Skip to content

Biomedical Odyssey

Life at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine

Biomedical Odyssey Home › Perspectives in Research › Transformations of Yesterday’s Truth and What We Can Learn from It: Birth Control in 1930s Baltimore

Transformations of Yesterday’s Truth and What We Can Learn from It: Birth Control in 1930s Baltimore

Young female doctor discusses health concerns with patient during appointment

“In trying to establish a clinic, do not be afraid: You must have courage, and you will find that if you don’t apologize for your belief in the cause, the opposition which has assumed tremendous proportions in your own mind, will cease to exist.”[1]

Baltimore’s first birth control clinic, the Bureau for Contraceptive Advice (BCA), was established in 1927 under the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. While progressive for its time, it exclusively served married women referred by physicians for health conditions.[2] However, upon fulfilling its research mandate in 1932, the BCA was reestablished as the Baltimore Birth Control Clinic.[3] This transition marked a significant shift as the clinic began admitting patients referred for both medical and social reasons, laying the groundwork for birth control access to be recognized as a critical social determinant of health in both professional and legislative spheres.

In 1935, the birth control movement achieved its most significant victory to date with the “One Package” case, wherein the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the medical prescription of contraception for the purpose of saving life or promoting patient well-being was not contrary to the Comstock law.[4] Today, however, the Comstock law is experiencing a troubling resurgence in contemporary legal battles over women’s reproductive rights; following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022, anti-abortion activists and certain judicial figures have sought to revive the antiquated act as a means to impose nationwide restrictions on abortion.[5]

Just as the federal Comstock Act of 1873 set a precedent for states to implement their own versions of restrictive “Comstock” laws with liberal and conservative states harboring different stances, the overturning of Roe v. Wade ignited a state-dependent patchwork of abortion laws nationwide.[6] As a result, different states are now promoting profoundly different ideas of right versus wrong, just versus unjust, moral versus nonmoral — thereby influencing individuals’ ethical perspectives in ways they rarely have the opportunity to consciously choose. In June, I attended a medical ethics seminar during which we discussed abortion at length. As I stoked my convictions of rightness, justice and morality, it struck me that we were all the same in wanting to do the right thing — we just had different ideas of what the right thing was.

While engaging with the history of reproductive rights in the U.S. failed to provide me with any significant insights regarding normative truths, the exploration opened my eyes to the fact that most (if not all) of my beliefs conform (at least in part) to existing prototypes, belief systems and identity schemas imparted to me by my family, my community, my faith … and the list goes on. More importantly, it has encouraged me to extend my idea of what truth can be, and pursue that which is genuinely justifiable rather than that which is aligned with my in-group loyalties. When yesterday’s truth is so often today’s error, we owe it to ourselves and to others to try. And in trying, I am hopeful that we might find that this pursuit leads to justice itself.

Between November 1927 and November 1937, the BCA and the Baltimore Birth Control clinic treated 14,945 patients — 11,825 white patients and 3,120 Black patients.

[1] Baltimore Birth Control Clinic, “Articles and Speeches, Rotary Club of Frederick Maryland 1939, University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives,” 1939, University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives, R0099_PP_S05_B04_F009.pdf.
[2] Lauren P. Morton, “Baltimore’s First Birth Control Clinic: The Bureau for Contraceptive Advice, 1927–1932.” (Maryland Historical Magazine 102, no. 4: 300., 2007).
[3] “Discussing Planned Parenthood,” The Sun, March 31, 1940.
[4] Carole R. McCann, “BIRTH CONTROL POLITICS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1916-1945,” 136123, 1994, https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/545519.
[5] “19-1392 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (06/24/2022),” 2022.
[6] Pilpel, The Legal Status of Contraception, 2.

References

  • “19-1392 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (06/24/2022),” 2022.
  • Baltimore Birth Control Clinic. “Articles and Speeches, Rotary Club of Frederick Maryland 1939, University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives,” 1939. University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives. R0099_PP_S05_B04_F009.pdf.
  • McCann, Carole R. “BIRTH CONTROL POLITICS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1916-1945.” 136123, 1994. https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/545519.
  • Morton, Lauren P. “Baltimore’s First Birth Control Clinic: The Bureau for Contraceptive Advice, 1927–1932.” Maryland Historical Magazine 102, no. 4: 300., 2007.
  • Pilpel, Harriet. The Legal Status of Contraception, 1944.
  • The Sun. “Discussing Planned Parenthood.” March 31, 1940.

Related Content

Want to read more from the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine? Subscribe to the Biomedical Odyssey blog and receive new posts directly in your inbox. 

Tags: