Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Relation to head: "At Nurse"

  • 30-01-2013 6:02pm
    #1
    InchicoreDude
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,443 ✭✭✭


    I have seen an entry on the 1901 census, where the relation to the head of the familiy is "At Nurse".

    What does this mean? The people are only 8 & 10....


Comments

  • #2
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,184 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Generally would just mean "child", but if the kids in question aren't a relation, it'd suggest that the woman of the house was acting as a nanny (or a foster parent).

    If the surnames are different, its going to be one of the latter options.

    I've seen it used in the occupation column for children before too oddly enough. Very old UK census records rather than Irish though.


  • #3
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    MYOB wrote: »
    Generally would just mean "child", but if the kids in question aren't a relation, it'd suggest that the woman of the house was acting as a nanny (or a foster parent).

    If the surnames are different, its going to be one of the latter options.

    I've seen it used in the occupation column for children before too oddly enough. Very old UK census records rather than Irish though.

    Could the person's role be 'wet nurse' ? How old?


  • #4
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,184 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    Could the person's role be 'wet nurse' ? How old?

    The OP said they were 8 and 10. Bit old for wet nursing!


  • #5
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    MYOB wrote: »
    The OP said they were 8 and 10. Bit old for wet nursing!
    To be pedantic they at 8 & 10 would be too young to be wet nurses and too old to be wet nursed. The OP is unclear as to what individual the description applied , which is why I asked my question.
    FWIW I've never seen the description 'at nurse' on the 1901 or 1911 census.


  • #6
    Alicat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,264 ✭✭✭✭Alicat


    I found a thread on Rootschat that might be relevant.

    It suggests that if a child was listed as a 'Nurse child' on the census, it meant that they were fostered, and under the care of the head of the household. Maybe it relates to that?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Jellybaby1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,108 ✭✭✭Jellybaby1


    I just did a search on the Irish 1901 census. Using 'more search options' I merely entered 'at nurse' for the occupation, and sure enough, up they popped. There are only seven 'at nurse' entries on the first page and they are 1yr, 2yrs, and 3yrs. I checked only the first six pages (600 entries) but the rest look to be only 'nurse' as occupation of an adult. 'At nurse' would mean 'still at the breast' being nursed either by mum or wet-nurse. Some of these children are too old to be wet-nursed but as the child wasn't belonging to the family maybe they just guessed a number for the age? Or perhaps children were nursed for longer in those days due to lack of solid food. Or am I clutching at straws?


  • #8
    CeannRua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 470 ✭✭CeannRua


    Alicat wrote: »
    I found a thread on Rootschat that might be relevant.

    It suggests that if a child was listed as a 'Nurse child' on the census, it meant that they were fostered, and under the care of the head of the household. Maybe it relates to that?


    +1. It doesn't necessarily mean that they were illegitimate as given in some scenarios in the Rootschat thread though.


Advertisement