Mental Defectives and Sexual Offenders / Report of the Committee of Inquiry Appointed by the Hon. Sir Maui Pomare, K.B.E., C.M.G., Minister of Health

by New Zealand. Committee of Inquiry into Mental Defectives and Sexual Offenders

It is clear that if we wish to reduce the number of mentally defective and socially inadequate individuals we must not only consider measures for preventing as far as possible the transmission of hereditary defect, but must also provide for the youth of the country an environment and training calculated to encourage the development of its best powers. There is no doubt that unfavourable home conditions and unsuitable educational methods conspire to keep many children from realizing their full capabilities. This is especially true of the backward and feeble-minded. It is, moreover, wasteful and ineffective to force on children of poor mental receptivity and potentialities an educational curriculum devised for those of normal mentality, since the subnormal impede the general progress in an ordinary class, and in it they soon form a discouraged minority which learns to accept failure unquestioningly. Untrained to perform the simple work which is within their power and in the achievement of which they might earn self-respect and happiness, they feel themselves to be aliens, and may cease to regard the laws of society in which they have no sense of membership. In such cases the community which might have benefited from their work had their potentialities been properly developed is burdened by their maintenance, and, further, if they are not law-abiding, has also the expense of segregating them in reformatories and gaols. Hence it is clearly the duty of the State to adapt the educational curriculum to the requirements of various groups of children.

The child who has been handicapped by illness and lack of opportunity, the child who is inherently dull and backward, must be distinguished from the child with nervous instability or definite mental defect. Wherever possible, the training suitable for various improvable types of children should be arranged in connection with the ordinary public schools. But the curriculum must be modified to suit the need of the individual and should be directed with the object of making him a useful member of society. By this means these pupils are not deprived of that association with their normal fellows which is of such value as a preparation for their after-life in the community.

For children whose homes are unsuitable or too remote from centres, who require more continuous supervision, or who tend to become delinquent, special residential schools will be necessary. These schools would also be used for those whose capabilities cannot be assessed without extended expert observation for a considerable period.

The special school is to be regarded as a training-centre for such feeble-minded children as are expected as a result of the training received there to be fitted to take a place in the community and to perform useful work under adequate supervision. There is a danger of filling the special schools with children whose poor mental endowment renders them incapable of receiving benefit at all commensurate with the energy and expense devoted to them. Such children are subjects for custodial institutions.

Institutional care is necessary for mentally defective persons whose helplessness or anti-social traits would render them either the victims of the unscrupulous or a menace to society. Such individuals should be segregated in farm and industrial colonies, so that not only is the community freed from the responsibility of their presence, but they themselves are afforded opportunity of leading much happier and more useful lives, and of becoming, to some extent, self-supporting.

All feeble-minded children within the community, whether in special classes, or on parole from an institution for the feeble-minded, or over school age, should be carefully supervised.

It is clear that the problem of making provision for the feeble-minded and mentally abnormal in the community is first to be encountered in the schools, though there must be considered also a much smaller number of such low mental capacity that they have never sought admission there.

In deciding the place of the feeble-minded in the community factors other than the degree of mental defect have to be considered. Many feeble-minded individuals are capable of performing useful work, and provided they have no anti-social traits and can receive adequate care outside their permanent inclusion in an institution is undesirable, not only from consideration of their own well-being, but also from a social and economic standpoint. Many feeble-minded individuals are so dependent upon routine that having once been trained in the regular performance of simple duties they find difficulty in breaking their methodical programme. In this way their lack of initiative is really protective, as it tends to keep them steadfastly at their labours.

In the case of all feeble-minded persons living outside institutions, whether with relatives or otherwise, the State should, in the interest of both such feeble-minded individuals and of society, have the ultimate right of supervision.

The magnitude of the task to be undertaken cannot be estimated unless we have some indication of how numerous are those for whom special measures must be adopted. The information given below must not be too literally interpreted, but will serve to throw some light upon existing conditions in New Zealand.