Two of the most intriguing aspects of the Civil War, to me at least, are the role of women in the Civil War and the role medicine played. As for women, they were slowly gaining acceptability in society as more than wife/mother, but that change was slow. In spite of that social status, women played key roles as soldiers, nurses and spies in the war.
I have often said, and you'll probably hear me say this again, that the most dangerous place to be in the battlefield was the hospital. Well-meaning surgeons spread germs/diseases like doctors today give out suckers and stickers. The infections received from the "medical care" often proved more fatal than the original wound. None of this was malicious of course. The doctors were doing the best they could, with the most up-to-date knowledge and instruments they had, all the while being right next to a raging battle.
For this week's blog, visit this site for more information on Civil War medicine and visit this site for a list of biographies of important Civil War figures. Read at least 5 biographies of women from this list. If you're not sure if a name is a female, just click the link and see. If you're wrong it's only cost you a few seconds and if you're right then you can count it towards your 5 for the blog!
In the comments section answer these two questions:
1) What shocked you the most about the medicine section?
2) Do you think war is an appropriate place for women, regardless of what era we live in?
What shocked me the most of all the things on this website was that even with the terrible conditions of the hospitals and what the nurses and surgeons had to go through, they still had many people apply to help. It also said that they relied on male nurses moat of the time, which seems funny, because the women usually take care of the household. I think it goes back to the fact that men thought women were too delicate for war. I see where they are coming from. THe soldiers see terrible things during war, which ultimately leave a HUGE impact of their lives. Seeing women as ladies who dressed nicely and worked in the house, I could see where the men could underestimate women. I think the things people saw at war could change anyone. Especially this war because it was one of the ugliest wars of all times. Based on this, I think it mostly just depends on the women. Some women may be able to be okay with the blood and deaths they would face everyday all day. Others wouldn't be as okay with it. Some men might not even be okay to it. Overall, I think war is an appropriate place for women if that's what the women choose. Women have done many important things in our country just like men. I don't think women should be underestimated. Women can make just as big and important change as any man could. (246)
ReplyDeleteThe thing that I thought was pretty interesting was the number of women who helped as nurses. It said that over 4,000 women helped in the Union hospitals. People thought that women were too delicate for war and could not act as a soldier, but so many women helped in the hospitals. I was shocked because people with horrible injuries and such came for help, and the women were allowed there. They could see the horrific things that happened to the soldiers, but could not be there to help fight. I think that women should be allowed to help out in a war. As long as women know what they are getting in to and are aware of the danger then I think it is appropriate for them to help. Some women are tougher than men, and can handle it all well. Women are just as helpful as men are, and should be able to choose whether or not they want to be a part of war. (167)
ReplyDeleteWhat really shocked me was that the doctors didn’t was their hands after they treated another patient. What also intrigued me was that most of the doctors were women. I think that the women should be able to be in the war. They should have the right to even fight. Even if they had to suffer the disease and the terrible time of hearing screams and blood all over the place. The women back then would sometimes dress up as soldiers who showed their dedication to the country and their spirit of fighting for a cause that they believe in. The hospital on the battlefield was the most dangerous place to be in at the war, but still the women still wanted to participate in the war.(127)
ReplyDeleteThis was a good blog about the civil war. My answer to the first question is about how I learned about how when they would get wounded they had a higher chance of dying from infection or sickness than the actual wound. The medical equipment was so terrible you were basically dead if you were in a hospital. My answer to the second question is yes, I do think that women should be nurses to help there men through the war. Men just does not sound right to be nurses in war but women do. The conditions of the hospitals were terrible also because of medicines.(107)
ReplyDeleteDuring the Civil War era they didn’t have half the medical equipment or knowledge we have today. Many people in the war died from infection that they got from their wounds or from disease. Most people would think that they would have died from the wound they got which they did, but infection and disease were one of the main culprits of dying. There was also a constant debate during the war that was about if women should be allowed to become army nurses. In my opinion I think if you feel like you're being called into the military whether a male or female you should have a right to join. I don’t think every women should be in the military if they can’t handle the everyday horrors war brings, but neither should men if they can’t handle it either. We can also see how women like Clara Barton saved many lives in the Civil War, or women like Sarah Emma Edmonds who risked their lives to bring important information on the opposing side back to camp. I think that women should have the right to join the army either as a nurse, soldier, or any other position.(198)
ReplyDeleteWhat shocks me most about the Civil War medicine is that more people died because of infections than actually on the battlefield. Since the guns were advanced for their time, but the medicine was horrific many people died in the army hospital. Most people that got shot had to get their limb amputated. Because of this people got infections in those areas and died. Also the amputated limbs were just thrown out the window, and one time it went as high as a second story window. I think war may be suitable for some woman. It really depends on the person and their background, not the war. Some women fit in with the army and others are not made for it. Some are the rough and tough women, while others are more feminine. (133)
ReplyDeleteWell, we've already established the fact that the field hospitals were VERY unsanitary, but reading those articles went into depth about it. The surgeons were covered in blood and pus, using uncovered hands for surgeries and basically nothing was sterile. I thought it was very interesting how many people died of food poisoning, but I suppose isn't very surprising. I think women should be allowed to help fight in wars, but it mostly depends on their tolerance of violence and war. Since women were still being treated less than men back then, I think the fact that they were allowed to become nurses in the war helped people realize women were good for more than just helping around the house. I read that the female nurses had a more compassionate side despite the environment around them, and they had a motherly-role in the soldiers' lives. Also from reading the biographies women had a big impact in the Civil War and have done other things that have changed America. (168)
ReplyDeleteTo be quite on honest, out of the 4,000 women who signed up as nurses during the Civil War, I would have not been one of them. The war was the bloodiest war in American history, and I am not quite fond of blood. That’s what seemed most surprising to me, seeing that, that many women signed really showed how much these women cared about not only the health and the safety of the soldiers but also the entire outcome of the war. But the conditions seemed exactly how I would picture them to be, gross, disgusting, and unsanitary. Like I said this was the bloodiest war in American history, the fact that the hospitals were unsanitary was completely understandable. They constantly had wounded, very bloody soldiers coming in and with the small amount equipment and supplies they couldn’t have made it sanitary or every person. This created most of the infection that killed many of the soldiers in the war but the hospitals also saved many lives as well. I understand that in the 19th century that women were still considered to stay at home and take care of children, but also many women were beginning to work. I think letting women enroll as nurses in the war was completely necessary and appropriate. Without the women, we could have lost many more lives than with them. (227)
ReplyDeleteThe army medicine seemed pretty advanced for its time. One example is I never knew they had ambulances until cars were invented. It is neat all or the models for different types of injuries and different time periods. The surgeons they had must have had a rough job. If 75 out of 115 dropped out it must be difficult to deal with all the horrific sights. Rose O’Neal Greenhow was a spy who helped the north. She was in love with gold so much it literally killed her by sinking her. By that it looks like things would be rough but that was personal greed. I think women were able to survive because what most of them did wasn’t on the front lines.(123)
ReplyDeleteThe medical department of the Civil War was quite poor to say the least. Nowadays, reading about the stuff that happened in the hospitals is really baffling. You tend to think, “Wow, that was a dumb idea.” But, we have to remember, they didn’t have the knowledge of medicine that we do now. They were just using the techniques they had been taught. It’s not their fault if they didn’t know any better. The most shocking thing to me was the part about the amputations. Getting any type of surgery today would scare me. I cannot even imagine how it would be if you had to get a surgery or even get a LIMB (or multiple!) removed, while you were awake! I probably would have just asked the doctors to hit my head and knock me out before performing the surgery! As for the part about women in the war, I think that women should be able to fight if they want to. It should be their choice. And I know, most of the time most men are stronger than most women, but that’s not always the case! And I certainly don’t think there’s anything at all wrong with women helping in the medicine department. (205)
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting thing to me about the medical system was the ambulances! The way the would all work as a team to help their sides soldiers get off the battle field and into safe hospitals was amazing! They also basically set up the ambulance system. Our system has similar qualities just like theirs today. In my opinion as society has progressed women do have a part in war. Sometimes women in the military can be just as tough and mean as the men. Women have contributed to the success in America from nurses to field agents. I thought it was really interesting how Mary Edwards Walker was the first woman to take advantage of the Syracuse Medical's College willingness to take women. Also, I never knew that Jefferson Davis's wife was a part of the south war effort. (140)
ReplyDeleteTo me this article was kinda gross because I get sick at the sight of gory stuff or blood and that was basically what the war was for nurses. For example, I felt sick that time we watched the video in class with all the blood and gunk. But, the most important thing that I learned was all of those 4000 nurses are also the heroes of the battle. They fought so that they could help...and I think that without them even more soldiers would have died. If I'm being honest, I wouldnt have been around all of the blood and danger of war. (108)
ReplyDeleteI found most interesting about the medicine section was that the surgeons went days without washing their hand and their instruments they used during the surgery. This led on to passing germs to everybody that needed surgery. Another thing I found interesting was that out of 175,000 wounds, 30,000 led to amputation. And I remember watching this in the movie we watched Friday about the Minnie ball bullets. If hit in the head or abdominal the wounds were almost always fatal. This could also shatter any bone encountered. In these bullets were dirt and germs that would cause infection. I think that women should be allowed to be in the war. They play as a big part in the war, just like the soldiers/men. Back then women were just suppose to take care of the house and kids. Now women were able to be a part of something besides the basics. As long as women knew what they were getting themselves into, they should be allowed in the war. (170)
ReplyDeleteThe medicine section was very interesting and disgusting at the same time. It said that when people came in seeking medical attention, they more or less got a real life horror movie treatment! Surgions usually used amputations to stop infection after removing bullet wounds. They were ordered to keep the patient as quiet as possible with liquer and some sedatives. Outside the hospital, there was a pile of amputations. Usually it was about 5 feet high unless there were lots of amputees. This process wasn't to save limbs clearly, but was used to save lives. These procedures may have been primitive, but it led to more advancements in medicine, leading to our current stage today. As for the subject on women, I would have to say they have the choice, as long as they know they can deal with it. If they can deal with the fact that you could possibly die, get seriously wounded, or have to work in a war hospital with men/women soldiers who have been injured spewing their fluids everywhere, then that's their choice. I know I just listed some of the worst parts but it could get even worse possibly. I myself wouldn't enter a war not because I hate surgeries and would rather be a different kind of doctor that worked with pancreases and not blood and gore everywhere. Yuck.
ReplyDeleteOh yah! (226)! I almost forgot the word count! Silly me! :P
DeleteThe conditions of the early hospitals were awful. The doctors and nurses where just as deadly as the bullets fired at the soldiers in battle. They carried infections such as gangrene and many other diseases. There favorite method was to amputate. They did this because the medical ways were so un-advanced. I honestly think women are needed during war. Women often make better spies and leaders. They also would help wit hall the infections because women are typically cleaner than men. The fought for just as much as the men did. So I think it is an appropriate place for women. If we are all created equal then women should have an equal opportunity on the battle field. (118)
ReplyDeleteWhen I first heard that more people died of infections than in the actual fighting, I was stunned. It was hard for me to believe at first, but after reading some of the links I can understand why that was the case. One thing I found pretty interesting was that Harvard didn’t even have a stethoscope or a microscope until after the war. I also thought it was so nasty and disgusting that doctors sometimes didn’t wash their hands or equipment for days. For some reason I thought that the only medication battlefield hospitals had were home remedy stuff, but they actually had some “real” medicine. They had chloroform and some other pills. As for the second question, I think that women were a real help in the hospitals. I would guess most knew what they were getting themselves into so they were pretty prepared. Of course I don’t know if you could brace yourself for something like that. I don’t think that anyone should hold women back from helping during war times. {173}
ReplyDelete~Mo
I thought it was interesting that even during this time, they still couldn't firmly grasp the germ theory. They really had no clue what to do except amputate. The way they did this was very crude as compared as today. Back then they didn't was their hands or equipment for days while if it isn't completely sanitary today you cannot operate. Back then they put people under using a drug that knocks you out and had to work fast so the person didn't wake up with half their leg gone! Today, after you are amputated, you aren't taken off hard hitting drugs for days. The pure ignorance of medicine during this time is shocking and makes me glad for what we have today. As for women being in the war effort. they were greatly needed and made great spies, cooks, nurses and in some cases soldiers. It has been shown in tests that women seem more trustworthy and can keep secrets better. (we all know the truth though) I think that without women, the war would have been alot longer.
ReplyDelete