Magdalene asylums, also known as Magdalene laundries, were named after the biblical Mary Magdalene and were institutions used to house “fallen” women (a general term for women employed as prostitutes but also encapsulated any woman that had sexual relations outside of wedlock). Beginning in the 18^th century, these Magdalene institutions survived up until 1996 when the last remaining laundry in Dublin shuttered its doors. The first institution, The Magdalen Hospital for Penitent Prostitutes in Whitechapel opened in 1758 and was Protestant aligned. However, the Catholic church also adopted the idea and soon there were hundreds of these institutions across various countries such as Britain, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, United States and Australia. While the real horrors of these institutions were hidden under a shroud of religious piety, a recent inquest into the running of these homes in Ireland has unearthed many of its secrets.

While the initial impetus for the establishment of these institutions may have been under the guise of charity, the contempt for the women inside was obvious; it was the fall of a woman that got humans kicked out of paradise, and it was these fallen women that continued to corrupt souls on earth. As the initial advert for The Magdalen Hospital for Penitent Prostitutes, states: “The miserable condition of common prostitutes, and the ruin they spread around, must raise compassion and horror in every humane mind; in order therefore to put some stop to that torrent of distemper, vice and villainy, which sweeps away multitudes of both sexes, the Society’s medal in gold will be given for a plan … for the effectual establishment of a charity house, or charity houses, to receive and employ such common prostitutes as are desirous to forsake their evil courses, and are inclinable to put themselves into a way of life, which, by a mixture of piety and useful industry, will in a few years render them worthy members of the community.” As this statement demonstrates; these institutions were not founded for the benefit of the women inside them, but to protect members of society from the “filthy pollution” of the lost souls inside.

Charles Dickens, no stranger to the struggles of the poor in Victorian England, was extremely critical of the Magdalene system, eventually setting up an institution of his own: Urania Cottage in Shepherd’s Bush.  In an 1846 letter to the philanthropist Angela Burdett-Coutts, Dickens envisioned their institution as a safe home that would help these women rather than punish them: “A woman or girl coming to the Asylum, it is explained to her that she has come there for useful repentance and reform, and because her past way of life has been dreadful in its nature and consequences, and full of affliction, misery, and despair to herself”. Dickens felt that the societal punishing of women who had already been discarded by that said society was redundant and unlikely to lead to the self-respect and self-sufficiency required for rehabilitation. While Dickens opinion of these women was not judgement free, he was one of the few that acknowledged their situation was often determined by circumstance rather than simply a case of poor moral character. His compassion towards many of the women is evident in his letters, and his refrain from ever using terms like “prostitute” to describe his wards underscores those beliefs.  His determination to make his own asylum a place of redemption rather than repentance was clearly articulated in his vision. Dickens himself was heavily involved in the running of the institution and demonstrated commitment to these ideas by asking staff to refrain from forcing these women to relive their shame, refraining from punitive rehabilitation methods, or simply by providing colorful garments for the women to wear as a contrast to the drab garb the Magdalene intuitions forced upon their inhabitants. As one of the more vocal social and economic critics of his era, it is safe to say the horrific conditions of these institutions was an open secret if it inspired Dickens not only to action, but to devote years of his life overseeing the daily operations of his alternative center.

While originally penitentiaries for prostitutes, in later years these houses also started to conflate with mother and baby homes for unwed mothers, an epidemic that was compounded by lack of reproductive options for women. As such, these institutions also started performing forced adoptions; taking the children (often without the mother’s consent) and sending them to another country in illegal adoption schemes. To add insult to injury, these traumatized mothers were then forced to work off their labor debt for the birth costs by spending years afterwards enslaved within an industrial laundry.  Eventually these houses became dumping grounds for any unwanted women, including those that were deemed too physically deformed or feeble minded to find husbands or those whose families no longer wanted to provide for them. Society often pushed women into a position where they were either forced into slave labor or forced to fend for themselves on the street until they were arrested and likely to be sent to one of these Magdalene institutions anyway, a fate that many considered worse than the inhumane Victorian penitentiary system. We must remember this was in a world where women’s choices were extremely limited, often they could not hold property or establish bank accounts or loans, and work options were few. Considering the Magdalene institutions offered a roof and some food for the inhabitants, the sheer number of escape attempts from these institutions suggests that life inside was absolutely horrendous.

How horrendous? The unearthing of a mass grave in the city of Tuam in Ireland gives some idea. Operating between 1925 and 1961 the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home was a maternity home for unwed mothers. After delivery, a woman would have her child removed from her care and was forced into labor for a year as penance for her sinfulness (regardless of the mother’s age or of if the child was conceived out of rape or incest). Women that reoffended a second time could be sentenced to the laundry indefinitely as their penitence, and very few had any support or means of appealing their fate. Like many pro-life stances- the care and concern for the welfare of the child’s life ended hypocritically at its birth, and the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home was no exception. In 1975 two children stumbled across a mass grave of bones they approximated at around 20 infants at the Tuam site. Religious officials were quick to cover up the find, dismissing these as unbaptized victims of the great famine and sealing over the cache. It was not until historians started digging into the records of the home in 2012 that they found vast numbers of infants unaccounted for, spurring the Irish government to open an inquiry. Excavations at the site exposed a mass grave in the homes septic system that held the bones of nearly 800 infants. It also revealed that the death rates at the home far exceeded any other recorded infant mortality rates at the time making it highly likely that these deaths were preventable with adequate care, and, more than likely, that these deaths were intentional. Steven O’Riordan’s 2009 documentary The Forgotten Maggies also provides an insight into the terrible conditions of these institutions and the conspiracy between these laundries and the unwed mother’s homes in imprisoning these women into unpaid slavery. With firsthand accounts from woman who survived these institutions and anecdotal stories of forced incarceration and servitude peppered with horrific instances of abuse, it is a powerful testament to the injustices these women suffered.

*

While it is important to put these inhumane workhouses in our past, it is important to remember these institutions existed until 1996, and many of the survivors are still living. There are various countries around the world that still regulate women’s reproductive health and force them into carrying unwanted children without exceptions. There are still many women shamed and abused for their personal sexual choices, and instances where women are victim blamed as the object of temptation. It is also a reminder that not all enforcers of patriarchal restrictions on women are men; sometimes they are other women who will exploit and abuse others to establish a privileged position within the hierarchy.

*

References:

Dickens, Charles. “Letter to Angela Burdett-Coutts 26 May 1846″ The Morgan Library and Museum. 1846. https://www.themorgan.org/collection/A-Letter-from-Charles-Dickens/5

“Final Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes”. http://www.gov.ie. 2021. https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/d4b3d-final-report-of-the-commission-of-investigation-into-mother-and-baby-homes

O’Riordan, Steven. “The Forgotten Maggies”. YouTube. Uploaded Apr 1, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4VAdN7HaxQundries

“RSA History: Magdalen Hospital for Penitent Prostitutes.” RSA. https://www.thersa.org/fellowship/news/rsa-history-magdalen-hospital-for-penitent-prostitutes#:~:text=%22The%20miserable%20condition%20of%20common,be%20given%20for%20a%20plan%20