Introduction
By 1941, the use of poison gas against civilians that the British Government had prepared for since 1935 had not materialized, but it was not necessarily going to stay that way. Bearing this in mind, the Ministry of Home Security were fearful of the civilian population becoming complacent, and so an information campaign was launched to remind of the need for caution and continued awareness of how to react in the event of gas being used.
 |
Advertisement number 5 of the campaign (right) was entitled 'Hints to Mothers' and included an illustration of a mother using the Baby's Protective Helmet. It was this illustration that caused controversy when it was first published in newspapers at the end of June, 1941.
The Deputy Controller of Air Raid Precautions in Bath, Major H. Pickard, complained about the advert:
"You have no doubt, seen the advertisement appearing in all the London papers under instructions issued by the Minister of Home Security. The picture of the Mother holding the baby is altogether wrong and it seems unfortunate that such a thing should be issued under the authority of Home Security. The Mother was pumping in air with the left hand instead of the right, and the position of the baby is absurd. After local authorities have taken the trouble to tell Mothers how to do things properly, such advertisements as this seem to be, to say the least, unfortunate." [1]
Whereas the General Civilian Respirator was quite easy for an Air Raid Warden to fully train people to use, the Baby Helmet required slightly more detailed instruction in its use in order to build up the confidence of the mother, who needed to be strict with a struggling child that might resist being placed in the helmet. It was for this reason that the more specialised technique required for using the Helmet was initially taught in local health clinics by nurses and midwives.[2] Training had to overcome the mother's instinct to remove the baby from the helmet if it appeared distressed. An unofficial A.R.P. handbook reminded that "if there is gas in the air, the helmet must be kept on however much the child cries."[3]
With these careful preparations, it is easy to see why local authorities might be annoyed at the incorrect illustration.
The advert was looked into, and a list of criticisms of the illustration drawn up by a Major Martin of the Research and Developments Department of the Ministry of Home Security:
"1.The natural position for a mother to hold her baby is on the left arm and the baby helmet has been designed for this as the general position.
2. In the reverse position shown in the illustration the air unit is awkwardly placed and the mother looks distinctly uncomfortable in working the bellows.
3. In the position shown the baby helmet is necessarily in such a position that the mother whilst wearing her own respirator cannot conveniently see the baby inside the helmet. The wire legs of the helmet which are intended for support when the latter is laid on a table should normally be folded underneath when the baby is being nursed on the lap.
4. The wire leg shown across the mother's arm in the picture should therefore not be visible in a correct drawing." [4]
So what was the final outcome of the matter? Major Martin felt that while it was recognised that mothers may change arms periodically to rest them and actually hold the helmet in the (wrong) manner illustrated, the correct method should have been depicted. However:
"I do not think any public retraction need be made, but I do suggest that the drawing should not be reproduced again and if it is desired to repeat the advertisement the illustration should be redrawn." [5]
Major Martin's comments stimulated further action from C. Snelling; he wrote on the reverse of Martin's memorandum to the person who perhaps had a hand in the misfortunate use of the drawing:
"Mr. Walker -
Please see Major Martin's minute over. I do agree with him that it is essential for an instructional illustration to be absolutely correct in detail. Departures from the normal way will take place, but they should not be illustrated."[6]
It would appear that Mr. Walker [name has been changed] was, if not the artist, then perhaps the person who approved the advertisement for release, as directly underneath is written a more ominous note:
"Mr. Walker -
Will you see Mr. Leslie with this file please?"[7]
The matter seems to have ended at this point, with Walker presumably being asked to see his superior and with the Ministry of Home Security acknowledging that instructional illustrations should be accurate. The Ministry had learned its lesson and the illustration was not published again.
 |
It is not recorded how the blunder came about, but a suitable illustration (shown left) that would have fulfilled the purpose was produced during the war. Compare this drawing with Major Martin's list of criticisms above, and it is seen that it does not fall foul of any of the points raised, and also illustrates how the baby has enough room to raise its arms to its face, which was an intentional part of the design.[8] The mother seems quite comfortable, and is operating the helmet in the manner recommended by the experts.
The source and date of this drawing is not known,[9] but it is likely that it was from a locally-printed instruction sheet for using the helmet. (Local authorities were responsible for organising their own Air Raid Precautions schemes, and were permitted to print their own instructions and material on the subject.) One incentive for a scheme-making body printing their own instructions was for the very reason of illustration; the official instruction leaflet issued with the baby Helmet was text-only.[10] Illustrated instructions would save time and make it easier for authorities to teach mothers the correct use of the helmet, making it easier for all concerned. Also, it was the local A.R.P. authority that had the closest contact with those who were to use the helmet if the need arose; the Ministry of Home Security would have done well to consult local authorities as part of their anti-gas advertisement campaign.
Footnote References
(Scroll down using bar at right.)