Derickson A
Department of Labor Studies and Industrial Relations, Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802.
Am J Public Health. 1992 Sep;82(9):1280-90. doi: 10.2105/ajph.82.9.1280.
The adverse health effects of work on approximately 2 million employed children troubled many in the United States during the early 20th century. Advocates of reform initially built a rationale for protective legislation primarily from informal, lay observations of the broad developmental outcomes of premature employment. In this endeavor, they projected a dismal scenario of impending national deterioration. This argument received strong criticism for the inadequacy of its corroborating evidence. In response, Progressive reformers emphasized the specific, measurable consequences of particular occupations. Increasingly, liberal advocates of the exclusion of boys and girls from the work force drew upon statistical compilations of occupational injuries and illnesses diagnosed by physicians. Despite their turn toward scientism, Progressives remained somewhat ambivalent about the sufficiency of quantitative data alone to achieve their aims.
20世纪初，工作对约200万就业儿童的健康产生的不利影响困扰着美国许多人。改革倡导者最初主要基于对过早就业广泛发展后果的非正式、外行观察，为保护性立法构建了一个理由。在这一努力过程中，他们预测了国家即将衰退的黯淡情景。这一论点因佐证证据不足而受到强烈批评。作为回应，进步改革者强调了特定职业的具体、可衡量的后果。越来越多地，主张将男孩和女孩排除在劳动力之外的自由主义倡导者借鉴了医生诊断的职业伤害和疾病的统计汇编。尽管转向了科学主义，但进步人士对仅靠定量数据能否实现其目标仍有些矛盾。
