A Midwife's Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812

A number of entries from 1802 describe the saga of John Davis, the son born outside of marriage to Sally Ballard’s (nee Pierce) sister Mehettable (Hitty) Pierce and John Vassal Davis, a justice of the peace. Martha was present at both the birth and death of the child. The community was shocked by Davis’s acknowledgment of his son and the support he showed the child and Hitty, though he never married her. The brazen openness of Davis’s affair is what was most surprising. Because of her association with a man as high ranking as Davis, Martha referred to Hitty as “Mrs. Pierce” instead of “Miss.” 

Due to the numerous religious, social, and economic factors at play, Ulrich writes, “the story of John Davis, Jr., offers grist for cultural or political commentary. Those issues are tangential to Martha’s diary, however. In her account it is the daily realities that stand out” (279). The daily realities include Martha’s repeated visits to see little John Davis, who was burned in an accident in the home. He recovered and worsened, passing worms in addition to enduring his burns. Martha nursed him often in the month he lived after his accident. John’s body was autopsied, a process that Martha observed. Martha observed four autopsies across the course of her career and was familiar with anatomy. When she looked at little John’s body, she could identify exactly which internal organs were inflamed. Martha’s invitation to observe was likely due to her role as nurse to John and her position as a healer within the community. Beyond that, Ulrich notes, her role as a midwife gave her presence additional meaning: “As guardians of women and children, midwives presumably ensured proper reverence for the bodies” (289). Martha’s presence validated the process and lessened the anxiety of relatives of the deceased. As the 1800s continued, men began to believe that women should not serve as midwives or in the medical field, as “their character would be destroyed” if they were exposed to elements of medical instruction like dissection or autopsy (289). Ulrich explains, “This was a classic double bind: Women could not qualify themselves to practice midwifery without mastering general medicine, but learning general medicine would disqualify them as women and therefore as midwives” (290). In this alleged logic, men attempted to push women further out of medicine. 

Ulrich wonders on the page if Martha’s familiarity with human anatomy dulled her empathy, but then turns to diary entries that prove that concern is misplaced. Martha expresses empathy for John’s death and moments of extreme emotion paired with medical facts in her recollection of her niece Parthenia’s illness and death. Parthenia and Martha shared a close relationship that continued through the end of Parthenia’s life: “Martha had been a watcher at her bedside, a nurse, spiritual supporter, and physician” (292). This dutiful care continued after Parthenia’s death and Martha’s preparations for her funeral: “[Martha] was now prepared to observe and record the dissection of her body. In witnessing autopsies, as in so many other ways, social healers connected illness and death with life” (292). Ulrich argues that Martha’s role as a midwife did not dull her sensibilities or her capacity for empathy, but instead allowed her to approach death, as she approached life and birth, from a place of love. This juxtaposition matches that between Martha and Dr. Cony in a conflict over the treatment of Hannah’s son and Martha’s grandson. Dr. Cony approached the case through the lens of a physician, challenging Martha’s opinions and taking a harsh course of treatment, while Martha and the other women focused on tender care of the child. Though Martha’s methods were similar to Cony’s, the growing tension between the two mirrors the tension between the men and women engaging in medicine. Male practitioners began to advocate for more new therapies, such as bloodletting for various gynecological and obstetrical issues, a treatment Martha was against throughout her career. With the increase in new techniques, doctors began to ascribe more importance to their titles and less to the knowledge of traditional practitioners and midwives.