Report of the Commission on child welfare to the governor ..
Connecticut. Commission on Child Welfare | Ladd, William Palmer, 1870-1941
J6.-. >^ -*5" ^ 'q x^a •T fc^OO.I J l" ' «.'< KfcncO l«^«*< t-*** { Digitized by VjOOQ IC ^nU of (Hmmftxtvd PUBLIC DOCUMENT SPECIAL REPORT OF THE Commission on Child Welfare TO THE GOVERNOR In Two Volumes VOLUME ONE PRINTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTE HARTFORD Published by the Stats 1021 Digitized by Google PUBLICATION APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF CONTROL f Digitized by Google CONTENTS PAGE Outline of Field of Child Welfare .... Frontispiece Letter of Transmittal vi PART I. The Argument. Introduction 1 General Principles 3 Violation of Principles 6 Bureau of Child Welfare 19 Duties of the Bureau . 22 Juvenile Court 25 Children Born Out of Wedlock ....... 32 Division of Special Education and Standards .... 33 General Changes 34 Estimated Annual State Expenditures 35 PART II. The Code. An Act Defining Certain Terms and Certain Classes of Children An Act Establishing a Bureau of Child Welfare. An Act on Juvenile Courts Additions to the Chapter on Adoption . .. A Chapter on the Duties of Selectmen with Respect to Children A Chapter on the Importation and Exportation of Children An Amendment to the Act on Marriage Licenses An Act Repealing a Series of Acts on Indenture A Chapter on Children Born Out of Wedlock An Act Establishing a Division of Special Education and Stand ards Under the State Board of Education Additions to the Laws on Crimes Against Children Miscellaneous Acts and Amendments Required by the of the Code Provisions 37 40 45 81 84 87 89 91 92 104 111 119 Digitized by Google Digitized by Googk THE CHILD WELFARE COMMISSION W. p. LADD, Middletown, Chairman, ANGUS P. THORNE, Bridgeport. Secretary, MRS. ROSEMARY ANDERSON, New London. ♦WALTER H. BROWN, Bridgeport. MARJORY CHENEY, South Manchester, KATHARINE K. FARNAM, New Haven, ARNOLD GESELL, New Haven, WILBUR F. GORDY, Hartford, J. MOSS IVES, Danbury, JACOB B. KLEIN, Bridgeport. HAROLD M. MEECH, Middletown, LOUISE H. MERRITT, Stamford, CAROLINE deF. PENNIMAN, Middletown, JOHN F. RYAN, Danbury, CHARLES A. TEMPLETON, Waterbury. tC-E. A. WINSLOW, New Haven. Executive Staff HENRY P. FAIRCHILD, New Haven, Executive Secretary, HERBERT M. DIAMOND. Milford, Assistant Secretary. HELEN C. CANNON, Hartford Chief Clerk. * Resigned March, 1920. t Appointed July, 1920. Digitized by Google Digitized by Google AN ACT CREATING A COMMISSION ON CHILD WELFARE. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of RepresentaHves in General Assembly convened: Section 1. The governor shall, on or before July 1, 1919, appoint a commission, consisting of not less than twelve nor more than fifteen persons, to study and investigate the laws, conditions and practice of this and other states and countries relating to dependent, neglected, defective and delinquent children and the entire question of child welfare, and report the results of its investigation to the next session of the general assembly. Said commission shall embody in its report a proposed code of laws, which shall include a revision of the provisions of the general statutes relating to children, with such changes and additions as It may deem advisable. Sec. 2. Said commission shall serve without pay, but may incur such expenses as shall be authorized or approved by the board of control, which shall be paid out of the state treasury upon the order of the comptroller. Digitized by Google LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. To His Excellency the Governor and the General Assembly of Connecticut: I have the honor to submit herewith the report of the Com- mission on Child Welfare. The act creating the Commission directed it to "embody in its report a proposed code of laws." This code of laws, preceded by a general statement of the reasons for the various proposals, and accompanied page by page with a brief explanatory comment, is contained in the present volume. The Commission was further directed to "report the results of its investigation." The report of these results in summary form will be found contained in the second volume of the report. Directly upon its first meeting and organization the Commis- sion found itself agreed that its most iqimediate and urgent task was to undertake a careful study of the actual situation in this state with reference to the various classes of handicapped chil- dren enumerated in the act. It seemed to us clear that any recom- mendation of new legislation which we might eventually make in the interest of child welfare ought to be based upon a thorough understanding of the conditions such legislation was designed to meet, and that whatever action might be taken by the present session of the General Assembly or by any future legislature would be likely to be wisely decided upon only so far as it was accompanied by an adequate knowledge of what is actually hap- pening among the dependent, neglected, defective and delinquent children of the state. It was this consideration which chiefly guided us in the selec- tion 'and organization of our executive staff. We were so fortu- nate as to secure Professor Henry P. Fairchild, of New Haven, as our Executive Secretary, and Dr. Herbert M. Diamond, of Milford, as Assiststnt ]^xecutive Secretary, both trained investiga- tors in the field of public affairs. Beside our Chief Clerk, Miss Helen Cannon, and clerical assistants, we have had a staff of field investigators varying in number from one to five. The employment of this able and efficient body of workers was made possible by the generous and sympathetic cooperation of the Board of Control, which appropriated $22,064 for tlie expenses of the Commission. Digitized by Google vu The result of our study and investigation must speak for itself. But it is safe to say that no such thorough survey of con- ditiotis bearing on the welfare of children has ever before been undertaken by any state of the Union. Connecticut has in this respect set up a standard which is likely to have a widespread influence for good. And we have no doubt that the amount appropriated will be saved to the taxpayers of the state many times over in the check which the body of facts we have assem- bled may offer to hasty legislation, and the guidance it will fur- nish toward wise administrative and legislative measures in the field of child welfare in the years to come. A careful study of our own Connecticut problems has the manifest advantage that it points the way to legislative action suited to the habits and temper of our people. A goal desired by all may be attainable by more ways than one, and in matters of social betterment the slow and sure way is often in the jend the best and quickest. Sweeping changes and novel expedients which might approve themselves in newer parts of the country might be quite out of place in Connecticut. Our conviction has been strong that changes in the laws of the state ought to be made without any unnecessary disturbance of existing conditions or any violent break with the past. We believe our report will show how it is possible to build the new strongly and well upon the old. This is notably true of our two chief proposals, namely, the Juvenile Court and the Bureau of Child Welfare. Our recom- mendation with reference to a Juvenile Court calls for no radical change. It destroys nothing. It simply expands an existing institution and adapts it to a new problem. At the same time it will provide Connecticut with a juvenile court which will be second to none in efficiency and in its suitability to local need§. The Bureau of Child Welfare, again, is not designed to replace any of the existing agencies in county, city, or township, now charged with the welfare of children. It will strengthen existing agencies, define their responsibilities, and cooperate with them in making their work fruitful and effective. In any proposal of new legislation the problem of expense to the state must be a prime consideration. This problem the Cotp- mission has kept constantly in mind. We have no doubt the report will commend itself on this score. Humanitarian consid- erations have weighed heavily with us, as they must, of course, Digitized by Google with every right-minded citizen. We feel keenly the responsi- bility which rests upon a strong, enlightened community such as burs to conserve the interests and shoulder the burdens of the little children within our borders who in one way or another, and through no fault of their own, are handicapped in life's race. But, if necessary, we should be willing to throw every humani- tarian consideration aside, and to rest our case for the proposed , legislation on nothing but its financial advantage. Our report shows the way to save money, as well as children, to the state. The present system of dealing with our handicapped children is not only inefficient, it is extravagant and wasteful. The modest annual outlay which the report calls for will, while benefitting the children, bring a quick financial return upon the investment, and in the end will, we believe, be paid back many times over to the taxpayers of the state. The act creating the Commission authorized it to deal with "the entire question of child welfare." The Commission has limited itself to a small part of the whole field. The diagram printed as a frontispiece to this report will indicate how much of the general field still remains to be covered. We are aware that the limitation of our recommendations to those changes which are essential and immediately urgent will be a disappointment to many high-minded citizens of the state. But we believe it is bet- ter at this time not to j^ttempt too much. The important thing is to take the first step, in the right direction, and upon sure ground. This first step will in due time suggest the way to other desirable reforms. The Commission owes a debt of gratitude to the many citi- zens of the state and others who have put information at our disposal and helped us with their advice. We would thank the Federal Children's Bureau, the State Board of Charities, the County Commissioners, the State Board of Health, and the Civil Code Commission for helpful cooperation ; and, in particu- lar. Dr. W. R. Miller, Judge S. O. Prentice, Judge Walter H. Clark, Judfee W. P. Marvin, Mr. A. E. Howard, Jr., and mem- bers of the faculty of the Yale Law School for valuable sugges- tions with reference to certain points of legal phraseology. The Commission has held in all twenty-six regular meetings. Beside these regular meetings, which have usually lasted the Digitized by Google greater part of a day, there have been a large number of impor- tant meetings of special committees, where problems have been carefully threshed out and material prepared for the considera- tion of the Commission as a whole. The decisions at which the Commission have arrived have been the outcome of the fullest and frankest exchange of opinion. No pains have been spared in order to view each problem as it arose from every possible angle, and no objection or difficulty has been brought before us that has not had a more than generous hearing. Every member has made some contribution toward the final result, and the report as it stands represents the united thought of many minds. It would probably be invidious for me to mention particular members of the Commission and to attempt to appraise their invaluable contributions toward the preparation of the report. Nor need I emphasize the obvious fact that the state has received the gratuitous service of men whose work both public and private is held at a high valuation, and whose talent is accustomed to receive national and even international recognition. As a mat- ter of fact, the appointment to membership on the Commission came to a group of exceedingly busy men and women. Not one who, in response to the call of the Governor and the General Assembly, undertook to serve on the Commission but has done so at the sacrifice of other important work. And if the amount of time contributed by the various members could be reckoned at its money value the total would undoubtedly reach a surprising figure. The members of the Commission accepted their appoint- ment in the belief that the state was now ready to undertake the solution of one of its most urgent problems. They have gladly contributed their hard work because of their desire to assist in finding a satisfactory solution of this problem. They are to-day more than ever convinced that a great opportunity lies before the people of the state, an opportunity to secure lasting benefit to our children, to protect our taxpayers, and to augment the well- being and the good name of the state as a whole. We trust our work will commend itself to the favorable judgnient of the Gov- ernor, the General Assembly, and the people of Connecticut. Respectfully submitted, WILLIAM PALMER LADD. Digitized by Google Digitized by Google Part I THE ARGUMENT Digitized by Google Digitized by Google INTRODUCTION. The twentieth century has been called "the century of the child." Whether it shall prove to be so for the world at large can not be told until the century has more nearly run its course. As far as Connecticut is concerned, the action of the Legislature two years ago in creating a Child Welfare Commission shows thajt the lawmakers of the state have determined that in this state, at least, the title shall be deserved. There is good precedent for Connecticut's taking an advanced position in child welfare administration. In the past it has more than once led in important matters. Thus the very beginning in the education of the deaf in this country and the first formal effort to train the feeble-minded were made in Rev. Thomas H. Gallaudet's school which was established in Hartford more than a century ago. The appro- priation of $5,000 by the state legislature for this school was probably the first instance in this country of spending public money for education not in the regular schools. Connecticut was also the first state in the Union to establish a home for blind chil- dren of nursery age. At the present time also certain of its laws are regarded as models. Thus its employment certificate law is generally con- sidered one of the best, if not the very best, in the United States. Its law for the protection of working women before and after child-birth is cited as unusually satisfactory. But the Legislature felt that in other respects there was room for decided. improvement, and that many of our legal pro- visions relating to the care of children needed sweeping revision if Connecticut was to continue to lead. The studies of the Com- mission have demonstrated that ample grounds exist for that feeling. The justification for giving particular care and attention to the welfare of children in Connecticut, as elsewhere, rests upon two main grounds. The first is humanitarian, and needs no special explanation. The second is a matter of econpmy and efficiency. The underlying principle in all modem scientific effort for human betterment, social as well as medical, is prevention. It Digitized by Google has been demonstrated that a given amount of effort expended in keeping an evil from coming into existence is vastly more effective and economical than the same amount of effort devoted to the attempt to cure an evil which already exists, both from the point of view of the reduction of suffering and of the saving of time, energy and money. It is especially true that all constructive work for children is preventive in character, both as regards the individual child and as regards the welfare of society in general. As regards the individual child, the significant fact is that the child is in a plastic state, readily subject to molding influences, capable of being transformed in body, mind, and character. Permanent results from intelligent effort are possible in his case which would be beyond hope in the case of an adult. As regards society, the child is the citizen in the making, and the treatment of the child of to-day determines the character of the citizenship of to-mor- row. Any expenditure which Connecticut makes for the welfare of its children, considered simply from the point of view of the st;»te's self-interest, is an excellent investment, the dividends upon which will be paid in a continuous reduction in the burdens of crime, poverty, disease, vice, ignorance, and related evils. Digitized by Google GENERAL PRINCIPLES. The investigations of the Commission have clearly estab- lished the following principles as the underlying foundation upon which all effective work for the children of Connecticut must rest : (a) The natural custodians, protectors, and guardians of the child are its parents. Any other form of care must be re- garded as a substitute, something less than ideal, necessitated by some abnormal condition. This conclusion is supported by biology, by social evolution, by religion — and by common sense. (b) The most satisfactory environment for the normal child is his owr| home. As long as the conditions of a genuine home exist no other environment is likely to prove so helpful. If conditions necessitate the substitution of some other environment, the best alternative is the nearest possible approach to a genuine home. (c) Because society has a profound and legitimate interest in its children it has a corresponding interest in the homes which are the cultural environment of those children. It is the right and duty of society, through th^ formal organization of the state,, to establish and prescribe such standards of home life as are necessary for the safety and progres of society itself. (d) When, in any family, the established standards of home life and care of children are no.t maintained it is both the right and the duty of the state to assert its authority. This may be done either by insisting upon the improvement of home con- ditions, or, if this cannot be accomplished, by the removal of the child from the home. (e) The removal of a child from its own home must always be regarded as the extreme step. Every other expedient should be given prior consideration. Only when other remedies have failed, or when home conditions are so bad that the welfare of the child imperatively demands it, should this final step be^ taken. Even then the removal should be regarded as temporary until it has been conclusively shown that proper conditions cannot be established in the home. The regenration of the home should be, the first and foremost objective of social eflfort. Digitized by Google (f) In the care of children so much is at stake that only the most experienced and competent agencies should be entrusted with the woFk. For the exercise of its own authority, the state must have agencies of both a supervisory and a judicial charac- ter. These should be given the widest possible latitude to enable them to care for all types of cases. Administrative agencies are also necessary in so far as the state undertakes to give*actual care. (g) Because of the helplessness of the child and his pecu- liar sensitiveness to environmental influences, many laws of a protective or developmental nature are necessary for children which would be an unwarranted infringement of personal liberty if applied to adults. (h) Because the solution of most child problems is a mat- ter of adjusting environmental conditions, and because of the his- torical development of legal administration in Connecticut, the actual care of needy children should be entrusted, as far a3 possible, to local officials and local agencies. The Commission, in the course of its investigations, has found that the foregoing principles are being unobserved in many particulars in Connecticut and flagrantly violated in others. It has, accordingly, in pursuance of its instructions from the Legis- lature, drawn up a set of recommendations in the form of pro- posed laws, designed to bring Connecticut's procedure in the care of its needy children up to the best standards. In passing judg- ment upon these recommendations two things are necessary: first, to decide whether the principles above stated are in fact sound; second, to determine whether the proposed laws are the' best means of interpreting these principles in the light of Con- necticut conditions and applying them to Connecticut needs. It is the opinion of the Commission that these proposals will be found to meet the essential requirements of efficiency, economy, and practicality. They are efficient because they assure maximum results with a minimum amount of machinery. The actual administration of care to needy children is entrusted almost entirely to local officials* and agencies. Only so many state officers are provided as' are absolutely necessary for adequate supervision and establishment Digitized by Google of standards. All likelihood of duplication and overlapping is thus eliminated. They are economical because of the very small amount of cash outlay which the plai) involves, and because the plan of local administration will reduce traveling expenses to a minimiun. The positive expense involved in new salaries, etc., will be more than offset by the saving to the State of large sums of money now wasted in improper and needlessly expensive methods of caring for children. An estimate of the expense involved in the differ^ ent proposals is presented on page 35. They are practical because they will produce the desired effects in the saving of suffering and the promotion of the happi- ness and welfare of the children of the State. Most of the unnecessary suffering experienced by the children of the State is due, not to indifference or deliberate negligence, but to the use of outgrown and mistaken methods. Competent supervision and authoritative jurisdiction will correct this situation. Digitized by Google VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES. The Commission has discovered ^hat the foregoing general principles are commonly violated in Connecticut in the following particulars. Complete evidence in support of these statements is presented in Volume II of this report, which must be consulted for full verification. In this connection only a condensed state- ment can be made. (a) As a general rule the expedient of removing a child from its home as a means of bettering its condition is too freely and too readily adopted. Children are placed in the County Homes in many cases with almost no attempt to find means of improving the conditions in their own homes or any effort to put these means into effect. Evidence of this is found in the very large number of County Home children who are returned to their parents as soon as they come to working age without any evi- dence that there has been a change in home conditions. In many cases, also, children are returned to their homes within a few months or even weeks after commitment. Further evidence is aflforded by the fact that in about 7% of the cases the n^ain- tenance of children in the County Homes is wholly or partially paid by the parents. It is clear that in many instances parents use the County Homes as a cheap method of supporting their children until they become of working age. This point is clearly illustrated by the following case. A colored boy was in the County Home a year because his step-father objected to his presence at home. At the end of this time the superintendent told the mother that if she would not take him home, he would place the boy out where she could not ' see him. The mother took him, but after a few months she and the step-fathier, despite the protests of the probation officer, who said there was no reason for such action, had the chiM committed to Meriden. He has been there six months, and has a very good record ; he will soon have earned his parole, and his mother's only concern seems to be that he will be allowed to come home too soon. None of the family have visited the boy since he has been in Meriden, but he writes home regularly and his letters show he bears no resentment. Digitized by Google (b) Throughout almost the entire child-caring work of the state there is a lamentable absence of adequate investigation of cases before action is taken. This is true of cases of delinquent, neglected and dependent children alike. This is perhaps nobody's fault in particular under the present system. It is nevertheless a fact which calls for immediate correction. An incalculable bur- den of expense is imposed upon the state for the failure to dis- cover available resources other than public funds for caring for children. In the great' majority of cases of children placed-out from County Homes which the Commission studied there were rela- tives who would have taken the child or contributed to his sup- port if they had been consulted. Relatives are seldom considered when a child is to be com- mitted to a home, but here are numerous, instances of their com- ing to claim the children when they find out they have been com- mitted. An uncle of one boy came from a neighboring state when he learned of his sister's death, and wished to take his nephew home with him. He heard that the boy had been taken to a County Home and went there, and also applied to the County Commissioners. He received no satisfaction, and had to return without the boy. The man was in all respects a suitable guardian and could have given the boy a good home. The boy was later placed out with strangers and the uncle has lost inter- est. (c) Taking the state as a whole, far too little attention is given to the' effort to 'accomplish the ideal solution of child prob- lem, namely, the rehabilitation of the original home. While many private agencies are doing excellent work along this line, the gross results are wholly inadequate. There is no state-wide agency which makes a specialty of this kind of work. As far as the public agencies are concerned, almost no work of this sort is done on account of the lack of appropriate facilities and the absence of recognition of the principle. Evidence of this statement is furnished by the fact that in a large number of cases of placements of children by the County Homes to their own parents represent the worst place- ments by the homes, showing that no effective effort has been made to improve the home conditions. As an illustration of Digitized by Google what may be accomplished by proper efforts in this direction the case may be cited of a certain family in one of our cities, which was about to be broken up by court order. The father was intemperate, and was on the point of being sent to jail. It was proposed to put the younger children in the County Home, and to secure a license for an older crippled boy to sell pencils on the street. Fortunately the case came to the attention of a person experienced in such problems. As a result of the efforts of this person the father was restored to his job on probation. His earnings were paid to his wife, an arrangement which was continued by his consent after probation was removed. With less money in hand he became less intemperate. The crip- pled boy was provided with a wooden leg and a good job. Work was also found for two of the other children who were over four- teen. The mother, cheered and hopeful, was able to keep the home tidy. In brief, by the right kind of help supplied at the critical moment, followed by sympathetic and intelligent coun- sel, this family was developed into a community asset. Three boys served their country during the war. On the other hand, there is the case of three children who were removed because of their mother's intemperance, and remained in the County Home for over three years. When they were allowed to return conditions were the same as before, but at present are much better owing to prohibition. It is said of the mother that she now seems a different woman. As the mother has shown that she can provide a proper home for her children, could she not have done so sooner if she had received help and encouragement? The cost of the three years' care for her chil- dren in the Home, at $3.50 per week, amounted to $1,638.00. (d) No adequate agencies exist in the state for the proper placing-out of children directly from their homes to foster homes without an intervening period of residence in an institution. The Commission recognizes that this is by no means possible or desirable in all cases, but it holds that in a large proportion of cases such a solution would be possible if there were adequate facilities specially designed for this purpose. Such a method not only spares the child unnecessary shiftings to and fro and the unfortunate effects of institutional life, but is also a saving in expense to the county. Digitized by VjOOQ IC (e) As a result of the foregoing conditions there is too ready recourse to institutional commitment as a solution for all types of child-maladjustments. The commission recognizes that, with certain types of. needy children, institutional care for a time, at least, is the best possible remedy. This is particularly true of many cases of mentally and physically handicapped chil- dren as well as of some delinquents. In the cases of neglected or dependent children, where there are no complicating factors^ institutional treatment must be regarded as something far from ideal. Yet, in Connecticut, the selectmen and others regard it almost as an axiom that a relatively normal child, who must be removed from his home, shall be sent to some institution. If the County Homes were in fact what the law provides that they should* be, namely, purely temporary homes, the situation wotild not be so serious. In point of fact. County Homes retain their inmates for extended periods of time in most cases. As far as can be estimated from the faulty records of the County Homes the average length of residence of the children in these institu- tions is between four and five years. Of the children placed-out from the County Homes 37 per cent, had been there from one to five years before their first placement, and 13 per cent, five years or over. (f) As a result of these conditions the needy children of Connecticut are subjected to the process known as "institution- alization" to a deplorable degree. The effects of institutional life upon the growing child have been too thoroughly demonstrated and are too generally understood to require elaboration in this connection. Nothing can be a poorer preparation for responsible life in society than a long period of years where practically every act and line of conduct, almost every thought, must be made to conform to the rigid rules and routine necessary for a large insti- tution. The qualities of self-control, decision and initiative can be developed only by practice. The opportunities for practicing such qualities are reduced to a minimum in an institution. In this connection it must always be borne in mind that in the case of the great majority of the needy children of Connecticut there is no element of blame attached to the child himself. What the state should aim at is to give everyone of these children the maximum chance for development. As one thirteen year old boy. Digitized by Google 10 who had spent nine years of his life in the County Home, put it, he didn't even know how to eat when he left the Home. (g) Even in the use of institutions, our present law does not provide for the efficient, utilization of the institutions which exist. There are many excellent private institutions in the state which are prepared to give as good care to needy children of certain types as are the public institutions, yet with only one or two exceptions the courts are not empowered to commit children to the private institutions directly. (h) Under the prevailing method of procedure no adequate analysis of cases is made or can be made as a basis for treatment. This is one of the most serious indictments which could be made of the child-caring system in the state. The underlying principle of the scientific treatment of needy children is the individualiza- tion of. each separate case. The first step toward individualiza- tion is a preliminary scientific classification. Provisions for even this elementary measure do not exist in Connecticut. Under the existing conditions in Connecticut the cases of children are handled according to the provisions of legal status which are rigid and which divide all cases into sharply defined classes. The results of this situation are adopted. Countless illustrations of this will be found in the reports of the field investigations. Neglected children are handled under criminal procedure. Numer- ous children who are subnormal mentally are to be found in the County Homes. The county commissioners recognize this situation and protest against it, but are unable to prevent it. A careful study of the girls in the Connecticut Industrial School for Girls at Middletown has shown that 48% of the inmates are sub- normal mentally, and an additional 20% positive defective. An extreme illustration is furnished by the case of the child commit- ted to a disciplinary institution, whose only offense, according to the records of the institution, was "destitution." (i) In altogether too many cases the final decision as to the disposition of a needy child is based upon conditions of fiscal expediency rather than upon consideration of the needs and wel- fare of the child. A single case will illustrate this point. There were brought to the attention of the authorities two children, one between four and five years of age, and the other less than two. Digitized by Google 11 They had lived with their parents on a barge plying up and down Long Island Sound, but the mother had died and the father had deserted and disappeared. As the children had been born in dif- ferent counties it was proposed to place the four-year-old in the County Home in his county, and to placfe the younger child in the almshouse of the city in which he chanced to have been born. At this juncture a private agency asked for opportunity to investi- gate. It was a very difficult case, but in the end relatives were found in another state who were only too glad to take the chil- dren and give them a good home. Quite apart from the avoid- ance of the tragedy involved in separating these two waifs, there was a cash saving to the state of thousands of dollars which would have been expended upon these children during the years that they would have remained public charges. This case illus- trates not only the saving in child happiness but also the saving in cold cash which results from competent treatment of children's cases. (j) Because of the faulty investigation or entire lack of investigation in the case of most needy children, it transpires that practically no record of a child's history or statement of the con- ditions which brought him under the care of the state accom- panies the child upon commitment. In the case of the County Home children the only record sent with the child is the mittimus giving only the barest facts of name, age, residence, etc. The managers of County Homes and other institutions and agencies are accordingly deprived of the knowledge of the child's ante- cedents which is absolutely necessary for the proper handling of his case. Each child must be treated as if he had had no previous existence, so far as any intelligent use of that existence is con- cerned. The same condition holds true at each step in the treats ment of the individual child. The child placed out from a County Home goes to his foster parents with no accompanying statement of his previous history or record of his character, dis- position, needs, etc. In fact in many cases the method of place- ment is such that there is hardly opportunity even for a verbal explanation of the personality and history of the child. It thus comes about that in numberless cases the career of a child is broken up into a number of unrelated periods in each of which he has to start almost from the beginning with a new group of Digitized by Google 12 supervisors and companions. It is not in the least surprising. that under these conditions an attitude of hopelessness, bitterness and even rebellion develops. In one case, tvsro children, placed in an orphan asylum, were called by an initial for weeks, because the person bringing them to the institution did not even know their names, and the children themselves were too young to give any information about themselves. (k) One feature of the record which should accompany a needy child through the entire period of his care by the com- munity is a statement of his physical and mental condition. No provision for such statement exists in connection with most of the agencies dealing with children in this state. The point at which an examination of this kind should first be made is the original occasion upon which the child is brought to the attention of a remedial agency. Without both an adequate physical and mental examination it is ordinarily impossible to make proper diagnosis of the case or to prescribe the individualized treatment which alone can be successful. Furthermore a single examina- tion of this kind is not sufficient. Examinations should be held from time to time during the child's career. Physical and mental conditions are such important factors in all child problems that no adequate treatment is possible without full knowledge on these points. It is true that most of our institutions, public as well as private, have some sort of physical examination, and a few have excellent examinations both physical and mental, but almost none utilize these records fully in caring for individual children. Abundant evidence of this statement will be found in Volume II of this report. Furthermore, in the case of courts where the orig- inal decision with reference to a child lies, provisions for physi- cal and mental examinations are almost entirely lacking. (1) The investigations of the Commission have shown that much oi the placing-out work done by the institutions and agen- cies of the state, public and private, falls far below the standards accepted in modern communities. There are three major require- ments for good placing-out work ; first, thorough investigation of the proposed foster home before placement; second, intelligent effort to secure the right adjustment of the individual child to the individual home. This requires genuine knowledge of the child (which, as already shown is impossible under present conditions Digitized by Google 13. in Connecticut), and much more than a superficial knowledge of ^he character and atmosphere of the foster home. Thirdly, con- scientious, intelligent and continuous supervision of the child and the home after placepient. None of these requirements is even measurably fulfilled in Connecticut. By way of proof may be cited the fact that in the County Home cases investigated only 31 per cent, of the foster homes had been visited before the place- ;nent of the child, as far as could be ascertained from the records. As regards supervision, the first responsibility lies with the town visitors and a limited responsibility with the State Board of Charities. Within recent years the State Board of Charities has made vigorous efforts to measure up to its responsibilities in this particular, but in view of the absolutely inadequate appro- priation given for this work, and the multifarious duties imposed upon it, it has been unable, even with its recently increased staff, to properly safeguard the welfare of the children of the state. Evidence of failure in all three of the foregoing particulars abounds in the reports of the field investigators. Perhaps the most striking evidence is the fact that upon the only official record in the state, that of the State Board of Charities, of children placed out from the County Homes and still under their jurisdiction, that 36% of the addresses were found to be incorrect. In the cases of the children recently discharged from the County Homes on account of having reached the age limit, 71% of the addresses were incorrect. In the cases of children still under the jurisdic- tion of the County Homes, 51% had never been visited since placement. There were numerous cases of no visits even over periods of six years, seven years and more. Many cases were found of children who had not been visited for three, four and five years. In many cases children have been absolutely lost and no one knows where they are. In a few cases children were found to have replaced themselves in foster homes of their choice, and the County Homes were ignorant of the fact. Even such an elementary rule of placement as the requirement that the child, shall be placed in a foster home of similar religious belief is not infrequently violated in the state. Certain instances of flagrantly bad placement have received much newspaper notoriety. Digitized by Google • 14 (m) A considerable amount of the failure of the public placing-out work in this state is traceable to the system of unpaid town visitors. This statement, of course, carries no implication as to the character, interest or disposition of the town visitors themselves. Many of them are persons of influence and high standing in their communities. All of them may be assumed to be genuinely interested in child welfare. At the same time, many years' experience with this system has shown that it is futile to entrust the welfare of needy children to such a group of unpaid workers. Many extraordnary conditions have been found. In one of the largest cities of the state the town visitors have made no visits for two years. In other cases persons listed as town visitors were found to have been dead as much as two years, and in other cases were entirely unaware that they were still on the list, supposing that their names had been dropped years pre- viously. Some had moved out of the state. Of the town visitors encountered in the course of the investigation, only 10% were fulfilling their functions. A group of unpaid town visitors, living in the same community as the foster parents, are subject to the influence of both personal prejudice and parental favoritism. It is asking too much of any human being to expect him to divorce his functions as an unpaid town visitor absolutely from his per- sonal relationships as a member of a community. One institution placed-out a -girl in the home of a friend of one of the board mem- bers, and then neglected to visit her for some time. It was later learned that the girl was constantly being accused of petty thiev- ing, was over-worked, and had been kept out of school most of the time. This is only one of numberless cases where serious con- ditions have resulted when supervision after placement is inade- quate. 