Margaret Sanger (1879-1966)

 



Choices of the Heart: The Margaret Sanger Story is a movie that is based on a true story: the life and career of US nurse Margaret Sanger (1879-1966). It premiered on US television in 1995 and was released on DVD in 2007. Here is some basic information about it:

*** Director: Paul Shapiro

*** Producer: Julian Marks

*** Executive producer: Jennifer Alward

*** Writer: Matt Dorff

*** Narrator: Jason Priestley

*** Run time: 98 minutes

The cast includes the following:

** Dana Delaney as Margaret Sanger (1879-1966) - nurse

** Henry Czerny as Bill Sanger – Margaret’s husband

** Blake McGrath as Stuart Sanger (1903-1995) – older son

** Lachlan Murdoch as Grant Sanger (1908-1989) – younger son

** Sandra Crljenica as Peggy Sanger (1909-1915) – daughter

** Rod Steiger (1925-2002) as Anthony Comstock (1844-1915)

** Yank Azman as Arnold Scopes – Comstock’s assistant

** Patrick Galligan as Charles S. Whitman (1868-1947) - District Attorney and later Governor of New York

** Julie Khaner as Anita Block – political activist - socialist

** Tom McCamus as Arthur M. Schlesinger, Senior (1888-1965) – American historian

** Maria Vacratsis as Emma Goldman (1869-1940) – political activist - anarchist

Margaret Higgins Sanger was born in 1879. When she passed away in 1966, she was 86. She was trained as a nurse, but she was also a writer, a public speaker, and a social activist. This movie is a partial biography which covers a brief but significant part of her life and career: the years 1914-1916, which were a crucial time of her life.

Since this movie is based on a true story, the basic facts are part of the public record. They are not a secret. Therefore I feel free to mention some of them here. If you wish to know more about the main characters, you can simply google their names.

PART ONE
In 1914, when the story begins, we see Margaret making a home visit to a poor family in New York. The couple already has three children. The mother has tried to perform an abortion on herself, because the family cannot afford to have one more child. Now she is bleeding to death. Margaret tries to help her, but she is too late. Before long the poor woman is dead.

Back in a hospital, Margaret talks to a doctor about the case. She says there are many similar cases. She asks him: “Why can’t we help these women before they become pregnant? Why can’t we tell these women how to avoid a pregnancy?”

The doctor replies: “You know as well as I that we are not allowed to say anything about this matter because of the Comstock Law.”

The law is named after the man who wrote it and had it passed by US Congress in 1873: Anthony Comstock. The law prohibits anyone from sending anything obscene through the mail. It also prohibits anyone from writing anything obscene in a book or magazine.

Comstock himself was watching to see if anybody broke the law. If he suspected that the law had been broken, he would have the suspect arrested. As Postmaster General he had wide-ranging authority and power.

If anyone wanted to explain how to avoid a pregnancy, using words or pictures or both, Comstock would define this as obscene, and he would take action as he saw fit.

Comstock was watching the famous activist Emma Goldman, because she was an advocate for women’s rights, including a woman’s right to control her own body, and when Margaret Sanger began to make similar statements, he was also watching her.

In this movie, we follow Margaret as she begins a campaign for women’s rights. She speaks at public meetings and writes a pamphlet about the issue. It is difficult to find a printer that is prepared to print it, because the printer is afraid of Comstock!

In 1915, when Comstock wants to arrest her, she leaves the country and goes into voluntary exile in England, leaving her family behind: her husband Bill and their three children. When their daughter Peggy is taken ill, Margaret returns to the US, but she cannot save her daughter. Peggy dies in 1915.

After the funeral Margaret is arrested and sent to prison. She is in prison while her trial is being prepared. Comstock dies before the case goes to trial, but his work is continued by his assistant Arnold Scopes. The District Attorney of New York Charles S. Whitman is ready to pursue the case, but he is also considering the political ramifications. And he wants to run for Governor of New York. Therefore he makes a surprising move. He decides to drop the charges against Margaret: she is free to go.

In 1916, when she is released from prison, Margaret opens a family clinic in New York. Before long it is closed down by the police. But she does not give up. For the rest of her life, she continues to campaign for women’s rights.

In 1921 she founded an organisation whose name was later changed to Planned Parenthood. Today this organisation is still active - defending and promoting women’s rights.

PART TWO
What do reviewers say about this movie? On IMDb it has a rating of 71 per cent, which corresponds to 3.6 stars on Amazon. On the US version of Amazon there are 19 reviews of this product. The average rating is 3.8 stars.

Three of the 19 reviewers denounce the movie, stating that it offers a false impression of Margaret. They say the movie fails to tell the truth about her. They claim she was a racist, who hated blacks, Jews, and poor people, and that she was connected with the eugenics movement. They also claim that she neglected her own children, because she was busy saving the world. If you visit “you tube” and search for Margaret Sanger, you will find several items which make similar claims.

What are we to make of such statements? Are they true? I have tried to look into the matter, and this is what I have found:

First of all, it is true that none of these issues are mentioned or discussed in the movie. In fact, all actors in the movie are white, so the question of racism never comes up.

In the movie, Margaret’s husband Bill supports her, although not whole-heartedly and not all the time. In the movie, he visits her in prison and she tells him that she will always love him. Unfortunately, this version of events is not quite true.

Margaret became estranged from her husband in 1913; they divorced in 1921. In 1922 she married again. Her second husband was J. Noah Slee (1860-1943). None of this is mentioned in the movie.

The narrator, who talks occasionally, is one of her sons, Stuart or Grant. The narrator talks about his mother with warm feelings. He talks about what she told them; what he and his brother learned from her. But the narrator is not identified. I believe it is the younger son Grant, because he was close to his mother, while the older brother Stuart was not always close to her.

So the charges against Margaret are neither mentioned nor discussed in the movie, but are they true? As far as I know, the charge about racism is not true. Margaret worked with Emma Goldman, who was certainly not a racist. Margaret also worked with black people. In 1966, Martin Luther King was given the Margaret Sanger Award by Planned Parenthood. And he accepted the award.

The charge that Margaret was connected with the eugenics movement seems to be true, although it also seems that she did not fully agree with this movement.

She divorced her first husband and married again. Are we going to denounce her for being a divorcee? This is a charge that could be used 100 or perhaps even 50 years ago. But today such a charge cannot be taken seriously.

CONCLUSION
What are we to make of all this? For me the conclusion is that Margaret Sanger was a human being. She was not a saint. She was not flawless.

When she spoke about women’s rights, she was ahead of her time. Many of the demands that she made, have since been implemented. In the US and in many other countries. In part because she paved the way for later changes. But in other areas she was a product of her own time. Her connection with the eugenics movement is a case in point.

If you wish to blame the movie, there are several reasons to do so:

** The narrator is never identified

** The movie has an all-white cast

** The relationship with her first husband Bill is misrepresented

** The time span of the movie is much too short, it covers only two years, 1914-1916, out of a long life

Margaret Sanger is an important person. She plays an important role in US history. Her story deserves to be told. The people behind this movie seem to have good intentions, but they fail to tell us the whole story and what they offer is not quite right. Historical accuracy is violated in several ways. I have to remove two stars because of these flaws. Therefore I think this movie deserves a rating of three stars.

PS. For more information, see the following books:

** The Autobiography of Margaret Sanger by Margaret Sanger (first published in 1938, reprinted in 2004)

** Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger by David M. Kennedy (1970, 2009)

** Woman of Valor: Margaret Sanger and the Birth Control Movement in America by Ellen Chesler (1992, 2007)

** Margaret Sanger and the Origin of the Birth Control Movement, 1910-1930 by Patricia Coates (2008)

** Margaret Sanger: A Life of Passion by Jean H. Baker (2011, 2012)

*****

 

 Margaret Sanger (1879-1966)

*****