Library Collections: Document: Full Text

Naturally, a question arises as to how large a disciplinary or restraint facility is needed? In inquiring about this from various superintendents I get such widely differing answers that one could only surmise that conditions pertaining to the plant and the management of each particular institution were the key factors rather than the actual extent of delinquent behavior. It would seem necessary, therefore, to take a careful look at the type of problem the administration considers as basic to institutional segregation. Rather than to think of just one special disciplinary or restraint unit for each institution, it would be far more effective and also more economical from a management point of view to have at least two such units. This would not only facilitate a greater differential in treatment, but also anticipate a possible decreasing need for such special treatment as better staff ratios and better auxiliary services produce a more favorable institutional climate. I would rather make this kind of general statement than to comment on any one specific percentage of the institutional population which might require restraint.

There are, as you may know, various superintendents who recommend that rather than building a separate unit on the same grounds, a separate institution altogether be established in their state for these troublesome "delinquent" retardates. Again limiting myself to children and youth, I feel quite strongly that such a move would be undesirable since it would undoubtedly involve unreasonably high costs. Small residential units on a separate basis are feasible when they have a flexible informal program, but not when custody assumes a major proportion.

APPENDIX

Early investigators put undue stress upon the intelligence factor of the delinquent person. They could not understand, and many do not yet realize that the prevalence of mental deficiency found in imprisoned offenders might be due to the fact that they got caught more easily than the intelligent ones. Therefore, the mentally deficient criminal would more often be jailed and, consequently, would turn up more frequently in the statistics. Another point was that if the offender was not outright mentally deficient, then his intelligence was thought to be lower than that of the average man. This, too, is a fallacy. The examination of the delinquent depends not only upon him but also, within certain limits, upon the examiner's attitude and the care with which he carries it out. In our own test material, we have invariably found a higher I.Q. in the offender than did other examiners. In some cases it has not only been a difference of a few points, for instance from 68 to 75, but as much as from 68 to 88. (5)

On the basis of this study it is justifiable to conclude that mental deficiency per se does not seem to play an important role in the causation of criminal behavior as has been assumed heretofore. It was found that the ratio of mental deficiency among the population of a state penitentiary is approximately the same as that of the general population of the United States. This study confirms the fact that criminality represents a bio-psycho-socio-phenomenon, and that a multiplicity of factors are at work in the causation of criminal behavior of which mental deficiency is one, and of importance only in combination with others, and that psychological, biological and cultural factors are equally important in this connection. It also shows that there is no typical "defective" criminal since this study reveals the tremendous range of difference in background, personality, physical, mental and emotional factors. (6)

In the field of criminology, interest is chiefly centered on the moron, since idiots and imbeciles, who are easily recognizable, are usually subject to such care and supervision as to render them harmless to society. Even morons apparently do not constitute a major law-enforcement problem, the available evidence, although admittedly inadequate, indicating that their conflicts with the law tend to involve such crimes as larceny, vagrancy, drunkenness, and the less serious sexual offenses. Often the moronic offender gets into difficulties because he is confused, emotionally unstable, or easily led and exploited by more intelligent companions... (7)

There are no reliable comprehensive statistics on the extent of delinquency or criminality among the mentally deficient. Although early studies led to the conclusion that feeble-mindedness was the major cause of crime and delinquency, the work of Murchison, Tulchin, Zeleny, and others helped to correct this misconception. The evidence now indicates that only a small proportion of the feeble-minded are delinquent or criminal, and that offenders and the general population have about the same distribution of intelligence levels. (8)