Produced by Turgut Dincer, Jane Robins and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from images made available by the
HathiTrust Digital Library.)
+------------------------------------------------+
| Note: |
| |
| Text around word like _this_ indicates italics.|
+------------------------------------------------+
HANDICAPS OF
CHILDHOOD
By
H. ADDINGTON BRUCE
Author of "Psychology and Parenthood," "The
Riddle of Personality," etc.
[Illustration]
NEW YORK
DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY
1921
COPYRIGHT, 1917, BY
DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY, INC.
TO MY FATHER
JOHN BRUCE
IN LOVING REMEMBRANCE OF BOYHOOD
JOYS AND ADVANTAGES
PREFACE
It is my hope that this book will be read as a companion-volume to
"Psychology and Parenthood," it being designed to amplify and supplement
that earlier work. Its general aim, accordingly, is to present
additional evidence in support of the central doctrine of "Psychology
and Parenthood,"--namely, that, in view of the discoveries of modern
psychology with regard to individual development, the mental and moral
training of children by their parents ought to be begun earlier, and be
carried on more intensively, than is the rule at present. But whereas in
"Psychology and Parenthood" the emphasis was chiefly on the importance
of early mental training, the chief concern of the present book is to
demonstrate the importance of early training in the moral sphere.
Everybody, of course, is more or less aware that lifelong character
defects may result from parental neglect to develop in children such
qualities as unselfishness, self-confidence, and self-control. But few
really appreciate that, by this neglect, children are burdened with
handicaps which, persisting into adult life, may imperil not alone the
winning of success and happiness, but health itself. And, among parents,
comparatively few are sufficiently alert to the danger signals giving
warning that such handicaps of perhaps catastrophic significance are being
needlessly imposed on their children. Eccentricities of behaviour in
children--such as jealousy and sulkiness--are too often ignored as being
of no particular account, or are sadly misinterpreted by parents, with
perhaps dire consequences to the children's whole careers.
These eccentricities and their possible consequences, these danger signals
and handicaps, form in the main the subject-matter of the pages that
follow. Desiring the book to be helpful to as many people as possible, I
have been careful to avoid writing in any technical scientific way, and
have tried to be simple and concrete. For this reason many illustrative
cases from real life are given, my belief being that I could thus present
most convincingly the truly remarkable facts with which the successive
chapters have to deal. The result, I sincerely trust, will be to
contribute in some degree to save children from the handicaps in question,
and to assist adults now afflicted with any of these handicaps to overcome
them.
In large part, this book has already appeared in the columns of several
magazines. To the editors of these magazines--_The Century Magazine_,
_Good Housekeeping Magazine_, _McClure's Magazine_, _Harper's Bazar_,
_Every Week_, and _The Mother's Magazine_--I owe grateful acknowledgment
for the opportunity to acquaint their readers with the discoveries and
theories herein set forth. I am also under a debt of gratitude to numerous
psychological and medical friends for advice and information. And, as in
the case of all my previous books, I am particularly indebted to my wife
for inspiration, encouragement, and innumerable helpful suggestions.
H. ADDINGTON BRUCE.
Cambridge, Massachusetts,
_July_, 1917.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
PREFACE v
I MENTAL BACKWARDNESS 3
II THE ONLY CHILD 37
III THE CHILD WHO SULKS 63
IV JEALOUSY 99
V SELFISHNESS 131
VI BASHFULNESS AND INDECISION 165
VII STAMMERING 207
VIII FAIRY TALES THAT HANDICAP 243
IX "NIGHT TERRORS" 271
X IN CONCLUSION 303
INDEX 307
MENTAL BACKWARDNESS
I
MENTAL BACKWARDNESS
Once upon a time, not many years ago, a distinguished French psychologist
paid a visit to a Parisian public school. It was accounted an excellent
school, and its principal beamed with pardonable pride when the visiting
psychologist, Doctor Alfred Binet, explained that he would like to see
the pupils at work. Forthwith his desire was granted, and for a time he
attentively followed the exercises of a class of forty children. He said
little by way of comment, until, toward the close of the lesson-hour, he
abruptly inquired:
"Which of these pupils do you consider the most intelligent?"
"That boy yonder," the master answered, nodding toward a pleasant-faced
youngster who was diligently reading his book.
"And, pray, how old is he?"
"He is twelve."
"That, I suppose, is the average age for the class?"
"Well, no. I should say that they are on the average ten years old."
"What, then, is this twelve-year-old boy doing among them? If he is so
bright, why is he lingering among these little ones? My dear sir," the
psychologist continued, while the principal stood in abashed silence,
"would it not be nearer the mark to call him a backward instead of a
bright child? And would it not be well to search for the cause of his
backwardness and try to remedy it? Assuredly, this boy should constitute
for you a delicate problem that insistently demands solution."
This, I say, happened not many years ago. For that matter, incidents quite
like it occasionally happen even to-day, testifying to the inability of
some teachers to appreciate the presence, let alone the significance, of
the laggard in the schoolroom. But in the brief period that has elapsed
since Alfred Binet began his epoch-making investigations in the schools
of Paris, there has undoubtedly been a genuine and widespread awakening
in respect to the tremendously important problem raised by the backward
child. Especially is this true of our own land. Nowhere else, perhaps,
have more diligent efforts been made to ascertain the extent and causes
of backwardness among the school-going population, and nowhere else is
greater activity being displayed in the beneficent task of transforming
the backward child, as far as possible, into the normal one.
Certainly, too, it must regretfully be added that there is abundant
reason for this activity. Researches conducted during the past ten years
by American school authorities and by independent investigators, have
revealed an appalling state of affairs. Doctor Oliver P. Cornman, a
district superintendent of the Philadelphia schools, making a statistical
survey of five city school systems, found 21.6 per cent. of Boston
school children a year or more behind the normal grade for their age;
30 per cent. behind grade in New York; 37.1 per cent. behind grade in
Philadelphia; 47.5 per cent. behind grade in Camden, New Jersey; and 49.6
per cent. behind grade in Kansas City. Doctor Leonard P. Ayres, acting
in behalf of the Russell Sage Foundation, investigated fifteen New York
City public schools, having twenty thousand pupils, and found a degree
of retardation ranging from 10.9 per cent. to 36.6 per cent. Scrutiny of
the school reports of more than thirty other cities revealed an average
retardation of 33.7 per cent. Taking this as a fair average for the whole
country, we have a total of between six and seven million American school
children who are a year and more behind grade.
To be sure, this does not mean that all these children are intellectually
deficient, for the term "retarded" is by no means synonymous with
"dullards." Irregular attendance owing to illness or truancy accounts
for not a little retardation. The education of a good many children
is deliberately postponed by their parents, and as a result they are
necessarily behind grade for some time after they enter school. In the
case of many others, especially in cities like New York and Boston,
where there is a large foreign-born population, ignorance of the English
language is a sufficient cause for temporary retardation. Thus, I have
received a letter from Doctor William H. Maxwell, superintendent of
schools, New York City, in which he points out that many New York school
children are recently arrived immigrants, coming from a foreign country,
considerably above the age at which school-going usually begins. The
personal inefficiency of teachers is also a factor to be reckoned with.
Many a child becomes a "repeater" simply because he has had a poor teacher.
Nevertheless, when every possible allowance is made, the results of
the investigations by Doctor Ayres, Superintendent Cornman, and their
co-workers sum up to a deplorable showing. It is a showing, however,
with one distinctly redeeming feature. Readers of my previous book,
"Psychology and Parenthood," will remember it was there pointed out that
the proportion of juvenile delinquents who are "born bad," and for whom no
remedial measures will avail, is exceedingly small. There is reason for
saying precisely the same thing with regard to the retarded child.
He may be dull, stupid, to all appearance hopelessly defective, but
the researches of the past decade, the fruits of the mind-developing
experiments that have gone apace with the discovery of the extent to which
backwardness prevails, leave no doubt that in most cases the child who is
a true dullard may be brought almost, if not fully, to normal intellectual
activity, provided he is taken in hand at an early day. In fact, even the
most pessimistically inclined investigators admit that, at an outside
estimate, not more than 2 per cent. of backward children are backward
because of incurable defects of the brain. Many present-day authorities
put the figure as low as 1 per cent., and my own belief is that even this
is too high a proportion.
Undoubtedly--and especially since the invention of psychological tests
to determine the mental state of dullards--many children have been
erroneously pronounced feeble-minded when their backwardness is in reality
due to remediable causes. The trouble is not with the tests so much as
with the inexperience of those who apply them, some of the tests being
seemingly so easy of application that in many instances they have been
utilised by teachers and others having little or no training in clinical
psychology. This is particularly true concerning the application of the
much-talked-about Binet-Simon method of mental diagnosis, devised by
Doctor Alfred Binet and his colleague in scientific child study, Professor
Simon.
The Binet-Simon method is certainly simple enough, and, rightly used, is
of great value. It was formulated by putting to hundreds of children,
ranging in age from three to thirteen, a series of questions and commands
of increasing difficulty, noting the results obtained, and selecting as
"norms" for each age the questions and commands to which the majority
of the children of that age were able to respond correctly. Thus it
furnishes a convenient means for determining with considerable accuracy
the degree of mental retardation of any particular child. Experience has
shown, though, that its fixed standard, by which children are pronounced
"mentally defective" if they fall three years behind the norm for their
age, is not always an infallible guide. When the method is applied by the
untrained investigator the result is sometimes absurd.
For instance, in one American city 49.7 per cent. of six hundred retarded
children tested by the Binet-Simon method were reported as being
"feeble-minded," while 80 per cent. of three hundred children in the
special classes of another city school system were similarly stigmatised.
On such a basis we should have, among the six million retarded children
in our schools, from three to nearly five million who are feeble-minded.
Even if the Binet-Simon testing is done by an expert, there is always the
danger of incorrect diagnosis, with resultant serious injustice to the
child tested, unless the indications drawn from the testing are verified
by careful clinical and laboratory investigation. A few cases from the
experience of a well-known clinical psychologist, Doctor J. E. Wallace
Wallin, director of the Psycho-Educational Clinic, Board of Education, St.
Louis, may well be cited to illustrate and emphasise this important truth.
There was once brought to Doctor Wallin a pupil in a private school, an
attractive girl of seventeen, who was studying--or, rather, attempting to
study--Latin, history, algebra, and English. Her teacher complained that
she could remember little or nothing of what was taught her, that her
attention flagged easily, and that in other ways she did not seem to be
of normal mentality. And, in fact, tested by the Binet-Simon method she
graded only eleven and a half years old.
Had the psychological inquiry into her condition stopped there, she would
have been declared a fit subject for institutional care, according to the
Binet-Simon rating. But Doctor Wallin insisted on additional and different
testings, and presently made the significant discovery that her trouble
lay, not in any structural brain defect, but in a functional weakness of
the nervous system that caused her to become fatigued at slight mental
exertion. She was, in short, a "psychasthenic," and needed only proper
treatment by a skilled neurologist to be put into condition to profit from
her lessons as her schoolmates did.
So, too, with a man of twenty-eight, who, tested by the Binet-Simon
system, displayed the mentality of a boy of twelve. Had he been in the
hands of an investigator who knew no more of the technic of psychological
examination than the Binet-Simon scale, he would unhesitatingly been
classified as feeble-minded. But, as Doctor Wallin said, in discussing the
case:
"He did not impress me at all as being feeble-minded. His appearance,
speech, and conduct suggested the polished and cultivated gentleman. I
put him through approximately thirty sets of mental tests [other than
twenty-five individual Binet tests] and thirty moral tests. These tests
demonstrated that there was a considerable difference in the strength of
his different mental traits. Some traits were on the twelve-year plane,
some on the fifteen-year, and some on the adult plane. In some mental
tests he did as well as college men. He passed correctly practically all
of the moral tests.
"His was indeed a case showing more or less deficiency in respect to
various mental traits. But, contrary to the Binet rating, the man was not
feeble-minded. It eventually developed that a sexual complex was at the
root of his trouble."
Again, with the express purpose of determining the reliability or
unreliability of the Binet-Simon tests as sufficient indicators of the
mental status, Doctor Wallin applied these tests to several successful
farmers and business men. The results were surprising and amusing. He
tells us:
"The 1908 scale was administered according to my own Guide,[1] and the
1911 according to Goddard's version, which is usually used in this
country for diagnosing feeble-mindedness. The subjects were generously
rated in the tests; i.e., full credit was given for some responses that
did not quite meet the technical passing requirements. Measured by the
standards of one of the best rural communities of the country, socially
and industrially considered, and by my own intimate knowledge of the
subjects tested during the greater part of my life, not a single one
of these persons could by any stretch of the imagination be considered
feeble-minded. Not a single one has any record of delinquency, or crime,
petty or major, or indulges in alcoholic beverages. All are law-abiding
citizens, eminently successful in their several occupations, all except
one (who is unmarried) being parents of intelligent, respectable
children. The heredity is entirely negative, except for a few cases of
minor nervous troubles and alcoholic addiction. No relative in the first
or second generation, so far as it was possible to get the facts by
inquiry, was ever committed to a penal institution or an institution for
the mentally defective or disordered."
Yet, given the Binet-Simon tests, every member of this group, if judged by
the tests alone, would have to be rated as feeble-minded. Here is Doctor
Wallin's account of one of these most illuminating cases:
"Mr. A., sixty-five years old, faculties well preserved, attended
school only about three years in the aggregate; a successful farmer and
later a successful business man, now partly retired on a competency of
$30,000 (after considerable financial reverses from a fire); for ten
years president of the board of education in a town of seven hundred;
superintendent or assistant superintendent of a Sunday school for
about thirty years; bank director; raised and educated a family of
nine children, all normal; one engaged in scientific research (Ph.D.),
one assistant professor in a state agricultural school, one assistant
professor in a medical school (now completing thesis for Sc.D.), one a
former music teacher and organist, a graduate of a musical conservatory,
now an invalid; one a graduate of the normal department of a college,
one a graduate nurse, two engaged in a large retail business, one holds
a clerical position, all high-school graduates, and all, except one,
one-time students in colleges and universities.
"Failed on all the new 1911 tests except six digits and suggestion lines
(almost passed the central-thought test). In the 1908 scale, passed all
the ten-year tests and some higher tests. Binet-Simon age, 1908, 10.8;
retardation, fifty-four years; intelligence quotient, .17. According to
the 1912 scale, 10.6 years."
Doctor Wallin fittingly comments:
"This man, measured by the automatic standards now in common use, would
be hopelessly feeble-minded (an imbecile by the intelligence quotient)
and should have been committed to an institution for the feeble-minded
long ago. But is there any one who has the temerity, in spite of the
Binet 'proof,' to maintain, in view of this man's personal, social, and
commercial record, and the record of his family, that he has been a social
and mental misfit and an undesirable citizen, and should, therefore, have
been restrained from propagation because of mental deficiency (his wife is
still less intelligent). No doubt, if a Binet tester had diagnosed this
man forty or fifty years ago, he would have had him colonised as a 'mental
defective.' It is a safe guess that there are hundreds of thousands like
him throughout the country, no more intelligent and equally successful and
prudent in the management of their affairs. Had he been a criminal when he
was tested, the Binet testers who implicitly follow these standards would
have offered 'expert testimony' under oath that he was feeble-minded and
unable to distinguish between right and wrong, or unable to choose the
right and avoid the wrong."
Truly, feeble-mindedness in an adult or child is not safely to be
determined by relying merely on the results of a set of stereotyped mental
tests. On the other hand, in deciding as to a child's actual mental state
it is far more misleading to depend on unaided observation as a guide.
Yet, since the beginning of scientific investigation into the causes
of backwardness, cases have continually been coming to light in which
teachers and even parents have mistakenly identified curable dullness with
incurable feeble-mindedness, and have abandoned all effort at intellectual
development. Sometimes, consequently, a condition closely resembling
outright idiocy results from sheer neglect, as in one particularly
striking case, for knowledge of which I am indebted to Doctor Arthur
Holmes of Pennsylvania State College, well known for his work in clinical
psychology.
In this case the daughter of a well-to-do professional man failed to
show normal growth in infancy and was supposed by her sorrowing father
to be weak-minded. Left to her own devices, on the theory that it would
be useless to try to mend the work of Providence, she remained until
the age of eight in a state of seeming imbecility. She could not read
or write, could not speak more than three words, and spent most of her
time gibbering in a corner. Then, as good fortune would have it, she came
under the observation of an expert investigator of mental conditions and
was subjected for a year to careful training. At the end of that time she
"could speak in simple sentences, answer ordinary questions intelligently,
read in a primer, write a few words, and conduct herself in the manner of
a little lady."
In other words, she had been taken in hand in time to save her from a
life of incompetency, misery, and mental darkness. Is it not reasonable
to infer, in the light of this and similar cases on record, that our
institutions for the feeble-minded would be far less crowded than they are
to-day had regenerative measures been likewise applied to their inmates in
early childhood? Indeed, with Professor Lightner Witmer, dean of American
clinical psychologists, I am prepared to affirm:
"I believe that a child may be feeble-minded in one environment--for
example, in his own home--and may cease to exhibit feeble-mindedness when
placed in a different environment. I also agree with those modern students
of insanity who assert that the development of some forms of insanity may
be averted by a proper course of discipline and training. Analogously, I
contend that because a child of sixteen or twenty presents a hopeless case
of feeble-mindedness, this is no evidence that proper treatment instituted
at an earlier age might not have determined an entirely different course
of development."
Also, as in the case of the criminal alleged to have been "born bad,"
mental backwardness has again and again been found to depend on
comparatively slight physical defects--defects of eye, ear, mouth, nose,
throat, teeth--the correction of which often results in a spontaneous
and remarkable intellectual awakening.[2] Or the dullness mistaken for
feeble-mindedness may be due to a generally weakened physical condition,
the result of unhygienic home surroundings, lack of outdoor exercise, poor
food, and so forth. Here is a case in point, reported by Professor Witmer.
It is the case of a little Philadelphia girl, Fannie, the eight-year-old
daughter of Russian-Jewish parents, whose two-room home is thus described
by Professor Witmer:
"The living-room had one window, and contained a table, a few chairs, a
stove, a lounge, dirty clothes piled in one corner, a barking cur, and
many flies. The table was covered with a piece of black oilcloth, and on
this were usually to be found pieces of brown bread and glasses of tea.
No meals were prepared and the family never sat down to table. Their diet
consisted chiefly of bread, tea, and sometimes fish. The bread was always
on the table for the flies to crawl over and the children to eat when
their hunger drove them to it.
"The front of the house looked out on a board fence which divided a double
alley. In the rear was a small back yard. One hydrant at the entrance
sufficed for the different families. There was underground drainage, but
an offensive odour came from the closets. This was the soil in which
Fannie had struggled to grow for eight years. When the school nurse
visited the house, Fannie sat crouched in a corner, her eyes sullen and
dead, her mouth hanging open, her skin showing the poorly nourished
condition. Her eyes were crossed, her teeth irregular, the whole face
devoid of life or interest.
"Fannie had been two years in the first grade of a Philadelphia school,
and had made in that time so little progress that there was no possibility
of promoting her to the next grade at the end of that school year. During
the first year her attendance had been somewhat irregular, but despite the
regular attendance of the second year she had profited little, and had
come to be overlooked because she was thought to be too feeble-minded to
progress in a school for normal children."
Taken to the psychological clinic, she was given a thorough physical
and mental examination. She was found to be afflicted both with adenoid
growths and enlarged tonsils, and was sent to a hospital to be operated
on for these. Later she was entered in the hospital school connected
with Professor Witmer's clinic at the University of Pennsylvania. Here
she remained a year, part of that time attending also one of the city's
public schools. Both mentally and morally she made satisfactory progress.
Her sullenness rapidly disappeared under sympathetic handling. Though "at
first she did not seem to understand affection," by the end of six weeks
"she was the most demonstratively affectionate child in the school."
Professor Witmer adds:
"During the first summer she appeared extremely sluggish. She showed very
little tendency to play, and preferred to sit more or less motionless.
As good food, better air, sunlight, and kindly treatment began to take
effect, she burst forth with such excessive vitality, such exuberant
spirits, that once when I had her before the psychological clinic one of
the teachers asked if the lively movements were not the result of St.
Vitus's Dance. This first outburst of vitality gradually subsided, leaving
her a normally active child."
Undeniably, of course, even though a vicious household environment was
chiefly responsible for this girl's backwardness, the adenoids and
enlarged tonsils were also responsible for it in some degree. Parents
cannot too keenly appreciate the hurtful effect bodily defects like these
may have on mental development. Doctor Ayres, who has made an exhaustive
study of this factor in retardation, estimates that it alone accounts
for about 9 per cent. of the laggards in our schools, and clinical
psychologists are disposed to put the percentage still higher. On the
other hand, their experience with retarded children has led them to the
important conclusion that, helpful as spectacles, the ear syringe, and
the surgeon's knife may be, "after-treatment" in the form of careful
individual training usually is indispensable, if only for the reason that
while handicapped by the bodily defect the child may have acquired faulty
mental habits which need to be corrected before education by ordinary
schoolroom methods can count for much.
This means, manifestly, that many agencies must co-operate in the
regeneration of the curable dullard. How many are sometimes involved may
perhaps be sufficiently indicated by detailing another case from Professor
Witmer's extensive experience, the case of an eleven-year-old boy who was
brought to the University of Pennsylvania's psychological clinic with a
history of five wasted years in school.
Any suspicion that this boy might belong to the ranks of the truly
feeble-minded was dissipated by the results of the exhaustive mental
testing through which Professor Witmer put him. This showed not only that
he was naturally intelligent, but also that he was of an affectionate,
generous, and thoughtful disposition. When, however, a physical
examination was made, ample reason for his dullness was discovered, for it
was found that he was suffering from adenoids, enlarged tonsils, weakness
of vision, and dental trouble, his teeth being decayed and unclean,
with tartar pushing back the gums, which were inflamed and swollen. In
addition, he was stoop-shouldered, had an irregular heart action, and
showed signs of being poorly nourished.
"Before anything can be done to improve your boy's mental state," it was
explained to his mother, "his physical condition will have to be improved.
He should be put under treatment without delay."
Then began a distressful period for the hapless youngster. First of all,
a throat specialist operated on him for the removal of the adenoids and
the hyper-trophied tonsils. After this he was sent to the eye clinic,
where he was fitted with glasses. Next, he was taken to the dental clinic,
where his teeth were cleaned and filled. All the while a trained social
worker kept in touch with his parents to make sure that he would receive
the hygienic care which had hitherto been wanting. In the meantime, he
was allowed to return to school, from which, after the beginning of the
summer vacation, he was transferred to a special school for backward boys.
Here he remained most of the summer, being given individual attention with
regard to his mental and physical needs.
It was noticed at first he was inclined to be quick-tempered and
disorderly; but under the tactful handling he received he soon settled
down. From being puny and delicate, he became an active, vigorous boy,
excelling in the swimming-pool and the gymnasium. At his books he also
made such progress that, on returning to regular school in the autumn, he
was promoted through two grades in less than six months, being then only
one grade behind normal and giving every promise of catching up with the
boys of his own age in another six months.
Altogether, the services of half a dozen specialists in psychology,
medicine, and education, and the expenditure of much time, effort, and
money had been required to get this boy straightened out. Nor is his by
any means an uncommon case. Moreover, like the case of the gibbering girl
of eight, it illustrates another point in connection with the problem of
retardation which should indeed be emphasised--the part played by parental
ignorance and thoughtlessness in swelling the army of the retarded.
Had the parents of this boy appreciated the close relationship between
bodily health and the health of the mind, had they taken alarm at
the first signs of malnutrition and sought the advice of a competent
physician, instituting developmental measures in accordance with his
counsel, their son might not have become an educational "lame duck," and
all the tedious and costly restorative work of later years would then have
been avoided. To be sure, it must immediately be added that maintenance
of his physical health would not of itself have unfailingly operated as a
guarantee against retardation.
For, quite conceivably, he might have been surrounded by an
intellectually deadening home environment, receiving from his parents
neither proper disciplining nor encouragement and stimulus to mental
activity, with the result that when the time came for him to go to school
he would display little capability for, or interest in, the tasks of
the classroom. So frequently is this actually the case that students of
retardation are inclining more and more to rate faulty home training
as perhaps the chief cause of mental backwardness. Thus we find one
keen observer, Professor P. E. Davidson, declaring in an address at an
educational convention in California:
"Parental neglect as a cause, resulting in emotional and volitional
disorder, is emphasised in our cases. Learning in school is conditioned
largely by what Witmer calls 'pedagogical rapport,' wherein a deference
to the prestige of the teacher and the school and a sensitiveness to
its rewards and punishments are such as rapidly to produce a habit of
voluntary effort or active attention. Confirmed wilfulness at home and
undisciplined impulsiveness must undoubtedly figure in the matter of
learning. If the child's organic habit, after five or six years of poor
home training, makes avoidance of the painfulness of effort the usual
thing, we may be sure the teacher in the first grade will have unusual
difficulty in inducing a disciplined attention, and a bad beginning on
this account may establish a backwardness which later may not be overcome
without the individual attention that is impossible in the teaching of
large classes."
Professor G. W. A. Luckey, of the University of Nebraska, listing the
causes of retardation, puts at the foot of his list "bad inheritance,
unredeemable defects, physical and mental," and at the very top,
"ignorance and indifference on the part of parents." Most investigators
would evaluate these contrasting causes in precisely the same way. The
inference, needless to say, is that we need never hope to bring about an
appreciable diminution in the number of retarded children until parents
are more fully enlightened as to their duties and responsibilities. It
is therefore good to find that a nation-wide campaign of enlightenment is
well under way, together with an ever-increasing extension of agencies for
the work of rescuing the retarded and fitting them to achieve success in
the school and in the world.
Eight years ago there were in all the United States only three
"clearing-houses for retarded children." These were the psychological
clinic of the University of Pennsylvania, established by Professor Witmer
in 1896; a civic psychological clinic, opened in 1909, in connection
with the schools of Los Angeles; and the psychological clinic of Clark
University, at Worcester, Massachusetts, established in the same year as a
department of that university's splendid Children's Institute.
To-day, as part of the regular activities of universities and normal
schools, there are psychological clinics in more than a dozen States,
including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and
Washington. At least four States--Indiana, Massachusetts, New York, and
Pennsylvania--have psychological clinics in operation as adjuncts of
hospitals. California, Illinois, Missouri, New York, and Pennsylvania
have similar clinics in direct connection with the public school system.
Ohio has one connected with a vocational-guidance bureau. And in some
States--such as Connecticut, Illinois, and Massachusetts--psychological
clinics are also in operation for the special purpose of aiding in the
proper disposition of cases brought before the juvenile courts.
Even more rapid has been the development of ear, eye, throat, and dental
clinics for the needs of school children. As an outgrowth, too, of the
discoveries of the past few years, there has been a widespread movement
in the direction of establishing special schools and classes in which the
retarded may receive the care necessary to enable them to make up for lost
time, or, when this is out of the question, to equip them for as happy and
useful a life as is possible under their exceptional mental limitations.
Unquestionably a splendid beginning has been made in the warfare against
retardation--a beginning not surpassed by similar effort in any foreign
land, and certain to prove of great value to the American nation.
But, if it is to prove of the utmost possible value, there must be active
co-operation by the public generally and by parents in particular. Society
must insist on every child being given hygienically decent surroundings,
and parents in the mass must become increasingly alive to their
responsibilities and opportunities in developing the mentality of their
young. To reiterate:
It may be considered as definitely established to-day that the vast
majority of cases of mental backwardness are the result, not of organic
brain defects, not of true feeble-mindedness, but of remediable physical
conditions or faulty training in the home.
It may be considered as established that even seemingly incurable cases
will often yield to expert treatment.
And it may be considered as established that, of the cases which cannot be
successfully handled, a large proportion are cases which could have been
successfully handled had they been recognised and given expert treatment
during early childhood.
Let every parent of a dull child act, and act promptly, to ascertain
from some expert just why his child is dull, and what can and should be
done to overcome the dullness. Let every parent of every child make it
his business to learn and heed the laws of physical and mental hygiene
as applicable to his child, with a view to insuring that the child shall
not be afflicted with preventable mental backwardness. This is one of the
prime duties of parenthood.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: As given in J. E. Wallace Wallin's "Experimental Studies of
Mental Defectives," 1912, p. 116 _et seq._]
[Footnote 2: For some illustrative cases see "Psychology and Parenthood,"
especially pp. 174-178.]
THE ONLY CHILD
II
THE ONLY CHILD
Fifteen years ago a boy was born of prosperous New York parents. His
arrival was exceptionally welcome, for his father and mother had been
living in dread that theirs might prove a childless marriage. They had
fervently promised themselves that if their fondest hopes were realised
and a child granted to them, nothing that loving devotion could accomplish
would be left undone to secure for the little one the best possible
start in life. As a first step in the fulfilment of this promise, they
decided soon after their son's birth to remove from New York to a pleasant
residential suburb, where fresh air abounded, and where the adverse
environmental influences of the crowded city streets were utterly unknown.
Seemingly, no decision could have been wiser; seemingly, no child could
have been brought up amid more favourable surroundings than their boy
enjoyed in the splendid home they provided for him on a beautiful slope
crested with pines. Yet, despite all the love lavished on him, despite the
prodigious efforts to keep him well and strong, he did not thrive.
Before he was seven he displayed "nervous" symptoms that threw his parents
into a panic. He suffered from "night terrors," he became excitable and
irritable. The eminent physician to whom he was taken made the flattering
diagnosis that the only trouble with the boy was an unusually sensitive
nervous organisation; prescribed sedatives, advised outdoor exercise,
warned against overstudy, and so forth. Unfortunately, he did not also
emphasise the necessity for simplification of the child's environment as
a preventive of nerve strain. Nor did he dwell on the supreme importance
to physical, no less than moral, welfare of sedulously cultivating in
the little fellow the virtues of courage, self-control, and self-denial.
Perhaps he did not think it needful to speak of these things to such
evidently well-bred and well-intentioned parents; perhaps he did not think
of these things at all.
In any event, while acting on his advice as to stimulating animal activity
and retarding brain function, the father and mother continued to minister
to their son's every whim, and eternally busied themselves devising
amusements and distractions for him. In time the "night terrors" were
no longer in evidence; but the excitability and irritability persisted,
and presently other unpleasant traits appeared, notably a tendency to
conceit and selfishness. Naturally, this did not make the poor youngster
any too popular among the few playmates with whom his parents allowed
him to associate, and naturally the parents blamed the playmates for
not appreciating the "sensitiveness" of his disposition. Thus matters
continued until his twelfth year, when his father suddenly awoke to the
fact that, intellectually, the naughty playmates were considerably ahead
of the good little boy. For the first time common sense scored a distinct
triumph over excessive and indiscreet parental love; the governess who had
been unable to handle her self-willed pupil was dismissed, and the boy was
sent to school.
There he has been painfully gaining the discipline--the lessons in
self-mastery--that should have been given him in the nursery. But he
still is lamentably arrogant and selfish; he still finds it difficult to
get along with other boys. Whether his schoolmates will take the trouble
to help him overcome the handicap of his early rearing is questionable;
and however this may be, it is hardly likely that the character defects
unnecessarily acquired during his childhood will be wholly rooted out.
It must regretfully be added that this boy's case is not an exceptional
one. Rather, it is typical of the plight of most "only children," who,
no matter what their advantages of birth, too often reach manhood and
womanhood sadly handicapped and markedly inferior to other children. In a
vague way, to be sure, parents with only one child have long realised that
they are confronted with special problems in child training; but there is
abundant proof that in innumerable instances they signally fail to grasp
these problems clearly and work them out satisfactorily.
Everyday observation supports this statement, and it is confirmed by the
findings of modern medical, psychological, and sociological investigation.
Statistically, its most important corroboration is forthcoming from
the results of a census of "only children," undertaken some years ago
by the psychological department of Clark University in consequence of
certain suggestive indications noticed in the responses received to a
_questionnaire_ on peculiar and exceptional children.
Of the thousand children described in these responses it was observed that
forty-six were specifically mentioned as being "only children," although
none of the queries in the _questionnaire_ asked directly or indirectly
about such children. The presumption was that a number of the remaining
children described in the responses were also of the only-child class. But
even if such were not the case, the total of forty-six was surprisingly
high, since, according to reliable vital statistics, the average progeny
of fertile marriages is six, with an only-child average of one out of
every thirteen fertile marriages; that is, a proportion of one only child
to every seventy-eight children, as contrasted with the proportion of one
in fewer than every twenty-two of the "peculiar" children described in the
_questionnaire_ reports.
Moreover, on dividing these reports into three groups based on the
"advantageous," "neutral," and "disadvantageous" character of the
peculiarities mentioned, it was found that while considerably less than
half of the total number of children fell into the disadvantageous group,
two-thirds of the "only children" had to be put into it. Naturally this
suggested the desirability of a special investigation with reference to
the only child, and accordingly a second _questionnaire_ was issued,
with queries relating to age, sex, nationality, health, amusements,
intellectual ability, moral traits, and so forth. In this way, from
school teachers and other disinterested observers, definite information
was obtained concerning nearly four hundred "only children"--information
which, as finally tabulated and analysed by the director of the
investigation, Doctor E. W. Bohannon, is of great significance to the
parents of every only child and to all interested in individual and racial
improvement.
The age average of those whose ages were given--nearly three hundred--was
twelve years, including about sixty ranging in age from seventeen to
thirty-five. About four-fifths were of American parentage, while the
proportion with regard to sex was, roughly speaking, one-third male and
two-thirds female, a disparity doubtless attributable in part to the
circumstances of the investigation. About one hundred were said not to
be in good health, and another hundred to be in outright bad health.
In one hundred and thirty-three out of two hundred and fifty-eight
cases the temperament was described as "nervous." Precocity was another
often-mentioned trait; but on the average the beginning of school life
was from a year and a half to two years later than is usual, and in the
performance of school work the _questionnaire_ responses also revealed a
marked inferiority on the part of many "only children."
In their social relations only eighty were reported as "normal," while
one hundred and thirty-four out of a total of two hundred and sixty-nine
got along badly with other children, usually because they were unwilling
or did not know how to make concessions, or were stubbornly set on having
their own way. On this important point Doctor Bohannon says, in detail:
"When they disagree with other children it is usually because of a
desire to rule. If they fail in this desire they are likely to refuse
to associate with the children who cause the failure, and in a measure
succeed in the wish to have their own way, either by choosing younger
companions whom they can control, or older ones who are willing to indulge
them. Many do not care for a large number of companions, and select one or
two for friends, with whom they prefer to spend most of their time.... In
numerous instances ... a marked preference for the company of older people
is manifest, even when opportunity for younger company is present. But
this is no doubt due less to a dislike of suitable companionship than to
their inability to understand and be understood by children of near their
own age. It is plainly evident that they have as deep longings for society
as the children of other families, but their isolated home life has failed
to give them equal skill and ability in social matters. They do not so
well understand how to make approaches, to concede this thing and that."
Of two hundred and forty-five in attendance at school, more than one
hundred "only children" were recorded as not being normally interested
in active games, sixty-two of these scarcely playing at all. "If left
to their own devices," Doctor Bohannon infers from the reports which he
received concerning the inactive sixty-two, "they are pretty sure to be
found in the schoolroom with their teachers at intermission. A number of
the boys prefer to play with the girls at strictly girls' games, such as
keeping house with dolls, and generally come to be called girl-boys."
Effeminacy, in fact, is an unpleasantly frequent characteristic of the
male only child, and was noted in case after case described in the replies
to the _questionnaire_. Selfishness was set down as the dominant trait in
ninety-four "only children" of both sexes, and many others were described
as being unusually bad-tempered, vain, naughty, or untruthful.[3]
These depressing findings have since been confirmed by other
investigators, some of whom have contributed specially to our knowledge of
the state of the only child in adult life. For instance, the well-known
English psychologist, Havelock Ellis, studying the life histories of
four hundred eminent men and women, found the low percentage of 6.9
for "only children," indicating unmistakably the persistence of the
intellectual inferiority brought out by the answers to the Bohannon
_questionnaire_. There would also seem to be no doubt that egotism and
social inadaptability characterise, the adult only child no less than the
immature one.
"In later life," affirms the American psychopathologist, A. A. Brill,
who has made a special study of the only child from both a medical and
psychological point of view, "he is extremely conceited, jealous, and
envious. He begrudges the happiness of friends and acquaintances, and he
is therefore shunned and disliked." Besides which, speaking from wide
experience as a practising specialist in New York City, Doctor Brill
insists that the only child, at any age of life, is peculiarly liable to
fall a victim to hysteria, neurasthenia, and other serious functional
nervous and mental maladies; and his belief, as I happen to know from
their personal statements to me, is shared by other observant neurologists
and psychopathologists, such as Doctors James J. Putnam and I. H. Coriat,
of Boston.