The Irrepressible Ego
- Author:
Ligiitner Witmek, Ph.D.,
University of Pennsylvania.
Iii the February, 1910, number of this journal I reported the case of a typical child of low vitality, apathetic and without initiative. With such a child nothing can be done unless by means of good food, fresh air, baths and appropriate medical treatment we can affect the nervous system in such a way that the apathy is overcome and the child acquires a new energy. At the opposite extreme we have the child of great energy and abounding vitality, a vigorous personality which may be sometimes found tenanting even a feeble or diseased body. In an environment where energy and personality have a normal outlet such a child may unfold, to the gratification of his parents, traits of character which will distinguish him by an early independence of thought and action. Coop this child up in an institution and he will be sure to get into trouble. An ideal child for an institution is one who stays where he is put. And yet the troublesome children are often the best material for mental and even moral development. This is true with not only large groups or classes of children,, it is true also of families. The black sheep sometimes turns out to be the mainstay of the family, and many who follow the trail of acquired degeneracy to its barren end might have been diverted into happier paths if they had been subjected in their youth to proper guidance. In my classes at the college preparatory school, where I taught after my graduation from college, the most troublesome boys often gave the greatest promise. One lad I remember still with a great deal of pleasure, though he was probably the most difficult case I encountered in my three years’ experience. When his father died leaving his business in a precarious condition, this boy who was then about fifteen years of age, buckled down and devoted himself to working in the most energetic manner to support his mother.
It is a great pity that the public schools of to-day are doing relatively so little for many active but troublesome children be(*93) tween the ages of ten and fourteen. This is especially true of the boys who, yearning to go to work so as to have something to occupy their minds and hands, are yet compelled to sit in school over uncongenial tasks which for many of them lack the slightest educational value. Parents are also apt to find the most vital and energetic member of the family the one Avhom they are least able to control and direct. In the home or at school, the troublesome child requires a larger outlay of time and thought, but he is worth it.
A child of this type was brought to the Psychological Clinic in October, 1908, by an agent of the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania. In the preceding March she had been entrusted to the care of the society in Philadelphia because the local authorities of the county from which she came were no longer able to control her by reason of her persistent and excessive incorrigibility. I am told that she is remembered to this day in the county poor house, where she had been an inmate, and in the local hospital, as the most difficult and in every way obnoxious case they had ever attempted to handle. The condition of her eyes called for an operation and prolonged treatment, and this added another reason for confiding her to the care of the Philadelphia society.
Though eleven years of age, Mary, as I shall call her, had not yet taken the initial steps in school work and was considered to be mentally deficient as well as morally defective. There is some vagueness concerning her parentage, but the mother had been for a time under the care of the county poor house and was reported to be feebleminded and to have a feebleminded sister. The report stated that the mother and sister were weak minded but not insane, a detail doubtless added because the girl’s moral symptoms justly awakened the suspicion of insanity. As a matter of fact, all that is known about the child’s family is that the mother and her sister are weak minded (not a professional diagnosis) and the father deserted the mother. In accepting the care and custody of this child, the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania showed that it does not shirk its obligation to look after even the most difficult cases. The history of this child from March, 1908, until the present day, is the history of a ward of the society. During a part of this time, about a year and a half, she was confided by the society to the professional care of the Psychological Clinic and Hospital School. THE IRREPRESSIBLE EGO. 195 Sent first in March, 1908, to a hospital for the treatment of her eyes, the authorities there were glad enough to get rid of her. The nurse stated that she became very mischievous, even malicious, as soon as her vision began to improve. For this reason she was discharged before the completion of the treatment. Still in need of medical treatment, she had been from July 20th until October 22d in a boarding house waiting for some disposal to be made of her case. The child could not possibly be recommended to a private family, either for adoption or boarding. The Pennsylvania Training School for Feeble Minded Children is overcrowded, and moreover will not accept feebleminded children with moral symptoms so long as more easily managed children are on the waiting list. A reform school scarcely seemed to meet the situation, for the child was in need of hospital care and of school training even more than of remedial discipline.
While awaiting the disposal of her case in the boarding house, she was reported to be uncontrollable, even dangerous, rushing at adults and other children, biting and scratching them. Whipping, to which she had doubtless been too frequently subjected, aroused the child’s stubbornness and sullenness to the last degree. The caretaker reported that it was necessary to give Mary valerian every day to keep her quiet. She would bite herself apparently in a sullen rage, and was said at times to clutch at her throat, though I am inclined to consider this a bit of sensational fiction. It was claimed, and I believe with justice, that she could not be left alone for a moment. While often attacking children of her own age or older, she was reported to be invariably kind to smaller children.
The Children’s Aid Society had not been willing to run the risk of sending her to the public school, as they were afraid she might harm the other children. ISTo effort had been made to start her education. Affairs finally reached a crisis at the temporary home, and at the time I first saw her she had been for some days in the personal care of an agent of the society who had found her fairly tractable, although she reported that the child had had an attack of temper, the first in two weeks, on the day before her visit to the Clinic. Mary behaved herself better than usual because of her devotion to this woman, probably the best friend the poor waif had ever known. The oculist, who’considered the child’s eyes to be in a fairly serious condition, was demanding better physical treatment and moral control, if he was to have any success in improving the condition of her eyesight. The examining neurologist had advised the society that the child should not be placed with “other healthy and normal children.” When the Children’s Aid Society referred the case to the Psychological Clinic, its agent brought the child to the University of Pennsylvania as to a place of last resort. I was aware of the main features of the child’s history, when I saw her for the first time in the examination room of the Psychological Clinic. The little girl who sat there, apparently about twelve years of age, looked very like the representation of her shown on this page. Certainly she presented no better appearTHIS GIRL APPEARS TO BE AN INCORRIGIBLE DEGENERATE BUT THE IRREPRESSIBLE EGO. 197
ance, for lier hair at tliat time was cropped short and she lacked the improved physical condition which was the result of six months’ treatment. Huddled together on her chair, her head, covered with short, tousled, brown hair, thrust well forward, her shoulders somewhat elevated, she looked out at me from narrow slit-like eyes, ready to offer sullen resistance to any move I might make. Her forehead was low and somewhat bulging, the bridge of the nose slightly depressed, the lower lip protruding. At that moment she appeared to me the picture of a mental and moral degenerate.
ISTo one can avoid entirely the effect on his judgment of preconceptions and prejudices. It is well known to the psycholSHE IS THE SAME GIltL, WHO APPEARS IN THIS PICTURE TO BE NORMAL. SHE IS THE SAME GIRL, WHO APPEARS IN THIS PICTURE TO BE NORMAL. ogist that not only our opinions may be modified in this way, but that our perceptions, the very objects which we seem to see about us, will be transformed by our preconceptions and our feelings concerning them. Did this little girl really look like a degenerate, or was it merely that all who came in contact with her, including myself, thought she looked like a degenerate because we knew that she behaved like one ? I was doubtless influenced not only by the history which had been given me, but to some extent also by the child’s mean attire and sullen expression. Who can look at the picture which she then presented and arrive at any other conclusion ? The photograph on page 197 is an excellent likeness of her after she had been under the treatment of the Psychological Clinic and Hospital School for about six months. The photograph which makes her look like a degenerate, was really taken a few moments after the other photograph, and was made for the purpose of obtaining a picture of one of the child’s characteristic but fastdisappearing expressions. ITer dress was changed and the ribbons removed from her hair. Mary’s volatile temperament assisted us in obtaining a good likeness of her old, sullen self. She hated to have her former clothing put on her and she rebelled, most justifiably, at the necessity of being photographed with disheveled hair, and without her beloved hair ribbon. She was told to hold her head in the old way and to look as she used to, but she did not have to try very hard, for her natural resentment was aroused, and her lips went out instinctively in the desired expression of sullen resistance. For a moment she was the hopeless degenerate I had seen that first day at the Psychologic Clinic.
A very few months separated these two children. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that both children had existed six months before and both still continued to exist in the same body. It is an extreme instance of “there was a little girl who had a little curl.” What is required of one who holds the fate of any troublesome child in his hands is sufficient psychological insight to see the other child beneath the one who is apt to be uppermost. This is the secret of selecting for treatment children whose mental and moral traits give promise of restoration to normal condition. However much a history, of the case may influence my first impressions on seeing a child, I learned very early the necessity of proceeding to the examination as though the history did not exist. Every scrap of information obtainable must be secured, but it must not be accepted as final, nor can it be allowed to stand for a moment in the light of facts discovered during the examination. Thus it took but a few minutes to assure myself that if this child knew so much less than the average child of her age, it was not due to the fact that she was feebleminded. A few tests convinced me that I had to deal with a case of intellectual retardation due either to neglect or else to the child’s inability, owing to her moral and physical defects, to take advantage of the limited educational opportunities which had been put before her. A favorable opinion was formed of her ability to progress under adequate mental taining.1
The determination of the moral status of a child calls for* even greater reserve of judgment than the determination of its mental status. An hour’s examination, or several visits to the Psychological Clinic, seldom suffice to establish the basis for a sound opinion. I consider most reprehensible the celerity with which some physicians, not a few judges and probation officers, and most layman, will reach a conclusion as to a child’s moral normality or degeneracy after a brief inspection and a hasty review of mostly hearsay reports. A competent social worker may keep a child under expert observation in his home, or the child may be under constant observation and scientific training for many weeks in the Hospital School, and it may still be necessary to decline to give a positive diagnosis. In Mary’s case it was six months before I ventured to express an opinion involving a prognosis, and then very nearly a year went by before I ceased to fear that my prognosis might not be proved incorrect.
It is always possible, however, to reach a tentative opinion based upon the results of an examination. Thus I may not be able to affirm that a child is morally normal, but I may at least assert that my examination has revealed no abnormality. In the absence of positive signs of moral perversity, the existence of traits of character which may be used for the child’s moral development is a fact of the first importance. At my first examination I discovered that Mary possessed considerable emotional spontaneity. I had occasion to test her with simple objects, such as iThe physical examination revealed defective eyesight, which can be only partially corrected owing to a clouding of the lens, and an irritative affection of the ears and nose giving rise to an offensive discharge which was cured only after a year of medical treatment and an operation for the removal of adenoids. In addition the child presented marked symptoms of intestinal disorder. Her case has been nearly three years under constant medical super vision. Physical ailments readily account for many “bad days” which caretakers had attrib uted to moral perversity.
a doll and other toys. She bounded to the doll as if she had never before seen this object, but had spent all her life thirsting for it. For the first time she was her real self, and her behavior was that of a perfectly normal child possessed of strong emotion which expressed itself in the most intense and vivid manner. Here was good material to be moulded into shape. The child was certainly not abnormal in the sense of being apathetic.
During the examination she manifested another trait oftentimes difficult to deal with but which I consider a most valuable educational asset. While I was questioning the agent of the society, the child became completely absorbed in stringing some beads; not a very exciting task, but for her the interest which this awakened caused complete abstraction from her surroundings. When I spoke to her it was obvious that she did not hear one word. Stringing beads is in one sense play, but in another sense it comes very close to work, and the task was given as work, not as play. In this brief examination she had shown that she could work hard and play hard, and this ability to concentrate remained a dominant characteristic throughout the months of training. She could develop crazes At one time it might be a bicycle, or skates, and then she thought and dreamed and talked of nothing else, but it could also be the care of her room, of her person and even successes in school* work. Here was a rushing current capable of carrying the child in many directions, and the problem presented to the skillful educator was to direct the current into helpful channels. Her history showed, and my entire experience with this child justifies the opinion, that the current could not be dammed without injury to herself and those about her.
Of all the traits of character which were disclosed at that firstexamination, and I can speak here only, of the more significant, I was drawn especially, to what I cannot but call her spiritual courage. Neither an isolated farm life with a weak minded mother scarcely able to support herself, nor an almshouse experience, nor being driven from pillar to post, first in the charge of this society and then of that, nor yet semi-blindness and a serious chronic disease of ears and nose, nor an intestinal disorder which must have given her a constant feeling of malaise, not all these things had been able to daunt the spirit of this child. She had lived fighting against her fate like a rat in a corner, and nothing short of death could have caused her to admit defeat. She met harsh treatment with sullen defiance or open revolt. Hers was not tlie mean spirit which lies down and allows the juggernaut of circumstance and society to run over her, hers the upward reaching spirit of the rebel. And vet, rebel though she was, irrepressible to the very core of her being, she was just the child to follow and obey you with the fidelity of a dog if once you won her esteem and love. For she was demonstrative and possessed of strong affections. It was love she craved, even insisted upon from those about her, and here I came to see lay the chief tragedy of her personality. Physically unattractive, and possessed of an offensive odor which it took many months to overcome owing to the disease at the root of her various ailments, she was to most persons who came in contact with her a very repulsive object. The child must have lived and to some extent is still living, in the depressing and perhaps irritating atmosphere of having her advances repelled, the advances of a perfectly normal and healthy minded child, which, coming from a more attractive physical personality, would have met with sympathy and encouragement.
My examination, therefore, had revealed no moral abnormality, but 011 the contrary had shown certain admirable traits. A brief examination, however, is not competent to set aside such a history as had been given me. A child who is reported a menace in an institution and who cannot be left alone for a moment must be cared for in an environment where she can be constantly overlooked. I could not take her into the Hospital School because I could not safely trust her with other children, and for the same reason I could not advise the Children’s Aid Society to place her in a private home. Nevertheless, my examination had disclosed nothing to justify a diagnosis of moral degeneracy, and it seemed to me a matter of some importance to determine how this child had acquired the attributes which gave her her present reputation. I therefore advised that she be placed in a private family, the same that harbored Fannie.2 Here she was under observation for three months.
Mary and Fannie got 011 very well together, barring the usual quarrels, Mary’s energy acting as a great stimulus to the more apathetic Fannie. Mary’s affection, like everything else about her, was boisterous and ungovernable. She said once to me in the laboratory, “You know I like everybody,” This seemed at the time very suspicious, hut I learned that the child came as 2The Psychological Clinic, Vol. Ill, No. 9, February,1910, pp. 272-280. near tlie truth as those whose stories only emphasized her outbreaks of temper. The same energy which caused her to express her affection by throwing her arms around other children and hugging them, made her when crossed or angry attack these same children, scratching, biting, spitting at, or kicking them. Whether it was affection, anger or any other emotion, Mary expressed it with all the force of which she was capable. During the three months she spent in the house with Fannie she showed the faults of an active young creature who all her life had had to fight to get and keep what she wanted. She was inordinately selfish about all her possessions, small as they were, not sharing them or even allowing them to be touched. On the other hand, if she saw anything she coveted in the possession of another child, she would grab it. Sometimes with her desire to possess was combined a feeling of impatience at the stupid manner in which the toy or game was being handled, for Mary was clever with her hands, and even in these first days of training she learned to sew, and to wash and iron her doll’s clothes.
She was stubborn, clung obstinately to her own way, and when compelled to obey was apt to be exceedingly impertinent. At this time she showed no interest whatever in her personal appearance; her table manners were abominable and she refused any kind of food with which she was unfamiliar. As the days passed in this new environment, her tendency to strike other children gradually diminished. The fits of temper in which she threw herself on the floor, kicked and screamed, or bit herself in an apparent frenzy, became noticeably less.
Ten days after she was placed in this private family I entered her in the first grade of a Philadelphia public school, where she remained for a little over two months. Although the child took a great deal of interest in the work, she was reported as unsatisfactory in both behavior and progress, and the result confirmed my belief in the inadequacy of the public school to solve a problem of this kind.
Mary would be sent to school in the morning in a neat dress, the buttons 011 her coat, face and hands clean, a fresh handkerchief in her pocket, and her gloves sewed to a tape on her coat. At noon when she arrived home, her buttons were off, handkerchief gone, tape torn off the gloves, and generally one glove lost. Her dress was black and dirty as if she had rolled in the mire. In a few weeks she reduced one pair of best quality, rubber shoes to frazzles, and lost two or three pairs of gloves. Her appearance after a morning at school was that of a person who has been downed in a street fight and buffeted by a cyclone. ]STo wonder this spirit of destructiveness wrought havoc in county poor houses, and such like economical institutions! Mary gave no indication of feeblemindedness. In all her play she showed great imagination, talking vivaciously to her doll and to the canary bird. There were signs that this gift of imagination had helped to soften some of the rough places in her own small life. Once she avowed to the trainer, “Every one has always spoiled me!” And this from a poor waif who had doubtless seen the roughest side of institution life! Mary was accepted for training in the Hospital School on February 23, 1909. On her arrival she did not have the faintest idea how to behave properly at any time or in any place. In the school-room, for instance, she dropped things, upset chairs, banged doors, shouted aloud any remarks she wished to make, and if the other children looked at her inquiringly or exclaimed at her behavior, she would shout at them, “What are you looking at ?” or “Shut up!” If her examples were marked right she would be elated; if wrong, she would grow sullen, throw chalk or pencil on the floor, stamp her foot, and behave as if the person who did the marking were to blame. The second day she was in the school she was sent to bed for the day. This punishment was found to be very effective, as was also denying her some plaything or article of attire. She objected to taking her cold bath in the mornings, resented any criticism by sulks and fits of temper, ate like a little pig, and teased and tormented the other children.
Little by little, never relaxing the discipline, but at the same time giving her more things to attract and hold her interest, making her periods of good temper and obedience as pleasant and gay as possible, and her rebellious times as wholly unpleasant, a great improvement manifested itself.
Two or three new dresses, and a pretty comb and hair ribbon changed her whole careless attitude toward her clothes, which up to this time had not been attractive enough to inspire either pride or neatness. She was given a room of her own containing a small wardrobe. This impressed her, and having been told once, she never failed to hang up and put away her clothes.
AS SHE APPEARED ;WHEN BROUGHT TO THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC. AS SHE APPEARED ;WHEN BROUGHT TO THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC. AS SHE APPEARED AFTER SIX MONTHS CARE AND TRAINING. AS SHE APPEARED AFTEIt SIX MONTHS CAKE AND TRAINING.
In the school-room Mary learned to be obedient and quiet, and to take a poor mark goodnaturedly. She could be trusted alone to study her reading and spelling, and not to waste a minute. She always studied aloud and never paused until all the words were learned.
She got over her objection to a cold bath in the mornings, learned to dress herself, to eat her food slowly and neatly, and to act quietly on the street. Taught to wash her hands and clean her finger nails, she spent a great deal of time on this and other details of her personal appearance, showing a marked desire to look well and to be thought pretty.
Outside of Mary’s abounding vitality, her most salient characteristic was her keen desire to do things herself, and her most joyous moments centered around her initiation into some simple duties confined up to that time to the “Olympians”. Thus she loved to care for the younger children, to dress and undress them, her zeal in this direction often outstripping her discretion. Whatever she saw the nurse do she wished to try herself. In helping to teach or take charge of younger children she mimicked exactly the words and tone of those in authority. But this desire to do things was one of her most troublesome qualities. She played with the hands of a large clock in the drawing room, setting them back and forward and making it strike the different hours, and this she amused herself with secretly, the clockmaker coming several times to investigate its apparently irresponsible behavior. The quiet, firm discipline, the regular life, good food and steady occupation helped the work. Mary’s rebellious periods grew less frequent, and when they did occur, were broken up more quickly. One Sunday she got up in a very amiable mood, took her cold bath, and was allowed to put on a new dress in honor of the day. She felt her superior appearance so much that at breakfast she asked for a clean napkin in rather a critical way. She was told she must take Avhat was given her as the rest did. When the cream was passed for her oatmeal she pettishly refused to take it. Afterward when she asked for it she was told she could not have it, and when the tears came into her eyes she was told she must not cry. She burst into tears at this and was ordered to go upstairs and take off her new dress. She left the table with loud crying which soon became bellowing. The trainer in charge followed her, and Mary kept repeating again and again, “I will be quiet if you won’t make me take off my new dress.” When told she could not be excused this time she tried the old trick of biting her hand, presumably to alarm the trainer. She was informed she could not frighten any one by this behavior and so far from gaining anything by it she must now take off all her clothes and go to bed until dinner time. This produced violent crying. She was assured that if she took her deserved punishment quietly she would be allowed to go down to dinner and have her ice cream, but if she persisted in being naughty she would have to remain in bed all day. At this she gave in and behaved admirably for the rest of the day. This was her only resort to biting herself during her three month’s stay at the school. Mary coveted the privilege of wearing a watch which belonged to one of the trainers. This was used as an incentive to good behavior, and she was allowed to wear it only when she was good, it being immediately forfeited in case of any naughtiness. Instead of sulking when it was taken from her she learned in time to take it off and return it voluntarily whenever she had misbehaved.
In spite of the strict discipline to which she was subjected, she enjoyed her life at the school. After she had been there a month, she announced, “I am so glad I ever came here. This is the best home I ever had,” going on to enumerate the things she liked, prominent among them being nice places to keep her things.
In all this time, Mary had shown no sign of being incorrigible. Her faults were those of any other homeless waif who had lacked the proper incentives to good behavior.
In May, a home was found for her on a farm in New England, where she was to be taken care of and perhaps ultimately adopted. When she was told of this plan for her future, she was delighted with the idea and was rapturous over each new frock which made up her small trousseau.
On June 3d she left for her new home, accompanied by the agent of the Children’s Aid Society. In Boston the finger-bowls on the table interested her more than anything on the trip. She asked at once what they were for, and, on being told, she waited obediently until the proper time, and then, promptly copying her companion, used her finger-bowl very daintily. At the next meal when no finger-bowls were forthcoming she said reprovingly to the waitress, “You did not give us any finger-bowls. We always have them.” On this journey to Boston the agent of the society noticed a great improvement in Mary’s manners, at table and elsewhere. She was very good and helpful, getting up early, dressing herself and packing all her own things. After breakfast, she wrote two postals to the school, refusing to do this in pencil. She quoted one of her teachers as saying, “If you think enough of any one to write them a letter always use ink.” At a small station in the country she was met by the woman who was to give her a home in the true meaning of the word. With her sense of the dramatic requirements of a situation, she threw her arms around this woman, exclaiming, “Oh, mother! I am so glad that you have come!”
A happy summer ended, Mary was compelled to return to Philadelphia, October 30, 1909, because the family with whom she had been placed moved so far into the country that adequate school advantages were lacking. Since her return to Philadelphia she has lived at a boarding school and in two homes, and has attended one public school. There is little variation in the reports of those who have had her in charge. She is never vicious, is extremely imaginative and demonstrative, honest and truthful, fairly obedient, very loyal to those who are kind to her. Her general health is good, but she is constantly handicapped by. the condition of her eyes which varies from time to time. During the summer of 1910 while in school at Ocean City, 1ST. J., under the supervision of the Psychological Clinic, her vision became so impaired that it was necessary to bring her to Philadelphia for the purpose of consulting an oculist. At the end of a week she was allowed to return to the school. Again on September 9th her eye condition became serious. She had so little vision that placing her in a school for the blind was under consideration. By October 1st, however, the eyes were so improved that she could see well enough to go to school.
Mary grieved greatly at being obliged to leave her iSTew England home where every one had been most kind to her and where she. had enjoyed to the utmost a real, country home life. She had been allowed to call her caretakers “father” and “mother” and she frequently speaks of having found a father and mother whom she was obliged to leave in order to go to school in Philadelphia. That she will return to their care some day is a great help and incentive to Mary, to do good work both in school and at home.
The training she received in tlie Hospital School still remains fixed in the child’s mind. She is orderly about her clothes and is interested in her personal appearance, bathes regularly and willingly, keeps her hands and nails in good condition and is apt to criticise those who neglect these personal duties. She has fair reasoning power, and uses it. She recently told a friend about the younger children in the home where she had formerly been. The children had complained of what they had had for supper and had said to her,?”Milk and bread is not anything, is it Mary?” Mary had replied,?”Yes it is something but not much”. She is undoubtedly clean minded, has never used improper language and seems to be wholly innocent of ideas of sex. She enjoys boys’ society, apparently because she likes the rougher games which they play. Once when she was seen in the street with several nice looking boys who said that they were flirting with Mary, she said, “I was not flirting with them because I don’t know what that means, but I like to play the games with them.” Since October 2G, 1910, Mary has attended a Philadelphia public school. She is in the second grade, class A. In a recent interview, her teacher gives the following report:?”Mary is neither troublesome nor incorrigible. She is not used to the routine of the school room where there are fifty-five pupils. She is much interested and diverted by their conduct and spends much time in consulting them about her work. This is largely due to the fact that she does not see well. The child is not able to see the work on the board from any seat in the room and is obliged to sit on a chair well up in front. This is not conducive to order as it is necessary for her to use a book 011 her lap instead of a desk. But in spite of these disadvantages, Mary is improving constantly. I11 a special class of about twenty children her progress would be rapid. I do not object to having the child in my room, and I am deeply, interested in her. I suggest the special class only because of the greater and more rapid progress that could be made there.”
At home Mary is interested, willing and considerate, her chief faults being inattention and an excessive demonstrativeness with the younger children. She helps with household tasks, and takes great interest in the home life around her. At the present time she is in the charge of the Children’s Aid Society, which has placed her in a boarding home where she is living peacefully and happily with a number of children who are in the care of either the Chil210 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CLINIC. dren’s Aid Society or the Psychological Clinic. To those who have contributed so generously, financially, and to the physicians and societies who have shown unending patience during the last two years, her restoration to normal condition must be a source of great satisfaction. A bright future can be assured the child if her vision continues to improve. How far she will climb upward, depends for the rest entirely upon her environment and the training which is provided her. The moral reconstruction of a child like Mary is in the nature of a work of art. The loving hands of many nurses, teachers, trainers, and social workers are acquiring to-day the skilful touch which is needed to mold the plastic human material into forms of beauty. The Mary of to-day, is a product of Miss Campion’s mind and heart, first as the agent of the Children’s Aid Society, and since October, 1909, as the social worker in charge of the social service department of the Psychological Clinic. Miss Campion discovered Mary, took hope for her future, and then supplied the energy necessary to obtain the co-operation of every agency likely, to help. It is fitting that I should close this history with a quotation from her last report: “Mary as she is to-day, with her improved vision and happy, interested face, and with her extreme gratitude to all who have helped her, is an inspiration to any one interested in child helping work.”
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.