5 ms·

Man, as a parent this chills me. Before modern medicine the statistics of deaths in childbirth were scary.

stefantalpalaru 3y ago
[dead]
Damogran6 3y ago
Death was something a lot more people spent a lot more time with than we do now. It was 23 years between the death of my last grandparent and the death of my father...and another 16 year til the death of my Father in law.
- matt-attack 3y ago
  My uncle used to tell stories about death when he was growing up (30s or 40s). A line he would use always sticks either me, “back then, when you got sick, you died.” He would go on to say just how common it was to know a child or adult that died. It was just a normal part of existence.
  - buffington 3y ago
    It used to be that if someone said "Jeff got in a car accident," it usually meant that Jeff was dead or disabled for life. Today, it simply means that Jeff is going to be 45 minutes late for work. Since I lived in the "surely dead" era, I still react that way if someone mentions someone getting in a wreck. People must assume I'm upset over Jeff's surely totaled car (something that didn't always happen in the olden days).
SilasX 3y ago
Yeah, the short code for it reminds me of the line from Broken Arrow (1996): “I don't know what's scarier, losing nuclear weapons, or that it happens so often there's actually a term for it.” https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0115759/quotes/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0115759/quotes/
ip26 3y ago
It also puts a very different perspective on 1) why you always read in history books "so and so's third wife" and 2) the obsession with things like "child-bearing hips". Starting a family was downright hazardous; modern sensibilities are comparatively unburdened by those problems.
- thih9 3y ago
  > the obsession with things like "child-bearing hips" I am unaware of this being a past obsession, do you have a source? I thought it’s a modern meme. Oxford lists earliest use as 1910: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/childbearing-hips_n https://www.oed.com/dictionary/childbearing-hips_n
  - BrandoElFollito 3y ago
    The Venus of Willendorf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf) is a good example of the importance of hips (or generally - shapes) related to childbearing in representations of women
  - matt-attack 3y ago
    Might have been so obvious it need not have even been mentioned. Just like today, you wouldn’t say “I’m really looking for a healthy woman with an unmutilated face”.
unsupp0rted 3y ago
As a non-parent, this is why I’m a non-parent. Even though mother and child mortality is minimized, there are 999 life-altering things that can go wrong. Take the simplest ones: what % of the population has the kind of mental illness that’ll destroy your relationship with them? E.g. borderline personality, sociopaths, etc. Easily 5% or more. That alone is a 1 in 20 chance of your kid ruining a significant portion of your life, not to mention you bringing a kid into the world with an inevitably ruined life. And then there’s physical disability, not to mention financial burden. It’s not worth it. I’m very glad other people roll those dice: I’m happy to live in a populated world. But I don’t touch the dice myself.
- peebeebee 3y ago
  I think 1 in 20 is a bit too high. 1 in 100 maybe to have a significant impact on your life. There are lots of tests now that so you have the chance to abort. 16% of the world population has a significant disability according to the WHO. Most of them are not born with it: age related (dementia, blindness,..), serious work accidents, lasting effects of diseases,... Loads of them can get treated or won't alter life as much in the western world. If your family history has no cases of mental illnesses, chances are very low to get them. For a serious learning disability (not able to attend normal school), it's probably 1 in 20. Most of these kids will still live a fairly normal life in the western world. Also, chances of disabilities also increase with the age of the parents. Best to have your kids between 20-35 to keep the odds down. Above 40 is a lot more dangerous than under 30.
  - unsupp0rted 3y ago
    > In 2021, there were an estimated 14.1 million adults aged 18 or older in the United States with [Serious Mental Illness]. This number represented 5.5% of all U.S. adults. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness
    - peebeebee 3y ago
      That's more than I expected for sure. But I do wonder how 'concentrated' these are. I'd think (mental) illnesses are really tied to genetics. And social-economic factors play a big role too in food, stabile stress-free upbringing and healthy activities.
otherme123 3y ago
There is a modern saying that goes like "People who lost their parents are called 'orphans'. People who lost their spouse are called 'widows'. But losing a child is so horrific that people who lost a kid has not even a word". The reason that there's no word for people who lost a kid is because until yesterday every family lost a child. The word for someone who lost a child was "parent".
- guerrilla 3y ago
  This is something I think about. If this happens today, people consider their lives ruined, go into deep depression, get divorced and often never recover. This can't have been the case before in time. How heavily does culture effect the experience and consequences of misforture? It seems to me like we may have some form of entitlement, like spoiled children, that has made us weaker. If that's the case, can we change our culture? I think so and I think we should consider that if it's a possibility.
  - pavlov 3y ago
    > "we may have some form of entitlement, like spoiled children, that has made us weaker" An alternative way to look at it is that the people of the past were subjected to massive unprocessed trauma at every age, and that made them weaker than us.
    - matt-attack 3y ago
      Who’s weak and who’s strong in this scenario: a bloody body is presented following a tragic car accident. The body is maimed, broken, but ultimately salvageable. One person sees the body and shrieks in horror and goes into a fit of panic. Another (an ER doctor) is cool as a cucumber from years of desensitization, calmly treats and saves the body. I’d have a hard time describing the ER doctor as “weaker”. They’re unquestionable more capable and useful. And I propose stronger not weaker.
      - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
teleforce 3y ago
The irony is that up until not long ago it is used to be quite common in a single family to have ten kids, but now a few children (less than five) is the norm.

[dead]

Death was something a lot more people spent a lot more time with than we do now. It was 23 years between the death of my last grandparent and the death of my father...and another 16 year til the death of my Father in law.

matt-attack 3y ago
My uncle used to tell stories about death when he was growing up (30s or 40s). A line he would use always sticks either me, “back then, when you got sick, you died.” He would go on to say just how common it was to know a child or adult that died. It was just a normal part of existence.
- buffington 3y ago
  It used to be that if someone said "Jeff got in a car accident," it usually meant that Jeff was dead or disabled for life. Today, it simply means that Jeff is going to be 45 minutes late for work. Since I lived in the "surely dead" era, I still react that way if someone mentions someone getting in a wreck. People must assume I'm upset over Jeff's surely totaled car (something that didn't always happen in the olden days).

SilasX 3y ago

Yeah, the short code for it reminds me of the line from Broken Arrow (1996): “I don't know what's scarier, losing nuclear weapons, or that it happens so often there's actually a term for it.” https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0115759/quotes/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0115759/quotes/

ip26 3y ago

It also puts a very different perspective on 1) why you always read in history books "so and so's third wife" and 2) the obsession with things like "child-bearing hips". Starting a family was downright hazardous; modern sensibilities are comparatively unburdened by those problems.

thih9 3y ago
> the obsession with things like "child-bearing hips" I am unaware of this being a past obsession, do you have a source? I thought it’s a modern meme. Oxford lists earliest use as 1910: https://www.oed.com/dictionary/childbearing-hips_n https://www.oed.com/dictionary/childbearing-hips_n
- BrandoElFollito 3y ago
  The Venus of Willendorf (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf) is a good example of the importance of hips (or generally - shapes) related to childbearing in representations of women
- matt-attack 3y ago
  Might have been so obvious it need not have even been mentioned. Just like today, you wouldn’t say “I’m really looking for a healthy woman with an unmutilated face”.

unsupp0rted 3y ago

As a non-parent, this is why I’m a non-parent. Even though mother and child mortality is minimized, there are 999 life-altering things that can go wrong. Take the simplest ones: what % of the population has the kind of mental illness that’ll destroy your relationship with them? E.g. borderline personality, sociopaths, etc. Easily 5% or more. That alone is a 1 in 20 chance of your kid ruining a significant portion of your life, not to mention you bringing a kid into the world with an inevitably ruined life. And then there’s physical disability, not to mention financial burden. It’s not worth it. I’m very glad other people roll those dice: I’m happy to live in a populated world. But I don’t touch the dice myself.

peebeebee 3y ago
I think 1 in 20 is a bit too high. 1 in 100 maybe to have a significant impact on your life. There are lots of tests now that so you have the chance to abort. 16% of the world population has a significant disability according to the WHO. Most of them are not born with it: age related (dementia, blindness,..), serious work accidents, lasting effects of diseases,... Loads of them can get treated or won't alter life as much in the western world. If your family history has no cases of mental illnesses, chances are very low to get them. For a serious learning disability (not able to attend normal school), it's probably 1 in 20. Most of these kids will still live a fairly normal life in the western world. Also, chances of disabilities also increase with the age of the parents. Best to have your kids between 20-35 to keep the odds down. Above 40 is a lot more dangerous than under 30.
- unsupp0rted 3y ago
  > In 2021, there were an estimated 14.1 million adults aged 18 or older in the United States with [Serious Mental Illness]. This number represented 5.5% of all U.S. adults. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness
  - peebeebee 3y ago
    That's more than I expected for sure. But I do wonder how 'concentrated' these are. I'd think (mental) illnesses are really tied to genetics. And social-economic factors play a big role too in food, stabile stress-free upbringing and healthy activities.

otherme123 3y ago

There is a modern saying that goes like "People who lost their parents are called 'orphans'. People who lost their spouse are called 'widows'. But losing a child is so horrific that people who lost a kid has not even a word". The reason that there's no word for people who lost a kid is because until yesterday every family lost a child. The word for someone who lost a child was "parent".

guerrilla 3y ago
This is something I think about. If this happens today, people consider their lives ruined, go into deep depression, get divorced and often never recover. This can't have been the case before in time. How heavily does culture effect the experience and consequences of misforture? It seems to me like we may have some form of entitlement, like spoiled children, that has made us weaker. If that's the case, can we change our culture? I think so and I think we should consider that if it's a possibility.
- pavlov 3y ago
  > "we may have some form of entitlement, like spoiled children, that has made us weaker" An alternative way to look at it is that the people of the past were subjected to massive unprocessed trauma at every age, and that made them weaker than us.
  - matt-attack 3y ago
    Who’s weak and who’s strong in this scenario: a bloody body is presented following a tragic car accident. The body is maimed, broken, but ultimately salvageable. One person sees the body and shrieks in horror and goes into a fit of panic. Another (an ER doctor) is cool as a cucumber from years of desensitization, calmly treats and saves the body. I’d have a hard time describing the ER doctor as “weaker”. They’re unquestionable more capable and useful. And I propose stronger not weaker.
    - tourmalinetaco 3y ago

teleforce 3y ago

The irony is that up until not long ago it is used to be quite common in a single family to have ten kids, but now a few children (less than five) is the norm.