Wallin, J. E. Wallace

English

Northwestern University Illinois, School of Law: Scholarly Commons

Journal of Criminal Law and CriminologyVolume 36 | Issue 2 Article 71945Questions and Answers: Mental, Deficiency,Psychopathy, and DelinquencyJ. E. Wallace WallinFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclcPart of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and CriminalJustice CommonsThis Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted forinclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons.Recommended CitationJ. E. Wallace Wallin, Questions and Answers: Mental, Deficiency, Psychopathy, and Delinquency, 36 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 116(1945-1946)QUESTIONS AND ANSWERSMental Deficiency, Psychopathy, and DelinquencyI. E. Wallace Wallin (Guest Editor)Since 1932 Dr. Wallin,. our Guest Editor, has been Director of theDivision of Special Education and Mental Hygiene in the State Depart-ment of Public Instruction, Wilmington, Delaware. He is a well knownpsychologist. His numerous books and published articles are for themost part within the area that is covered by the phrases "mental devia-tion" and "mental hygiene" with particular reference to younger folk.He-is in considerable demand as a lecturer, director of forums and ofpsycho-educational investigations.-EDrroR.Question 1: Is feeble-mindedness the tap root of crime and delin-quency?Answer:During the early part of the second decade of the century feeble-mindedness was considered by many as the tap root of almost all ofour social ills: poverty, vagabondage, prostitution, inebriety, delin-quency, crime, and recidivism. This conclusion was, in the main,based upon the concept of the high grade moron as a feeble-mindedperson with an intelligence level of from ten to twelve years asdetermined by the Binet scale (which was a very imperfect instru-ment in the higher ages at that time). The following percentagesof feeble-mindedness among various groups are typical of thesehighly exaggerated findings: 68.8% for white and 90.2% for coloredconvicts in the Kansas State Prison; 70% for white and coloredcriminals in Virginia; 68.2% for prostitutes in Chicago; 58% ("amoderate estimate") for inmates in the Girls' Reformatory- in Ohio;84.5% for boys in the Boys' Courts in Chicago; and 66% ("distinct-ly feeble-minded") for children in the Newark, New Jersey, deten-tion home.With the passing years, the findings have grown more and moreconservative, as shown by the following median percentages offeeble-mindedness among juvenile delinquents based on many in-vestigations (as compiled by E. H. Sutherland): for the period1910-1914, 51%; for 1915-1919, 28%; for 1920-1924, 21%; for1925-1928, 20%.Question 2: Do these figures indicate that delinquency is becomingless prevalent among the feeble-minded than formerly?Answer:A part of the decline may have followed as a by-product of theimproved training of mental defectives at large in society, of animprovement in the social milieu of some crime-breeding geograph-ical areas, and of the colonization of a larger ratio of mental defec-tives. But the main causes for the decline are the greater cautiondisplayed by examiners in the diagnosis of feeble-mindedness uponthe basis of clinical test results, the more critical standards of diag-nosis of feeble-mindedness now in vogue, and the keener apprecia-tion of the role of various exogenous or environmental factors inthe production of delinquent and criminalistic behavior.QUESTIONS AND ANSWERSQuestion 3: Do these findings justify the conclusion that there is norelation between low mentality and behavior disorders or crimin-ality?Answer:By no means. More recent studies justify the conclusion thatdelinquency among children of low intelligence level is four or fivetimes as high as among those of higher intelligence and that theaverage I.Q.'s of malbehavior or delinquent juveniles fall in the low80's (an average of 82 at the Chicago Montifiore School for truantand delinquent boys; a peak of 85 in Detroit). My St. Louis find-ings many years ago, based on 2,774 consecutive school cases-mostlyreferred because of mental retardation, that the average Binet agewas higher for the delinquents than -for the non-delinquents, justi-fied the conclusion that it is the dull backward child rather than thefeeble-minded child who creates the problems of discipline in theschools and who is more aggressively criminalistically inclined andthat feeble-mindedness is not a prime cause of delinquency orcriminality. The vast majority of the feeble-minded are not out-spokenly or aggressively criminalistic. But many drift into crimeprimarily because of lack of proper training, inadequate support orprotection, defective powers of control or inhibition, temperamentalinstability, lack of moral insight, lack of foresight or capacity toenvisage distant motives, overcredulity, imitativeness, or high sug-gestibility. They can easily be led astray or be victimized by theunscrupulous and more intelligent evil designers in the community.They are often the guileless victims of a bad society. Subnormalityin general often becomes an important factor of antisocial conductbecause of its frequent correlates: the low intelligence, limitedschooling, illiteracy, marginal economic condition, indifference, andinefficient discipline of the parents; the crime-producing environ-ment in which they reside; school retardation and dissatisfaction,etc. Investigation shows that about 95% of mental defectives and85% of delinquents come from the three lowest economic groups asdetermined by the Minnesota Scale for Occupational Classification.Question 4: Are we to infer from these conclusions that criminalis-tic tendencies are non-existent among the mentally defective?Answer:Definitely not. Some of the feeble-minded of moron and imbecilegrades are conspicuously lacking in the power of inhibition or con-trol, are highly irresponsible, and aggressively criminalisticallyinclined. Some of the feeble-minded possess a genius for mischief-making and unless properly controlled, may become consummateplotters in spite of their lack of intelligence.But the outspokenly criminalistically inclined mental defectivesconstitute the exception rather than the rule.Question 5: What about the statement that "all feeble-minded per-sons are potential criminals?"Answer:It is evident from what has been said that the answer is in thenegative. This is another patent exaggeration. Perhaps all per-sons, normal as well as subnormal, may become criminalisticallyQUESTIONS AND ANSWERSinclined if the provocation is sufficiently exasperating. While thefeeble-minded as a group are more easily led into antisocial conductthan the normal, some are actually less potentially criminalistic thannormal persons. Some cuffed, beaten, or abused idiots and imbe-ciles will make far less effort to defend themselves or to retaliateby aggressive reactions than will normal children when subjectedto the same provocations. Some mental defectives rate lower on thescale of potential criminality than do many normals.Question 6: What is the relation of psychopathy to conduct disor-ders and criminality?Answer:This is an ill-defined category that became very popular towardthe close of the century's second decade when it was discovered thatthe army of delinquents and criminals who had been classified asmiddle and high morons were, after all, of borderline and dull nor-mal mentality, no more intellectually retarded than millions of law-abiding and self-determining citizens at large in society. It thenbecame customary to classify many of these so-called morons andsome others as "psychopaths." The assumption made by manydiagnosticians was that these delinquents were neither outspokenlypsychotic nor outspokenly mentally defective, but that they consti-tuted a large, ill-defined borderland group between these categorieswhose chief characteristics were emotional and temperamental in-stability, moral obtuseness, and delinquent or criminal behavior.That emotional and temperamental defectives exist admits oflittle doubt; but that much is gained by the application of a labelsuch as psycopathy, which is not a definite nosological entity, maywell be questioned. The application of labels, even when they aredefinite and precise, is, after all, merely the first step in any ad-justment program and means little without effective measures oftreatment and control.Question 7: What is the relation between personality maladjust-ments and conduct disorders?Answer:Many conduct disorders are merely symptoms of personalitydistortions. They represent efforts to overcome, suppress, conceal,evade, escape from, disguise, or compensate for feelings of dissatis-faction, frustration, bitterness, resentment, inadequacy, insecurity,or failure to win recognition or success in studies, play activities,occupational pursuits, or social relationships.The application of sound methods of child rearing and of theprinciples of mental hygiene, especially in their positive and pre-ventive aspects, in the nurture, training and treatment of childrenin the homes, schools, churches, and community centers will removethe causes of much malbehavior. Investigations demonstrate thatproperly adjusted instruction, especially in efficiently conductedspecial classes, will prevent much juvenile truancy and delinquency,while efficient psychotherapeutic treatment will remedy delinquenttendencies in many children.QUESTIONS AND ANSWERSQuestion 8: Does transfer to special classes completely eradicatetruanting among mentally deficient and retarded children?Answer:No, not entirely. But it does result in a considerable reduction,as shown by the following quotation from two systems of specialclasses that have been under my administration:"Of 787 pupils enrolled in the St. Louis Special Schools for Indi-vidual Instruction (for mentally deficient children) from Septem-ber 1918 to April 1921 only 4.5% had been runaways a half a day ormore (38 boys and 4 girls). Five boys were responsible for 71%of the total number of days of truancy (291 days out of 408). Whilenearly all the children responded to the special-class regime, a fewcontinued to be 'bad customers,' one having absconded 113 daysand another 65 days during this period. Confirmatory evidence ofthe holding power of the special classes came from a survey con-ducted at that time under the auspices of the National Committeefor Mental Hygiene of the city industrial (residential) school fordelinquent boys. Although the examining psychiatrist reportedthat the large majority of the 186 boys were mentally retarded, onlyfour of them had been in the special classes. The other retardatescame from the regular grades where, apparently, the instructionwas not adapted +o their interests or capacities. In a day class fortruant boys taught by an understanding man, the percentage ofattendanoe for several years averaged in the nineties.In Wilmington, Delaware, in the school year 1935-36 only 3.7%of the enrollees in the special and opportunity classes for the men-tally deficient and retarded were truant one-half day or more, eightboys and one girl (of whom four were colored). Two of the boys(both colored) were responsible for 86% of the total days of ab-senteeism. The girl (colored), admitted to a special class at theage of 11-3, Binet I.Q. 68, attended the regular grades very irregu-larly prior to her admission to the special class. In fact, she finallyrefused to attend at all. But she was perfectly willing to attendthe special class although she was an occasional runaway, beingabsent 8 days out of 92 during the year 1935-36. In February, 1937,however, at the age of 14-7, she was transferred by the principal,unbeknown to the department head, to the sixth grade in the be-lief that contact with normal children would prove beneficial. Thetransfer proved disastrous because she immediately reverted to herformer habits of truancy. She was absent 22 out of 27 days beforeher nomadism brought her into conflict with the law, resulting inher commitment to the girls' industrial school on the charge ofthievery."Question 9: Has the present social upheaval produced by WorldWar II increased truancy among these special-class children?Answer:Not among special-class pupils in the small schools in Delaware;but there has been some increase among Wilmington special-classpupils, as indicated by the following quotations from my annualreports on 1hi incidence of truancy and delinquency among thesechildren:From the 1942-43 report: In Wilmington "the percentage oftruancy this year was 5.5% in the special and opportunity classesQUESTIONS AND ANSWERScompared with 3.7% in 1935-36, although only two teachers in theseclasses reported that the condition was worse this year than before.Truancy was far worse in the provocational classes for the olderretardates than in the opportunity and special classes for theyounger children, 18.8% vs. 5.5%. Nine girls (all in the prevoca-tional classes except one) had played hookey as compared with 46boys. Three teachers reported that the truancy situation wasworse, four no worse, two better, while five did not answer thequestion.Thirty-six boys and nine girls were reported as having beenguilty of some form of delinquency during the year. Ten and six-tenths per cent of these were in the special and opportunity classesand 9.6% in the prevocational classes. The proportion of boys in-volved was about twice as large as the proportion of girls. Theincidence of delinquency was probably heightened this year, al-though only one teacher reported that this was so. Comparabledata are not available for previous years."From the 1943-44 report: "On the whole, no alarming wartimebehavior problems seem to exist among the retarded children in therural schools of the state." In all except one or two of these schoolsthe conditions were as good as during normal times or even better.In Wilmington the truancy conditions also showed an improvement.In the special and opportunity classes 1.7% of the boys and none ofthe girls were truant as compared with 7.0% for boys and 1.7%for girls last year. In the Bayard prevocational (for boys) 6.1%of the boys were truant this year as compared with 35.9% lastyear." (One school with most of the prevocational classes failed tosubmit the report this year).

Questions and Answers:  Mental, Deficiency, Psychopathy, and Delinquency

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3333&context=jclc

Questions and Answers: Mental, Deficiency, Psychopathy, and Delinquency

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Northwestern University Illinois, School of Law: Scholarly Commons