Susan J. Pearson

4.5, rounded to 5 (I really liked this, but I also recognize it's very much an academic book, which is how humanities tend to publish things- definitely on the drier side than other history of things books).

The birth certificate is one of those documents you can assume has existed in some form or another, when in reality it's one of those inventions that came up in trying to standardize and quantify metrics for US citizens (previously, the standard was family Bibles which creates an obvious blindspot for non-Christians and/or illiterate individuals!) Unsurprisingly, initial advocates for vital statistics were those seeking quantitative data to improve public health- what communities are experiencing issues and where should we apply resources, etc.? But, as our societal structure trends towards what benefits capitalism and possession of property/labor, birth certificates became a tool to determine:
* age, re: labor laws
* race, especially for heinous individuals like Virginia's Walter Plecker who decided to use the vital statistics office to enforce anti-miscegenation purity laws and work under the assumption that either you were White or Colored in the state of Virginia, using the one drop rule for the latter if ANYONE in your genealogy had a whiff of non-caucasity (really demonstrating how race is a construct, though one with real impacts as he worked to annul marriages etc.)
* legality of personhood, including whether or not to track if a birth is illegitimate because on one hand, unwed mothers might require more public health resources but on the other, is that information something an individual wants to disclose to their school or employer? In addition, the practice of issuing new birth certificates upon adoption with the adopted parents listed and sealing the originals.

The conclusion spends most of its time talking about how these historical issues (is the birth certificate a statement of fact or a political tool or a combination of such) are still ongoing regarding gender identification and sex at birth, with recent proposed legislation suggesting that people use the sex on their birth certificate to determine bathroom entry, which seems even less enforceable than southern states requiring proof of birth to deny hiring Black people (as certificates hadn't been consistently issued prior to a certain date in most cases).

This was a particularly interesting read at this time because as per other contemporary reviews, I'm currently pregnant. We received our birth certificate worksheet a few days ago, so I can see those questions that are on the longform but concealed on short where the state still finds it useful to collect demographic information (the race(s) my husband and I identify as, our highest education level, any disabilities we may have, language) as well as planned birth intentions (hospital vs home birth, with a doctor, a midwife, a certified nurse midwife or a naturopathic doctor, etc.) and # of prenatal visits. I agree that these statistics SHOULD be counted so agencies have an idea of what the population demographics are like, but I also agree with the notion that some of these should not be used to enforce discriminatory structures. Fortunately, Oregon's specifically notes the public health info

"you share is anonymous and is combined with other Oregon birth records. Each question has a purpose. The combined information tells us what problems women are having during their pregnancies. It also helps the Oregon Health Authority evaluate health equity, decide what services to offer, assess distribution of public health funding, and determine levels of need among groups of women."

Like I said, timely and fascinating read for me at the moment.… (mehr)