Psychology Introduction
We are mainly talking about s.l.d. children here, although we do
discuss some cases who were even more handicapped, (and might have
been placed in the 'idiot' category in former days), some m.b.d. cases
and some e.b.d. children.
Some definitions of terms
- 'profound mental handicap'
- The I.Q.'s are
below 20.
This corresponds more or less to the old category of
' idiot '
- 's.l.d.'
- children with severe
learning difficulties. The I.Q.'s are in the
20 to 35 range.
- 'm.l.d.'
- children with moderate
learning difficulties.The I.Q.'s are in the
35 to 50 range.
This corresponds more or less to the old category of
' imbecile '
- 'mild mental handicap'
- The I.Q.'s are in the
50 to 70 range.
This corresponds more or less to the old category of
' feeble-minded ' or 'moron'.
- 'borderline'
- The I.Q.'s are in the
70 to 80 range.
- 'e.b.d.'
- children
with emotional and behavioural difficulties.
Their intellectual level is unspecified
These are not hard and fast definitions, it would be anal to be
pedantic and overconcerned about precise figures.
Some children with whom I worked, and whom I discuss, were in fact in
the category below the s.l.d. range, as defined here; they had
IQ's below 20 and would have been called ' idiots ', in former days.
Associated with the very low intelligence of the s.l.d. child there
is often
1. some degree of brain damage or dysfunction.
2. a particular difficulty with verbal communication, with
little or no speech. This is obviously due to the fact that
verbal abilities constitute a very high level skill, and these children
do not have the mental ability to develop them, or at least not to any
great extent.
What are the dominant drives of these children? The answer is fairly
obvious
1. Basic biogenic drives, for food, drink, warmth
2. For attention, and affection.
3. For sex.
Note here that the type of sex reflects the physical level
of development, and the mental psychosexual level. So a child's
interest in sex may only be a sort of infantile interest in touching
and looking at genitalia, while the choice of sex object might also be
appropriate to the mental level.
4. For control over their environment. (As an illustration of this
drive we will add to the site, at a future date, a discussion of the
interesting case of Helen P.)
5. etc.
To use psychoanalytic terminology, (not popular nowadays, but I am more
interested in truth than fashion),
we might say that in the s.l.d. child
the id is at a more or less normal level and strengh of
development, the child has more or less the same biogenic need drives
as anyone else
the ego, the ability to deal with the real world, is weaker,
of course, than normal.
the superego, or perhaps self concept, as a higher
function, is relatively poorly developed.
So the s.l.d. boy might play with himself in the lounge of his living
unit, a relatively public place with many people around, not because
his sex drive is stronger than normal, but because the normal
inhibitions against engaging in that sort of behaviour in public are
week or absent. His ego, being relatively weak, might not enable him
to understand that he might get into trouble by doing this, while his
superego does not provide him with a sense of guilt
or shame, or his self-concept with the feeling that in so doing he is
behaving in a way which conflicts with his idea of himself, e.g. as
'a nice boy'.
Similarly the s.l.d. girl might engage quite freely in sexual acts,
again not because of any particularly abnormally high strength of sex
drive, but because of a deficit in the superego, or the self-concept,
(wherein she might have an idea that 'good girls do not do these
things', a desire to be a 'good girl', and a belief that she
is, or might very well be, or could quite easily become, a 'good girl')
Such acts include, as well as actual sexual behavior, sexual exhibition
such as the teenage s.l.d. girl who exposes her breasts, or genitals,
in the unit lounge where adult males are present.
The same consideration applies to non-sexual acts which incidentally
involve the exposure of the child's private parts, e.g. the child who
drops her pants and knickers in the classroom or living unit as a way
of asking to go to the toilet, or of asking for her wet knickers to be
replaced with clean, dry ones.
(Such behaviours used also to be seen in persons, not mentally
handicapped, [at least not originally], suffering from
schizophrenia, untreated by psychotropic drugs, i.e. before the
1950's. So the case of the hebephrenic young woman washing all the
clothes she had just been wearing in a washbasin of a public toilet).
Personality variables
Do these children vary in personality traits, and where they do, in
what traits do they vary?
1. We might look at data from developmental tomes which tell us how
very young normal children vary, to give us a clue here. The first one
is level of activity. Such a personality trait would be associated with
the 'D' factor in Cattell's personality questionnaires, and is seen in
an exaggerated form in ' A.D.H.D. ', (attention deficit
hyperactive disorder).
Web Work in Progress
(This section of the site is still under construction)
Go back to introduction