'since middle-class women were assumed to possess a natural propensity to maternal affection and were also accorded responsibility for their children’s early education, they were understood as ideally positioned to direct infants’ upbringing according to scientific psychological principles. At the turn of the twentieth century, women actively participated in the construction of new approaches to child-rearing in which children’s development increasingly came to be guided by the contentions of developmental science. [note: 'Hilary Marland, Health and Girlhood in Britain, 1874–1920 (Basingstoke, 2013); Sally Shuttleworth, The Mind of the Child: Child Development in Literature, Science, and Medicine, 1840–1900 (Oxford, 2010),286–88; Carolyn Steedman, “Bodies, Figures and Physiology: Margaret McMillan and the Late Nineteenth Century Remaking of Working Class Childhood,” in In the Name of the Child: Health and Welfare, 1880–1940, ed. Roger Cooter (London, 1992), 19–44; Cathy Urwin and Elaine Sharland, “From Bodies to Minds in Childcare Literature: Advice to Parents in Inter-War Britain,” in Cooter, In the Name of the Child, 174–99.']' (291)