Library Collections: Document: Full Text

An immediate outgrowth of the increased diagnostic services has been the recognition of the importance of guidance for the parents of retarded children. One of the particularly aggravating factors in the problem of mental retardation has been the fact that even the diligently searching parent had great difficulty in getting helpful information regarding the retarded child's capacity and needs. During the past decade programs of parent education have been developing utilizing a variety of means such as lectures and film showings, parent discussion groups, and guidance pamphlets such as "The Mentally Retarded at Home" (U.S. Children's Bureau), "3 R's for the Retarded" (National Association for Retarded Children), and "Now They Are Grown" (Minnesota Department of Public Welfare). While these programs aim at giving the parent a general understanding of the meaning of mental retardation, the needs of the retarded child and the impact of the retarded child on the family, there is also need for counseling services providing help to parents in coping with specific problems. Few such counseling services are now available to other than the parent of the preschool child and there is uncertainty as to under which auspices they should be developed in the years to come.

Guidance alone is obviously not enough, particularly for the parent of the severely retarded, often also physically disabled, child. The past several years have seen the development of pioneering programs in day care to provide relief to the family from the 24-hour care of the child and in nursery school programs to provide for the often isolated retarded child group contacts as well as group learning. Here again a variety of state agencies and private organizations have set up the demonstration projects and no agreement exists as to auspices, staffing, and financing.

Speaking quantitatively and qualitatively, no other service has as much to offer to the total group of mentally retarded as has the public school system. It is therefore encouraging that the last decade has seen spectacular progress in this area but also challenging for the decade ahead that special education facilities are as yet available for only one-quarter of the retarded who can avail themselves of them.

A particular controversy developed a few years ago as to whether the trainable child was a proper responsibility of the public schools or whether his training should rather be entrusted to welfare or mental health departments. While divergent opinions are still being expressed, the fact that 37 states authorize such classes either by mandatory or permissive legislation or administrative regulation and interpretation speaks for itself. In some cities classes for the trainables are fully integrated and in the same school buildings serving all other elementary classes, while elsewhere segregation is seen as the more desirable policy.

One of the arguments made against public school programs for trainable children is that this group sooner or later will find their way into public institutions. A study by Saenger, "The Adjustment of Severely Retarded Adults in the Community," contains convincing documentation that this is a false assumption. Following up a large sampling of pupils who between 1929 and 1956 had attended New York City classes for children with IQ's of between 40 and 50 he showed that only 26 percent were subsequently institutionalized. Twenty-seven percent of those who resided in the community worked for pay at the time of the study, an additional 9 percent had worked for pay previously. Obviously, such individuals should have the benefit of specialized public school education.

A new development pertains to secondary schools for the retarded. In a few communities this is now being extended to the trainable group. During the next decade further attention must be given to test out and develop prevocational programs for these pupils. This is all the more urgent because of the encouraging developments of sheltered workshops, of which more than 100 offer specialized services for the mentally retarded.

The experience of these workshops indicates that a sizable group of the retardates eligible for public school services is capable of sustained productive work. This should result in reexamination of public school curricula to determine whether they are designed to develop this vocational potential. An even greater challenge must be faced in the community: sheltered workshops are dependent on production contracts from business and industry. Also vocational training of the retarded for work in the community is useless unless the community, and in particular employer and employee groups, are receptive. It remains to be seen whether education of the public will create as favorable a climate for the young adult and adult retardate as now exists for the retarded child.

The success of vocational training centers and sheltered workshops will depend to a large measure on proper screening. Facilities must be developed for those individuals who can make a limited adjustment in the community but are incapable of sustained productive effort. They will require a simple type of activity center which in some measure is akin to the day care programs for the younger children.