Identified! PA - Philadelphia - 'Boy in the Box' - 4UMPA - Feb'57 - Joseph Augustus Zarelli #4

[Susikatze]

<modsnip - discussing social media comments>
this is the early 1950s. There were no records, many adoptions were done privately by local individuals who just knew someone, churches, charities and within communities. There were also famous and infamous ladies who checked for places with unwed mothers and collected their babies to adopt them out. Without any official record. Everything was hush hush and hardly anything made it into official files.

My own grandfather in the 1920s had a foster brother whose birth mom was unwed and unstable and couldnt keep him. She just went from door to door asking people if they knew someone trustworthy. She was directed to my greatgrandparents place who had a small boy the same age (my grandfather). My greatgrandma, the sweet woman she was, didnt hesistate to take the unknown boy in. She fostered him until his teens (when his birth mom came back to claim him) and he returned to her after escaping his birth moms care. There was never an official adoption and no records.
It was no different in the early 50s.

 

[Susikatze]

<modsnip>

MOO Although she is a very pretty young lady, many times there are "issues", that come out: like getting pregnant at a young age, and then getting pregnant at age 21. She may have been trying to start a life away from her family and may have kept secrets from them...She may not have wanted them to know she was pregnant because they may have insisted that she go to "a home. give up the baby" etc...If she was living away from home, she could have been living what they would have called a "a double life" back then...MOO

People were independent and started families much earlier than today. There was also virtually no sex education and no effective birth control. There were hush hush booklets issued exclusively for married women that suggested some half effective ways like lysol douches (thats why they were so popular), CI, pessaries and cycle tracking. But a single woman had no access to them at all.
There were no pregnancy tests (there was a frog test that was very expensive, time consuming and only available at doctors where a single woman didnt go), if a woman got pregnant without any sex ed, the pregnancy was diagnosed very late (manually a doctor could diagnose it from week 10 or 12 only, but as i said, single women didnt usually go) and she was not aware of it until she started showing. If she was lucky, her boyfriend (or someone else) married her and all was legal.
But there was not always that option.
Abortion was deathly and illegal. When the family found out about the pregnancy, it was kept under cover and the daughter was shipped to some birth home. If someone asked, they were told she has tuberculosis or some ailment and went to a care home. The babies were immediately put into foster care and the birth mom went on with her life, pretending she never gave birth.
That is how it was. Hush hush. Major stigma.

Today your average teen sees a gyn and gets BC when they have a boyfriend. In the 1950s, you were either smart enough or sheltered enough by parents not to have a boyfriend and sexual intercourse or you just got married young. Plenty of folks were 20 and already divorced.

I believe the father may not have had an idea, they may have been long seperated when she found out she was pregnant. He may not have wanted to marry her or not being allowed. Or she could have not wanted to marry him.

<modsnip>
Hard to judge and impossible to judge.

 

[Laughing]

People were independent and started families much earlier than today. There was also virtually no sex education and no effective birth control. There were hush hush booklets issued exclusively for married women that suggested some half effective ways like lysol douches (thats why they were so popular), CI, pessaries and cycle tracking. But a single woman had no access to them at all.
There were no pregnancy tests (there was a frog test that was very expensive, time consuming and only available at doctors where a single woman didnt go), if a woman got pregnant without any sex ed, the pregnancy was diagnosed very late (manually a doctor could diagnose it from week 10 or 12 only, but as i said, single women didnt usually go) and she was not aware of it until she started showing. If she was lucky, her boyfriend (or someone else) married her and all was legal.
But there was not always that option.
Abortion was deathly and illegal. When the family found out about the pregnancy, it was kept under cover and the daughter was shipped to some birth home. If someone asked, they were told she has tuberculosis or some ailment and went to a care home. The babies were immediately put into foster care and the birth mom went on with her life, pretending she never gave birth.
That is how it was. Hush hush. Major stigma.

Today your average teen sees a gyn and gets BC when they have a boyfriend. In the 1950s, you were either smart enough or sheltered enough by parents not to have a boyfriend and sexual intercourse or you just got married young. Plenty of folks were 20 and already divorced.

I believe the father may not have had an idea, they may have been long seperated when she found out she was pregnant. He may not have wanted to marry her or not being allowed. Or she could have not wanted to marry him.

<modsnip>Hard to judge and impossible to judge.

Margaret Sanger published a pamphlet advocating birth control in 1914:

Biography: Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger founded the birth control movement and became an outspoken and life-long advocate for women’s reproductive rights.

www.womenshistory.org

There was some level of information available, likely we will never know the situation of JAZ's birth parents.

 

[Susikatze]

Margaret Sanger published a pamphlet advocating birth control in 1914:

Biography: Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger founded the birth control movement and became an outspoken and life-long advocate for women’s reproductive rights.

www.womenshistory.org

There was some level of information available, likely we will never know the situation of JAZ's birth parents.

Yes but your average single teen did not have any access to those booklets. They were around but not given to unmarried women. I found one from the 1950s in my grandmas posessions and it clearly stated "only to be distributed to married women". Yeah...

 

[Petunia83]

<modsnip> I think there's a good chance that Joseph was put up for adoption <modsnip>

I apologize if this sounds like a silly question, but I am no expert on adoption and I’m certainly no expert on adoption almost 70 years ago… If he was put up for adoption, wouldn’t he have been given the surname of his adoptive parents? Or was this simply not customary at the time? Or perhaps he was adopted at a later age, older than at birth?

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

I am counting on that. When the captain said that they had theories, that gave me hope.

So sad. I wonder if he was born out of wedlock, which back then was considered a horrible shameful thing, then it was kept a secret,maybe mom spent about 9 months in a home for unwed mothers, and he was adopted out in secret too. Maybe to one of those backdoor adoption agencies run by someone like Georgia Tann. I can't imagine how the siblings feel. Finding out that the boy in the box is their brother. That's a lot to unpack,and cope with. MOO

 

[Susikatze]

So sad. I wonder if he was born out of wedlock, which back then was considered a horrible shameful thing, then it was kept a secret,maybe mom spent about 9 months in a home for unwed mothers, and he was adopted out in secret too. Maybe to one of those backdoor adoption agencies run by someone like Georgia Tann. I can't imagine how the siblings feel. Finding out that the boy in the box is their brother. That's a lot to unpack,and cope with. MOO

There were plenty of ladies and also sometimes men like Tann. They never made it into the news because they took babies from women who voluntarily gave them up. Tann told single moms their babies had died when they were secretly adopted which made her infamous.
Most others did not operate like that.
But they all preyed for unwed pregnant young women

 

[blackbeary]

<modsnip - off topic>
If Jaz wasn't adopted, maybe a family member or friends took him in as their own?
M00

 

[Friday Fan]

Since MA named JAZ after his father and his name was on the birth certificate, I truly believe she had every intention of raising him and I believe she wanted his father in his life. GZ was a very handsome guy in his youth, I could see how she was smitten and how she was hoping for a life with him..JMO...
Sadly the long term relationship with GZ didn't happen....
Closed adoptions were the norm in the 1950's.

<modsnip> if she had wanted to relinquish Joseph, she could have worked with an agency. If she relinquished Joseph through an agency, it would have been a closed adoption.

If Joseph had been in a closed adoption, police would not have released his birth name and would have indicated this when they revealed his identity.


Someone killed Joseph...was it someone who "informally adopted" him? Why does the adoption narrative persist?


<modsnip>

 

[Vern]

So sad. I wonder if he was born out of wedlock, which back then was considered a horrible shameful thing, then it was kept a secret,maybe mom spent about 9 months in a home for unwed mothers, and he was adopted out in secret too. Maybe to one of those backdoor adoption agencies run by someone like Georgia Tann. I can't imagine how the siblings feel. Finding out that the boy in the box is their brother. That's a lot to unpack,and cope with. MOO

IMO, there must have been some type of 'meaningful' relationship between them whether it be secrectly dating with family(ies) unaware or whatever.

Joseph Augustus Zarelli carried a name in tribute to his bio father. And that name was on his birth certificate. A 'promiscuous' woman prone to just sleeping around would have no way to confirm who the bio father was when JAZ was born. Nor would any unmarried woman of the time attach her rapists name to the child who was born of that assault (so sexual assault can be ruled out in this case). I'd like to give her reputation back to her - too many women so unjustly lost them back in the day.

Mom knew who the dad was and so he was named, officially too, and on the record. That lends me to believe there was a relationship of some meaningful type. Given the times and the stigma associated with pre-marital sex in the era this occured, the fact that no survivors can describe or detail what exactly that relationship was neither surprises not shocks me.

 

[Jerri Blank]

I apologize if this sounds like a silly question, but I am no expert on adoption and I’m certainly no expert on adoption almost 70 years ago… If he was put up for adoption, wouldn’t he have been given the surname of his adoptive parents? Or was this simply not customary at the time? Or perhaps he was adopted at a later age, older than at birth?

well part of the issue HERE is we only know what DNA and genetic genealogy can tell us. and that gives us an incomplete picture on its own.

it is very possible that he was known by an entirely different name in life and existed in a world separate from all the people mentioned throughout this thread. if he was adopted, especially in a less than legit process as a baby, i would be shocked if anyone used the name joseph with him. DNA can't tell us that part, so sadly joseph's life and the identity of his abuser(s) are still unknown.

 

[fridaybaker]

I haven't been following this very well, so apologies in advance here, but can anyone tell me if the "M" woman who thought the boy had been adopted and abused by her mother is still a viable theory? Would any of what we've heard about his identity preclude such?

 

[nhmemorymaker]

I haven't been following this very well, so apologies in advance here, but can anyone tell me if the "M" woman who thought the boy had been adopted and abused by her mother is still a viable theory? Would any of what we've heard about his identity preclude such?

She has been ruled out by police early on, and clearly ruled out by the DNA experts in the case.

I feel that many people "feel" for Martha, who, more than likely, did have some serious family traumas.

However, the only detail that SEEMS so relevant is that she mentioned "Jonathan threw up baked beans"..... and that was just not enough to go on.

 

[Friday Fan]

I wonder if Rh incompatibility issues would have shown up on Joseph's autopsy?

I think they contacted a few surgeons, but if Joseph's scars were due to Rh incompatibility issues and exchange transfusions, this might have helped to narrow down his identity back then. (Surgeons were likely not to be involved in treating Rh incompatibility)

Just wondering if compatibility would have shown up on blood tests? I assume they did blood typing.

Elevated bilirubin is something that is found, but by the age of four, I have no idea if this would be an issue or how this even works.

Or would his labs show this? Rh-D positive with circulating anti-D

Would the findings persist or would exchange transfusions in infancy put a damper on it?

Just curious....

ETA: I assume mom's blood was also tested during both of her pregnancies. My mom was born in 1932 and became a nurse. She wasn't the brightest and only worked for a year as a surgery tech, but she knew about Rh issues, so she must have learned about them in nursing school. (She went to nursing school in GA. Philadelphia would likely have better medical facilities than GA) Anyway, if MA had Rh - blood, she likely knew before she became pregnant with Joseph. (Just rambling)

 

[phantomstrider]

She has been ruled out by police early on, and clearly ruled out by the DNA experts in the case.

I feel that many people "feel" for Martha, who, more than likely, did have some serious family traumas.

However, the only detail that SEEMS so relevant is that she mentioned "Jonathan threw up baked beans"..... and that was just not enough to go on.

Was the information about the baked beans public at the time.

 

[Narkj]

Great story, well reported. This is why I live in Pittsburgh but subscribe to the Inquirer. Thanks for letting us know you cared enough to post the story here. Let's hope we find out who killed this boy.

Thanks

 

[Susikatze]

I wonder if Rh incompatibility issues would have shown up on Joseph's autopsy?

I think they contacted a few surgeons, but if Joseph's scars were due to Rh incompatibility issues and exchange transfusions, this might have helped to narrow down his identity back then. (Surgeons were likely not to be involved in treating Rh incompatibility)

Just wondering if compatibility would have shown up on blood tests? I assume they did blood typing.

Elevated bilirubin is something that is found, but by the age of four, I have no idea if this would be an issue or how this even works.

Or would his labs show this? Rh-D positive with circulating anti-D

Would the findings persist or would exchange transfusions in infancy put a damper on it?

Just curious....

ETA: I assume mom's blood was also tested during both of her pregnancies. My mom was born in 1932 and became a nurse. She wasn't the brightest and only worked for a year as a surgery tech, but she knew about Rh issues, so she must have learned about them in nursing school. (She went to nursing school in GA. Philadelphia would likely have better medical facilities than GA) Anyway, if MA had Rh - blood, she likely knew before she became pregnant with Joseph. (Just rambling)

I believe Rh incompatibility in neonates is usually severe. Today if the mother got no rhogam shot, they do a blood transfusion sometimes in utero, sometimes shortly after birth. I think before that, most, if not all affected babies died or were stillborn. I dont think anyone survived more than mere hours.
I think JAZ scars may have been results of other things, not transfusions. Not sure what caused them, thou.

 

[IDK]

I believe Rh incompatibility in neonates is usually severe. Today if the mother got no rhogam shot, they do a blood transfusion sometimes in utero, sometimes shortly after birth. I think before that, most, if not all affected babies died or were stillborn. I dont think anyone survived more than mere hours.
I think JAZ scars may have been results of other things, not transfusions. Not sure what caused them, thou.

According to this article, exchange transfusions were done in the 1950’s, although through the umbilical vein, not a cutdown:

Exchange Transfusion for Jaundiced Newborns in the United States | Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Exchange transfusion is the replacement of blood from newborn infants with elevated bilirubin level in their blood stream with donor blood containing normal bilirubin levels. Newborn infants that experience jaundice, the yellowing of the skin and eyes, have a buildup of bilirubin, a chemical...

embryo.asu.edu

“In 1951, Louis Diamond, Fred Allen, and William Thomas, physicians at the Children’s Medical Center, published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine describing improved techniques for exchange transfusion to treat elevated bilirubin levels due to EF in newborn infants. They suggested using the umbilical vein as the site of transfusion, and that a single polyethylene tube be used to withdraw the infant’s blood and sequentially replace it with donor blood. They stated that the umbilical vein is the best location for transfusion because there is less chance for scarring and it is easily identified through the umbilical cord on newborns.”

EF is erythroblastosis fetalis.

 

[fred&edna]

He had scars from what was believed to be an IV line. The location of the scar on his ankle certainly indicates vascular access. And, I don't think it's at all out of the realm of possibility this could have been related to blood transfusions.

jmo

 

[fred&edna]

According to this article, exchange transfusions were done in the 1950’s, although through the umbilical vein, not a cutdown:

Exchange Transfusion for Jaundiced Newborns in the United States | Embryo Project Encyclopedia

Exchange transfusion is the replacement of blood from newborn infants with elevated bilirubin level in their blood stream with donor blood containing normal bilirubin levels. Newborn infants that experience jaundice, the yellowing of the skin and eyes, have a buildup of bilirubin, a chemical...

embryo.asu.edu

“In 1951, Louis Diamond, Fred Allen, and William Thomas, physicians at the Children’s Medical Center, published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine describing improved techniques for exchange transfusion to treat elevated bilirubin levels due to EF in newborn infants. They suggested using the umbilical vein as the site of transfusion, and that a single polyethylene tube be used to withdraw the infant’s blood and sequentially replace it with donor blood. They stated that the umbilical vein is the best location for transfusion because there is less chance for scarring and it is easily identified through the umbilical cord on newborns.”

EF is erythroblastosis fetalis.

Umbilical vein would seem to be best in a newborn. However, I thought maybe the transfusion took place some quite some time (a year or so) after being born... as treatment for severe anemia.