Home History CHAPTER THREE. The Nuclear Family: Militarizing Domesticity, Domesticating War
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

CHAPTER THREE. The Nuclear Family: Militarizing Domesticity, Domesticating War

View more publications by Princeton University Press
Civil Defense Begins at Home
This chapter is in the book Civil Defense Begins at Home
CHAPTER THREEThe Nuclear Family: Militarizing Domesticity,Domesticating WarSHORTLYafter the National Shelter Policy became official, a PrincetonUniversity psychology professor escorted a married couple and their threesmall children into a fallout shelter (in the basement of Princeton’s psy-chology building), where they resided for fourteen days to test the feasibil-ity of shelter occupancy. For their participation in “Project Hideaway,” thePowner family received five hundred dollars “to repay the normal wageslost to the breadwinner” and a little extra for their heroic feat. It was thefirst experiment to test shelter inhabitance for a period as long as twoweeks, so the Powners’ emotional and physical states were studied closelybefore, during, and after their stay. Prior to confinement, each family mem-ber received a thorough physical and psychiatric review. During their wak-ing and sleeping hours, the Powners were monitored, unknowingly, by amicrophone. When the experiment ended, they again endured a batteryof tests to see if shelter living rendered any ill effects. But the Princetonprofessor who ran the study reported only good news to his federal govern-ment sponsors. The middle child had suffered a bit, as evidenced by hismoody withdrawal from family activities, but the three year old “wasquickly brought out of this attitude by one administration of a tranquil-izer” (the adults had whiskey), and follow-up exams showed that he was“perfectly all right.” The final report concluded that aside from this glitch,the Powners emerged “with a very positive attitude toward shelter life.”1Project Hideaway was kept secret before it was underway, but when thePowners finally climbed out of the shelter, the media swarmed, givingthem a chance to speak directly to their peers about the lessons and policyimplications of the experiment. Mr. Powner spoke for the entire family,saying, “It really wasn’t as bad as I thought....shelters are practical andI think everyone should build one in his own home.” His glowing accountsuggested that shelters offered some valuable intangibles beyond falloutprotection—most importantly, according to the report, the “integrationof the family.” Indeed, the Princeton researcher noted improved relation-ships among the children and the father’s “opportunity to get to knowhis children better,” resulting happily in Mr. Powner’s “new-found respectfor the entire family.” It seemed that “shelter life had produced a positiveattitude toward the family,” just as the Powners’ togetherness had fostered
© 2020 Princeton University Press, Princeton

CHAPTER THREEThe Nuclear Family: Militarizing Domesticity,Domesticating WarSHORTLYafter the National Shelter Policy became official, a PrincetonUniversity psychology professor escorted a married couple and their threesmall children into a fallout shelter (in the basement of Princeton’s psy-chology building), where they resided for fourteen days to test the feasibil-ity of shelter occupancy. For their participation in “Project Hideaway,” thePowner family received five hundred dollars “to repay the normal wageslost to the breadwinner” and a little extra for their heroic feat. It was thefirst experiment to test shelter inhabitance for a period as long as twoweeks, so the Powners’ emotional and physical states were studied closelybefore, during, and after their stay. Prior to confinement, each family mem-ber received a thorough physical and psychiatric review. During their wak-ing and sleeping hours, the Powners were monitored, unknowingly, by amicrophone. When the experiment ended, they again endured a batteryof tests to see if shelter living rendered any ill effects. But the Princetonprofessor who ran the study reported only good news to his federal govern-ment sponsors. The middle child had suffered a bit, as evidenced by hismoody withdrawal from family activities, but the three year old “wasquickly brought out of this attitude by one administration of a tranquil-izer” (the adults had whiskey), and follow-up exams showed that he was“perfectly all right.” The final report concluded that aside from this glitch,the Powners emerged “with a very positive attitude toward shelter life.”1Project Hideaway was kept secret before it was underway, but when thePowners finally climbed out of the shelter, the media swarmed, givingthem a chance to speak directly to their peers about the lessons and policyimplications of the experiment. Mr. Powner spoke for the entire family,saying, “It really wasn’t as bad as I thought....shelters are practical andI think everyone should build one in his own home.” His glowing accountsuggested that shelters offered some valuable intangibles beyond falloutprotection—most importantly, according to the report, the “integrationof the family.” Indeed, the Princeton researcher noted improved relation-ships among the children and the father’s “opportunity to get to knowhis children better,” resulting happily in Mr. Powner’s “new-found respectfor the entire family.” It seemed that “shelter life had produced a positiveattitude toward the family,” just as the Powners’ togetherness had fostered
© 2020 Princeton University Press, Princeton
Downloaded on 22.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9781400843558-005/html?srsltid=AfmBOoqmvZTv7OtYRJPDhVmRN0i3UdzDZ7_XrYnDrI8gyTm9N0JHfmOa
Scroll to top button