or more births | 29 | 6 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 1 | ||
| Foreign mothers | 675 | 200 | 62 | 41 | 19 | 7 | 7 | 2 | |
| 1 birth | 103 | 24 | |||||||
| 2 births | 107 | 31 | 5 | ||||||
| 3 births | 105 | 38 | 7 | 3 | |||||
| 4 births | 89 | 22 | 7 | 5 | 1 | ||||
| 5 births | 83 | 29 | 9 | 7 | 1 | 2 | |||
| 6 births | 58 | 25 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 2 | |||
| 7 births | 45 | 12 | 11 | 7 | 2 | ||||
| 8 births | 33 | 10 | 3 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 2 | ||
| 9 births | 21 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |||
| 10 or more births | 31 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |
| Population, Registered Births, Deaths of Infants under 1 Year of Age, and Infant Mortality Rates for Registration States and Registration Cities having a Population of at Least 50,000 in 1910. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AREA. | DEATHS[44] OF INFANTS UNDER 1 YEAR OF AGE. | |||
| Population in 1910. | Births.[45] | Number. | Per 1000 births.[46] | |
| REGISTRATION STATES. | ||||
| Connecticut | 1,114,756 | 27,291 | 3,476 | 127 |
| Maine | 742,371 | 15,578 | 2,108 | 135 |
| Massachusetts | 3,366,416 | 86,765 | 11,377 | 131 |
| Michigan | 2,810,173 | 63,566 | 7,912 | 124 |
| New Hampshire | 430,572 | 9,385 | 1,373 | 146 |
| Pennsylvania | 7,665,111 | 202,631 | 28,377 | 140 |
| Rhode Island | 542,610 | ([47])6,595 | ([47])1,111 | ([47])168 |
| Vermont | 355,956 | 7,343 | 791 | 168 |
| REGISTRATION CITIES OF 50,000 POPULATION OR OVER IN 1910. | ||||
| Connecticut: | ||||
| Bridgeport | 102,054 | 2,976 | 367 | 123 |
| Hartford | 98,915 | 2,411 | 286 | 119 |
| New Haven | 133,605 | 3,772 | 406 | 108 |
| Waterbury | 73,141 | 2,150 | 320 | 149 |
| Washington, D. C. | 331,069 | 7,016 | 1,068 | 152 |
| Portland, Me. | 58,571 | 1,163 | 167 | 144 |
| Massachusetts: | ||||
| Boston | 670,585 | 17,760 | 2,246 | 126 |
| Brockton | 56,878 | 1,359 | 134 | 99 |
| Cambridge | 104,839 | 2,462 | 293 | 119 |
| Fall River | 119,295 | 4,591 | 854 | 186 |
| Holyoke | 57,730 | 1,702 | 362 | 213 |
| Lawrence | 85,892 | 3,165 | 529 | 167 |
| Lowell | 106,294 | 2,630 | 607 | 231 |
| Lynn | 89,336 | 2,218 | 216 | 97 |
| New Bedford | 96,652 | 3,873 | 685 | 177 |
| Somerville | 77,236 | 1,728 | 174 | 101 |
| Springfield | 88,926 | 2,438 | 302 | 124 |
| Worcester | 145,986 | 3,918 | 536 | 137 |
| Michigan: | ||||
| Detroit | 465,766 | 11,960 | 2,138 | 179 |
| Grand Rapids | 112,571 | 2,693 | 329 | 122 |
| Saginaw | 50,510 | 897 | 130 | 145 |
| Manchester, N. H. | 70,063 | 1,939 | 375 | 193 |
| New York, N. Y. | 4,766,883 | 129,316 | 6,159 | 125 |
| Bronx Borough | 430,980 | 10,926 | 11,047 | 96 |
| Brooklyn Borough | 1,634,351 | 43,128 | 5,063 | 117 |
| Manhattan Borough | 2,331,542 | 66,112 | 8,900 | 135 |
| Queens Borough | 284,041 | 7,095 | 865 | 122 |
| Richmond Borough | 85,969 | 2,055 | 284 | 138 |
| Pennsylvania: | ||||
| Allentown | 51,913 | 1,406 | 202 | 144 |
| Altoona | 52,127 | 1,392 | 166 | 119 |
| Erie | 66,525 | 1,713 | 197 | 116 |
| Harrisburg | 64,186 | 1,308 | 169 | 129 |
| Johnstown | 55,482 | 1,628 | 268 | 165 |
| Philadelphia | 1,549,008 | 38,666 | 5,334 | 138 |
| Pittsburgh | 533,905 | 15,059 | 2,259 | 150 |
| Reading | 96,071 | 2,370 | 336 | 142 |
| Scranton | 129,867 | 3,512 | 520 | 148 |
| Wilkes-Barre | 67,105 | 1,840 | 269 | 146 |
| Rhode Island: | ||||
| Pawtucket | 51,622 | ([48]) | 191 | ([48]) |
| Providence | 224,326 | ([48]) | 827 | ([48]) |
44. Exclusive of stillbirths.
45. Provisional figures; exclusive of stillbirths.
46. Based on provisional figures for births.
47. The figures for Rhode Island are exclusive of Providence and Pawtucket.
48. Returns of births not received from State board in time for inclusion.
It will be seen by this table that Johnstown is among the 10 cities of more than 50,000 population which had an infant mortality rate of 1910 in excess of 150 per 1,000 births. These 10 cities and their respective rates are as follows: Lowell, Mass., 231; Holyoke, Mass., 213; Manchester, N. H., 193; Fall River, Mass., 186; Detroit, Mich., 179; New Bedford, Mass., 177; Lawrence, Mass., 167; Johnstown, Pa., 165; Washington, D. C., 152; and Pittsburgh, Pa., 150.
It should be borne in mind that the absolute infant mortality rate of 134, computed for the group of babies included in this investigation, that is, for those born in Johnstown in 1911, can not be compared with any of the approximate rates in the foregoing table, since the basis of computation is entirely different. But the method used in this report seemed to be the only practicable one for our purpose, namely, to measure the infant mortality rate in different districts of the city where the babies are subjected to varying conditions.
Conditions similar to those existing in Johnstown were found in Chicago by Dr. Alice Hamilton, Bacteriologist in the Memorial Institute for Infectious Diseases, Hull House. The results of a study made of 1,600 families in the neighborhood was published in 1910. The investigation was undertaken to find out the truth or falsity of a general feeling among the district nurses that a high birth rate was accompanied by a high death rate. It was found that a high birth rate was not so much accompanied as outrun by a high death rate. The number of children live-born was compared with the number of children who reached the age of three, so it is a study of child mortality, rather than of infant mortality. The child mortality rate rises and falls very much as does the infant mortality rate in Johnstown. A table calculated from the data of all the families shows an ascending mortality rate:
| No. in Family | Child Mortality Rate |
|---|---|
| 4 children and less | 118 |
| 6 children and more | 267 |
| 7 children and more | 280 |
| 8 children and more | 291 |
| 9 children and more | 303 |
Expressed in words this table says that child mortality increases as the number of children per family increases, until we have a death rate in families of eight and more, which is two and a half times as great as that in families of four children and under.
The findings of the bureau’s earlier study in Johnstown, Pa., are confirmed in many respects by the findings in Manchester—the coincidence of a high infant mortality rate with low earnings, poor housing, mother’s work, and large families.
The mortality rate among the 1,564 live-born babies studied in Manchester was 165 per 1,000 births, which is considerably higher than the estimated rate for the whole country.
Manchester is primarily a textile town, and the textile mills employed 36.3 per cent. of all the fathers of babies born in Manchester during the 12 months covered by the study. Of the fathers, 13.7 per cent. were earning less than $450 per year; 48.5 per cent. less than $650; 22.9 per cent. $850 or more; 6.4 per cent. $1,250 or more.
Of the babies with fathers earning less than $450, about 1 in 4 died before it was 12 months old. The great majority of the babies had fathers in the wage group from $450 to $849, and of these about 1 in 6 died. Of the babies whose fathers earned $850 but less than $1,050, 1 in 8 failed to survive. Where the fathers earned $1,050 or more, 1 baby in 16 died in the first year.
Where families lived two or more persons per room, the infant death rate was twice as high as where they lived less than one person per room. The babies living in houses occupied by a single family died at the rate of 86.1 per 1,000, but those in tenements occupied by more than six families died at the rate of 236.6 per 1,000.
When the mother was a wage earner the baby’s chances of living were less than when she was not. Babies of mothers who had worked at some time during the year before the baby’s birth died at the rate of 199.2 per 1,000, while babies of nonworking mothers died at the rate of 133.9. Babies of mothers employed away from home some time during the year after childbirth while the baby was still alive and under four months old had a rate of 277.3, while babies of mothers not employed during that time had a rate of 122.
Babies of foreign-born mothers did not fare so well as babies of native mothers. The differences of rates, however, are only partly accounted for by their lower earnings. The largest foreign element in Manchester is Canadian French, and among them the infant mortality rate, 224 per 1,000 live births, is greater than that among any other group of the population, although their earnings are in general higher than those of other foreigners.
Sheer size of family appears to be one factor in this high Canadian-French rate, one-third of their babies being sixth or later in order of birth, while over one-sixth of these mothers had had from 9 to 18 children. These Canadian-French babies in families of 6 or more children died at the rate of 246.2 per 1,000 and the rate rises to 277.2 per 1,000 when only babies ninth or later in order of birth are considered.