red.

FOOTNOTES:

[6] All names of deserters given throughout the text are pseudonyms.

[7] For an excellent discussion of the process of rationalization see
The Psychology of Insanity, Bernard Hart, Cambridge University Press,
1914.

[8] For a thoughtful discussion of this point see Eubank, E.E.: A Study
of Family Desertion. Chicago Department of Public Welfare, 1916.

[9] Brandt, Lilian: Family Desertion. The Charity Organization Society
of New York City, 1905.

[10] For a fuller discussion of forced marriages, see p. 92 sq.

[11] See also p. 98.

[12] See also p. 154.

[13] Two books may be suggested: Forel on The Sexual Question and
Havelock Ellis on Sex in Relation to Society (Vol. VI of Studies in the
Psychology of Sex).

[14] See p. 70 sq. for a discussion of collusive desertion.

III

CHANGES OF EMPHASIS IN TREATMENT

Unconsciously and imperceptibly, the point of view about the treatment
of desertion has been changing during the past fifteen years. The case
worker's attention used to be focussed on the danger of increasing the
desertion rate by a policy of too sympathetic care for deserters'
families. Little study was made of individual causes, and in so far as
there was a general policy of treatment it was to insist, wherever a
desertion law existed, that the deserted wife go at once to court and
institute proceedings against her husband. He was often not seen by the
social worker until he appeared in court. The policy toward the family
meantime was to reduce its size by commitment of the children until
their mother could support herself unaided; or, if relief was given, to
give smaller amounts than to a widow or the wife of a man in hospital.
As soon as the man had been placed under court order or had returned
home, old records generally show that the social worker's efforts were
relaxed, and often the final entry is, "Case closed--family
self-supporting."

There were excellent reasons underlying much of the practice. Few laws
were at that time in existence or at all adequately enforced, and any
man who desired was at liberty, so far as the community was concerned,
to walk off and leave his family at any time. The multiplicity of
sources of relief in the large communities and the absence of anything
resembling investigation constituted almost an invitation to men to
desert. It did not occur to the charitable public to draw any line
between the widow and the deserted wife, or indeed t