Written by Dr. Ruchika Sharma (PhD, M.Phil. – CHS, JNU), Assistant Professor, Department of History, Mata Sundri College for Women, University of Delhi (Report 3)
Awarded an SSHM bursary to attend the conference.
Henry Daysh Building, Newcastle University, 3rd – 4th September 2026
The two-day conference was a part of UKRI FLF grant – Caring Communities: Rethinking Children’s Social Care, 1800-present, and has been funded by UK Research Innovation, Society for the History of Children and Youth, Society for the Social History of Medicine, and Social History Society. The conference brought together different geographical focuses, varied timelines and a variety of research methodologies. As a historian, what excited me the most was how historically grounded and well rounded the conversations turned out to be. From those looking at archives to actual archivists, those working with government records, visual mediums, legal archives, institutional papers, magazines, Instagram pages, Oral history, websites and actual heritage practitioners – everyone presented their research, leading to meaningful dialogues.
The first panel was titled, Archival ethics: issues of voice, visibility, marginalisation and oppression. Tanmay Kulshrestha presented his research on Ayahs and their representation in the colonial archive and how social histories of care-givers like Ayahs can be constructed using visual archives. Prof Mary Clare Martin’s paper focused on London Hinterland, while looking at how the institutional relief, like Boarding schools functioned. She argued how the outskirts of London, formed different, localised networks of charity, family care and parish support. Her work saw intersections of gender, class and religion throughout. Theo Lazar and Celine Elliot’s work brought research beautifully in sync with actual practice. They presented Care Experience History through Youth Engagement at English Heritage. They spoke from the field like Campaigns, Social Media, Websites, Instagram page, Young Producer’s Prog and so on. They focused on involving younger people with their work, as well as with English heritage, specifically focusing on Oral History Projects.
Second session, the economics of intimacy: pay, class, and labour was started by the research by Jade Shepherd, who argued how the foster care system was deeply humanised by everyday working-class families. The State did keep it strict, regulated and monitored, as boarding was a scheme to solve the workhouse crisis. There were happy case studies of 3 siblings in the same house, along with images from archives of many more not so happy case studies. Kate Gibson spoke of two divergent issues of love and money in care care work, particularly in foster relationships in Britain. Her argument brought focus to Care as commodity – Care for Profit. One of the interesting case studies was that of Foundling Hospital London in her paper. I spoke of bequeaths by the British men to their ‘native’ concubines and mixed-race children of early modern Bengal. The bequeaths are more than just simple money and objects but the terms for which they were left the property is what makes these Wills a very interesting historical record.
Session three was titled, Care Work, Pay and Emotion in Foster Relationships. Sonia Knapczyk-Tomalka’s presentation Cold Rooms, Empty Plates: The Material and Sensory Worlds of Orphan Care in Postwar Krakow, 1945-1952. The paper focused on a very different approach, guided by a sensory understanding of a political and social life of that time, from the perspective of the Orphans. By focusing on sensory memory, she builds the history of nobody’s children, including war orphans, and half-orphans. Laura Nys’s paper spoke of “Total Institution”. Using the theoretical frames of Erving Goffman’s book – Asylums. The Paper discussed three very interesting aspects – Constituting Borders, Crossing Borders, Negotiating Borders using the maps of the city, reform schools and what they meant. Jordyn Beaupré joined online to present, Fostering a Canada for Canadians: Race, Immigration, and the Emergence of Ontario’s Children’s Aid Society. Focusing on the late 19th century, Ontario, her research showed how women’s attempts to enjoy themselves, especially when away from their jobs, were portrayed as “vagrants” and “immortal.” Her work intersected through legal history, gender, race, and the evolution of social welfare.
Panel four on Day two was named, Radical movements, grassroots activism, and supporting mothers. Anna Muggeridge’s research presentation deals with the idea of care for mothers during the interwar period (1918-1939). It wonderfully brought out the state’s perspective on focusing on the babies and making more regimented rules for mothers for childcare. Eve Pennington’s paper, ‘Only you and the children?’: Single parents, community childcare, and grassroots activism in late twentieth century Britain took the discussion to a very interesting tangent. The presentation spoke of Gingerbread charity among other things through the second half of the 20th century. Niamh Cullen’s ‘I want the grass’: Anti-authoritarian nurseries and radical models of care in 1970s
Italy was a fascinating study of care work from a political perspective. Her rich visual archive spoke of anti-authoritarian nursery movement’s desire to break free from rigid institutional structures.
Panel five, Archival perspectives: access, engagement, ethics and representation, focussed on the actual archive and how they keep and speak of closed case files for example. NSPCC (National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children) spoke of the real-world challenge of offsite storage, concerns about cataloguing, as well as opportunities their work offers. Opportunities like collection development of archives, Engagement through oral histories, possibility of onsite archive expansion and so on.
Panel six, discussed Families, communities and the Poor Law, where Valentina Damiani, Calista Williams, and Claire Phillips spoke about the concerns of class along with care institutions, foster care in different parts of Europe. The panel brought together a variety of archival records, while focusing on local networks, regional archives and so on.
In the end there was farewell, and plans to move forward with possible collaboration & publication.