Author Explores Lives of 'Practice Babies' Once Raised on College Campuses

I'm 54 years old, born in 1957 -- I personally never wanted to be a mom. However by the time I was old enough to really consider parenthood there were all types of options INCLUDING "birth control pills".

Women who grew up in the 50's and earlier didn't have that option. THE PILL is relatively new. The only thing women had earlier were condoms, pull out early, and a lot of hoping and praying.

It WAS a different life back then. Women grew up and were EXPECTED to marry, have children, and be a home-maker. Married women didn't usually work outside the home.

Husbands were supposed to be the bread-winners of the family. These days the thought of a man working, bringing home money, supporting his wife and children while his wife stayed home and took care of all the domestic issues ... it's almost a foreign concept to some guys.

Reply

I think every one needs to remember that times were different then. Young women, "normaly" didn't party on campus. Proper young women studdied, and prepared for marriage and family. NOT a carreer. Family values were held higher than a pay check, and House Wife was not demeaning or a dirty word. Children of that time were tought what is important. They didn't shoot up their schools, cuss out their teachers, or fight with the police. If you had to go to their parents about bad behavior, the parents didn't turn on you and defend the bad behavior. I could write a book about the way things are different now than back then. There weren't many unwed mothers either. SSSSooooo.

Reply

My mother was a member of the class of 1924 at Cornell majoring in Home Economics, and she was one of the first to have a practice baby. Her picture appeared on the cover of Life magazine with one of the babies. She received a huge response from all over the country including proposals for marriage. . I still have the letters and a picture of mother and enjoy looking at them on occasion,

Reply

They do the same thing now only they do it in high school and they do it with little robot babies. They take the babies home with them for a week or two and care for them just like they were a real infant. They even have to take them to school with them and care for them throughout the day. I think it is a good idea for people to really learn what it is to be a parent to an infant before becoming an actual parent to a real infant.

Reply

I recently read a novel about this very subject. The protagonist in the story had been a practice baby. The thing was, he got lots of attention but the students were always changing so he never really learned how to bond.

Reply

Schools really should go back to teaching "Home Economics". Maybe with a different name for the couse, like "Living Real Life". Whether or not you are going to be a career person you have to take care of your home, cook, manage a budget and so forth. And a lot of people become parents, knowing how to care for a child might be handy:)

Reply

Gee, maybe they really need to bring this back. And in to the high schools, then just maybe these youg teens would really think about having kids!

Reply

I find this concept as a class in college a little creepy but useful. With all the abuse there is in this day and age on our young maybe high schools and colleges should go back an teach this kind of class again and make it mandatory. God know our young people need the training before the deed is done. I am a singlemother and yes I new what I was getting into but the education would have been nice, it would have given me a little more undrestanding of what it was like to be a mother. No I didn't babysit when I was younger I worked at Jack-in the Box. Still the Stepford Baby's rings the bells.

Reply

In the 1970s a wonderful program of caring for children occurred on the campus where I was a student--students brought their babies and children to campus where other students cared for them! It was a fantastic experience where my daughter was cared for, loved, read to, taught to swim, went to plays (and broke her leg!!) on campus. Today, she says she thought the entire campus and student body was there because she was there! She's grown into a well-adjusted young adult who wishes her own children were able to have a similar experience.

Reply

I went to college in the 50's and surely never heard of such a class and couldn't imagine any classmates that would want to be involved.

Reply

I don't which is worse, that this was done or that many who have commented take it so lightly, even suggesting it was a good thing.

This was a sick human experiment that used real life infants as tools.

In the 50's and 60's when babies were relinquished for adoption, none went directly to adoptive parents. They were all in foster care for a time....not orphanges.

These were babies that young mothers sacrificed because they were pressured to to save THEIR parents' reputations and status. Young mothers who were convinced that it was the best thing they could do and that by allowing their children to be adopted they were providing them a "better life."

Would any mother willingly allow her baby to be used in this manner? To have multiple care-givers? To be a human play thing or instrument of learning? I think not! The fact is that these babies' mothers were never asked their permission or even told that their children were being exploited - used - in this manner.

It is inhumane and vulgar. It is not very different than using soldiers for syphilis or other medical experiments. It is using people WITHOUT CONSENT, something that could never happen today and is part of a shameful past.

Mirah Riben, author, THE STORK MARKET: America's Multi-Billion Dollar Unregulated Adoption Industry

Reply

I am Home Ec teacher from the old school. Now it's called Family & Consumer Science. I graduated from an excellent teacher's college in Virginia in 1974. I have never heard of the term "practice babies". Obviously,it was before my time. When I was there it was called Child Development: a 5 hour class which included time in the "nursery school", a developmentally appropriate program for 3, 4, and 5 year olds. Now it's the school systems PreK which is NOT developmentally appropriate in most cases. We didn't have babies but it would have been great to have that exposure. Babies don't come with instructions and research proves good or bad people copy what their parents did. For some children this is not a good thing. For the person who said parenting styles change....yes, it's like a fashion show or dieting trend. But actually, ECE professionals like myself, teach from the educational theorists from way back when. We use best practices that are researched based with proven results.
In high school, we had a 'nursery school' and moms would bring their toddlers to play like "mom's day ou".
Even though my parents were not college educated, they did educate themselves with reading material about babies and how children grow and learn. Good for me. I didn't get screamed at to get up in the morning like a lot of children today and I didn't get put in a day care so some else could raise me. While I understand it's seems to be necessary today so some parents can have the latest TV, two cars, boat, cell phone, country club membership, stocked liquor cabinet and huge house they are never in because they have to work to support all this materialism and buy their kids love with things. I teach Child Development to high school students and God in heaven above knows they need it.
I am a grand mom to a year old boy and I love watching his parents take so much time and interest in his growth and development.
They stay on top of his needs. He was a preemie.
Hmmm. Practice babies; not a good term but it was an education in child development. Now? School systems are crossing anything to do with living skills off their list. It's more important for them to brag on number of students they send to college or that their school isn't a failing school.

Reply

Some of the opinions in the comments section are absolutely nauseating. It just goes to show you the "gratefulness" stigma of the adoptee community. We for whatever reason, don't deserve the same equal treatment and human rights as everyone else because our lives "could have been worse." Couldn't anyone's life have been worse?? Why is this notion exclusive to infants surrendered to adoption?

These babies were deserving of loving homes and parents to attach to. Everything we know about peri-natal and infant mental health should tell us that taking an infant separated from the mother it bonded with for 9 months and passing it around from non-permanent caregiver to the next has the potential to be very damaging. I don't care what day or age or era this took place in. It was unethical, it is not how anyone themselves would want to be treated. Let's not put our stamp of approval on it simply because the stigma of adoption is involved. Adoptees are human beings with the same rights and needs as everyone else. Period.

Sickening. Absolutely sickening.

Reply

I read your article with much interest because for the first 13 months of my life, I was also a "practice baby" for the Home Economics' students at (all womens) Cedar Crest College in Allentown, Pennsylvania. All my life, until 1994, I did not the circumstances of being a foster child nor did I know anything about my birth family. I only discovered and learned the following information in 1994, at the age of 48 years. I did not know my father's name and had no knowledge of my family. In 1994, I learned that my birth parents and my 6 older siblings were living "homeless" on the street in Allentown, Pennsylvania, when my parents were arrested for vagrancy and my siblings were placed in county run children's homes. At this time, my mother was 4 months pregnant with me. My mother was brought from the county prison in Allentown to the local charity hospital to give me birth, returning the next day. I stayed at the St. Francis' Charity Hospital for 9 days, then was selected by the Cedar Crest College home economic's students as their new "practice baby". I lived in the dorm with the home economics' girls and was taken to their daily home economics' classes to demonstrate the proper methods of diapering a baby, feeding a baby, and nursing a baby. I lived and stayed with the Cedar Crest College home economics' students for the first 13 months of my life, then placed on a Mennonite family farm in Quakertown, Pennsylvania. In 1994, I also learned that my birth father took his own life by hanging in prison when I was 6 months old and my birth mother died in 1980. A nice note to this story is that I attended and was the guest of honor at the Cedar Crest College students' 50th class reunion at which time, I met many of my "practice" mommies leading to my tears. The college placed a brick in my honor, "Baby Donnie", on the college's walkway! By the way, if you are interested...I discovered and I have met 5 of my siblings, many close relatives, began a family genealogy research allowing me to trace my lineage of grandfathers back to the year of 1330, have visited distant relatives in Fellbach,
Germany.....Also I have earned BS and MA degrees, retired as a
high school teacher after 26 years, Assistant Principle, state-know basketball coach, and coached professionally in Germany. All has turned out so well and I give much of my success to the nurturing of my Cedar Crest College home economics' "practice mommies" during the first year of my life. My name is Don Aldinger, my address is 937 W.Mill Street, Quakertown, Pa. 18951, and my e-mail addess is ....donnie7@comcast.net...should you want to contact me...Again, "thank you" for your story on "practice babies"!!!

Reply

I was born in 1938, to an unwed mother, who left me at the hospital, Iowa Lutheran or Iowa Presbyterian, for over two years, till she brought me "home". She said I was a "practice baby" for the nurses there. Now I wonder if there was a nursing school component, or if I remained at the hospital. A friend told me about this online article; I hadn't known about "practice babies" and thought that's the way Mother used to describe my unique beginnings.

Reply