sae ees @ HYSTS SG New York State Cullege of Agriculture At Gornell University Ithaca, N. B. Library Date Due MAY 3 | 1952 Nov14 5 Jan's. J May13) Dee1858 | aliov25 64 lll Cornell University Library Child-placi | in Brother and Sister in a Foster Home BosTon CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES A MANUAL FOR STUDENTS AND SOCIAL WORKERS By W. H. SLINGERLAND, A.M., D.D. SPECIAL AGENT, DEPARTMENT OF CHILD-HELPING RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION INTRODUCTION By HASTINGS H. HART, LL.D. RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION NEW YORK, 1919 @ HY SiS D6 CopyRIGHT, 1918, BY THE RussELL SAGE FOUNDATION @ safer WM °F. FELL CO* PRINTERS PHILADELPHIA aoe sf TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE List oF ILLUSTRATIONS 15 PREFACE 17 INTRobDucTION, by Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Director De- partment of Child-helping 19 PART ONE HISTORICAL AND GENERAL BASIS CHAPTER | A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING 25 The Family 25 Ancient Tribal Conditions 26 Ancient Cities and Nations 26 Code of Hammurabi 26 The Jews 27 Greece and Rome 28 Early Christian Conditions 28 Method of Early Christian Church 29 Child-caring Institutions 20 The Modern Period 30 Renaissance of Child WelfareyWork 32 French Boarding-out System 32 The Teutonic Empires 33 Dr. Barnardo’s Homes and Child-placing 35 American Organizations 35 Modern Jewish Work in America a9 Extent and Variety of Work 38 CHAPTER II MODERN CHILD-PLACING DEFINED 40 Legal Definition 40 A Working Definition 40 Corollaries 4! TABLE OF CONTENTS Cuapter III CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS Organization Elements and Relations Some Operating Essentials Better Work Demanded Private Organizations for States Other Private Organizations 1. Nonsectarian Agencies 2. Denominational Agencies Public Child-placing Agencies Juvenile Courts and Child-placing New York Children’s Home Bureau State Boards of Children’s Guardians Institutional Child-placing CHAPTER IV CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN Classes by Causes Neglected Children Dependent Children 1. Deserted Children 2. Foundlings 3. Needy Children 4. Orphans \- Delinquent Children Defective Children 1. Physical Defectives 2. Mental Defectives Psychology and Classification Mental Defectives Specially Classified 1. Idiots 2. Idio-Imbeciles 3. Imbeciles 4. Morons 5. Dullards Subnormal Children Sometimes Placeable 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART TWO THE TECHNIQUE OF CHILD-PLACING CHAPTER V RECEPTION OF CHILDREN What Reception Involves Receptions According to Function Sacredness of the Work Requests to Receive Children * Taking Children from Parents Reception Sources 1. The Courts 2. Poor Officials 3. Relatives and Friends 4. Other Agencies Case Study Medical Examination Needed Detailed Diagnosis 1. Study of the Family 2. Study of the Child Itself Accurate Records Needed Formal Reception Reception on Surrenders Reception by Default Reception by Favor Court Process Best Basis Papers and Records Official Reception Co-operation and Reassignments Personal Reception CHAPTER VI RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS Physical Essentials 1. Central Location 2. Site 3. Buildings TABLE OF CONTENTS Type of Buildings 1. Single Buildings 2. Cottage Group Plans a. Two Cottage Plan b. Three Cottage?Plan Working Force 1. General Employes 2. Medical Staff 3. Psychologist Physical Care of Wards 1. Dietary 2. Dining Room 3. Milk Supply 4. Bathing Facilities 5. Toilet Articles 6. Dormitories 7. Care of Infants 8. Clothing g. Cleanliness Children’s Activities 1. Work 2. Play 3. Education 4. Religious Privileges CHAPTER VII SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES General Placing-out Discussion of Methods Obtaining Applications Illustrative Examples of Selection 1. Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania 2. Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society Indirect Selection Replacements Final Tests of Quality 10 PAGE 97 97 100 101 101 102 103 103 104 104 105 106 106 107 108 108 109 109 109 110 111 112 112 113 115 116 116 117 119 119 121 TABLE OF CONTENTS CuHapTeR VIII SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN Personal Visits Necessary Types of Children Personal and Racial Selection Types of Placement 1. Boarding Homes 2. Free Homes 3. Working Homes Sending Children to Homes First Impressions Important Sex of Placing-out Agents Placing-out Standards Relatives and Placed-out Children 1. Children in Boarding Homes 2. Children in Free Homes Guardianship and Consent to Adoption Laws and Decisions 1. Illinois 2. Idaho 3. Massachusetts y Trained Workers Required CHAPTER IX ADEQUATE SUPERVISION Supervision by Agencies Basis in Boston and Elsewhere The Golden Mean Supervision by Leading Agencies Studied 1. Number of Children to Visitor 2. Variation for Free, Boarding, and Working Homes 3. Average Numbers in Desired Standards 4. Frequency of Visitation Aids in Supervision A Few Essentials State Supervision I PAGE 123 123 124 125 125 126 127 127 128 129 129 130 131 131 132 133 134 134 135 137 140 143 143 144 144 145 145 145 146 146 147 148 149 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ¥ Purposes of State Supervision 149 Declaration of White House Conference 150 State Supervisory Boards 150 1. State Board of Charities System 151 2. State Board of Control System 151 3. State Commissioner or Department System 152 4. Director of Public Welfare System 152 State Research Bureaus 155 1. Ohio 155 2. lowa 156 Codes to Replace: Legal Chaos 157 Essentials of State Supervision 160 PART THREE SPECIAL CLASSES, ARGUMENTS, AND?FORECASTS CHAPTER X CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS 165 Numbers of Illegitimates 165 Results of Social Ostracism 166 Commercial Lying-in Homes 166 Disposition of Unwanted Children 168 Traffic in Children 168 General Social Program 170 Norway’s New Law 172 Minnesota’s New Code 173 Present Problems 174 The Negative Side 174 Foundling Asylums Fail 174 Combined Care Institutions 176 Foster Homes 176 CHAPTER XI JUVENILE WAR DEPENDENTS 178 Policy of the American Red Cross 178 Institutional Care of Children of Soldiers 181 12 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER XII PAGE ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING 184 1. Its Normality 185 2. Its Economy 185 3. Its Availability 187 4. Its Universality 188 5. Its Ultimate Necessity 19! Summary 193 CHAPTER XIII LOOKING FORWARD 194 Four Elements 194 1. The Children 194 2. The Homes 195 3. The Organizations 195 4. The Methods 196 The Public Interested 196 Personal Views of Leading Workers 1907 The Agency Point of View 197 1. Florida—Marcus C. Fagg 197 2. Illinois—Wilfred S. Reynolds 198 3. lowa—A. T. Burnell 199 4. Kansas—D. F. Shirk 200 5. Massachusetts—F. H. Knight 201 6. C. C. Carstens 202 7. Minnesota—S. W. Dickinson 203 8. Missouri—C. C. Stahmann 204 9. New York—Homer Folks 204 10. North Dakota—Frank D. Hall 205 11. Ohio—C. V. Williams 206 12. Washington—Marion Johnson 207 The} Institutional Point of View 208 1. New York—Ludwig B. Bernstein 208 2. R. R. Reeder 209 3. Ohio—S. D. Watts 210 4. E. J. Henry 212 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS Conclusion 1. Active Workers 2. Members of Boards 3. Interest of Society at Large 4. Right Legislation and Supervision PART FOUR APPENDICES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND INDEX APPENDICES A. Twentieth Century Terminology B. Building a Definition of Child-placing C. Extracts from Laws and Supreme Court Decisions D. The Tennessee Child Welfare Law SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY INDEX PAGE 213 214 214 214 214 219 224 227 233 244 249 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Arranged alphabetically according to location of organization headquarters) Boston Boston Children’s Aid Society PAGE Brother and Sister in a Foster Home Frontispiece Boarded-out Because Her Mother is III 50b Typical Boarding Home in the Country 50b New England Home for Little Wanderers Receiving Home and Clinical Laboratory 68a Chicago Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society Evanston Receiving Home 96a Floor Plans 96b Des Moines Iowa Children’s Home Society Receiving Home and Central Office 200a Jacksonville Florida Children’s Home Society “Somewhere in Florida’””—A Fine Foster Home 1424 The Foster Mother 142a The Foster Children—Brother and Sister 142a Los Angeles Children’s Home Society of California Receiving Home—Society Headquarters 1i2a A Foster Home ; 112a Interior of Foster Home, Highland, Cal. 112a New York Children’s Aid Society of the City of New York Typical Group at the Receiving Home 68b A Neglected Boy . 68b Results— After Eight Years in Good Family Homes 68b State Charities Aid Association of New York A Child From This Shack 142b Went to This Fine Free Home 142b Happy in the Country 142b Twin Girls and Their Excellent Free Home 142b 15 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Philadelphia Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania A Sample Foster Home A Happy Adopted Boy As Child Was Received Same Child Four Months Later Seattle Washington Children’s Home Society Superintendent’s Residence and Receiving Home Worcester Worcester Children’s Friend Society A Boarding Home in the Country PAGE 112b 112b 112b 112b 200b 50a \ 1 4 PREFACE HILD-PLACING in families is an important branch of C organized child welfare work. It is an approved method of providing for destitute and homeless children. It possesses a technique as definite as that of any other branch of social ser- vice. Experts in social betterment show a constantly increasing interest in its ideals and in its practical operation. Up to this time child-placing in families has received only inci- dental treatment in social service publications. Several confer- ence reports and many special papers devoted to the subject, as well as numerous paragraphs and short sections on home-finding and placing-out, are to be found in books on related themes. But more extended treatment is desirable. Child-placing should have a theoretical and practical literature of its own. The present volume is an effort to treat the subject in one publication with a fair degree of completeness. The progress of the world war and the entrance of the United / ‘States as a direct participant presage an immense increase in juvenile dependents for many years to come. In addition to national and state pensions and insurance, and in co-operation with such public provisions for dependents, it is probable that ac- commodations in private institutions and the facilities of all organizations for child-caring for a long time will be taxed to the utmost. The author suggests that child-placing in families, properly strengthened and standardized, will afford a practical and satisfactory method of providing for all normal juvenile war dependents who cannot be cared for by parents or other near relatives. It is with the object of meeting the needs and guiding the action of those engaged in this national service that the following manual has been written. It represents nineteen years of work and study by the author in this field. Many topics are only briefly outlined, and various important subjects, such as financing the work of private agencies, are omitted entirely. Yet it is hoped that stu- dents and social workers will find the book informing and helpful. Child-placing in Families was selected as the title of this manual 2 17 AUTHOR’S PREFACE because the term seems to be the best and most comprehensive for the work described. Broader than “home-finding,” a term very generally used in the Middle West and on the Pacific coast, it includes both “boarding-out”’ and “ placing-out,” terms widely used in all parts of the Union. It also includes “placing with kin,”’ meaning the child’s immediate family, and is therefore both suitable and comprehensive—one that will be understood in every section of the United States. A definition of terms and a bibliography are inserted at the close of the book. As the use of some of the terms here listed varies in different parts of the Union, a preliminary study of this section will materially aid the reader in an understanding of the text. The bibliography was purposely kept small, so as not to discourage the student by a long and imposing array of titles; but each title represents a book or article directly related to the subject under consideration, and the list includes a vast amount of practical information for child welfare workers. Most of the books and pamphlets are very recent publications. The writer has drawn freely upon them, as the notes referring to direct quotations or condensations testify. Many social workers have given substantial aid and counsel in the preparation of the volume. Among those to whom the writer feels especially indebted are the following: C. C. Carstens, Frederic H. Knight, J. Prentice Murphy, and Miss Helen A. Woods, of Massachusetts; Ludwig B. Bernstein, R. R. Reeder, Homer Folks, and C. Spencer Richardson, of New York; E. D. Solenberger, and Mrs. Martha P. Falconer, of Pennsylvania; W. J. Maybee, of Virginia; Marcus C. Fagg, of Florida; E. J. Henry, S. D. Watts, and C. V. Williams, of Ohio; George R. Bedinger, of Michigan; Wilfred S. Reynolds, of Illinois; A. T. Burnell, of lowa; C. C. Stahmann, of Missouri; D. F. Shirk, of Kansas; S. W. Dickinson, of Minnesota; Frank D. Hall, of South Dakota; J. W. Flesher, of Montana; and Marion Johnson, of Washington. To these 24 child welfare workers sincere thanks and appreciation are here expressed, and thanks are also extended to as many others, in various parts of the United States, who have provided helpful material. W. H. SLINGERLAND. 18 INTRODUCTION By HASTINGS H. HART, LL.D. i: HE plan of placing-out dependent and neglected children in family homes, temporarily or permanently, has become well established; and it is generally recognized that, as a rule, a carefully selected family home is to be preferred to an in- stitution as an abiding place for such a child, especially in the case of young children. The use of foster homes for the permanent care of orphan chil- dren, or children whose parents are permanently unable or unfit to care for them, has had the strongest endorsement. As long ago as 1899 Hon. Thomas M. Mulry, of the St. Vincent de Paul Society, as Chairman of the Committee on the Care of Destitute and Neg- lected Children in the National Conference of Charities and Cor- rection, discussing the report of the committee of the preceding year, declared that “The preponderance of opinion seemed to be in favor of placing the children in good homes where such could be found and the circumstances warranted such action being taken.” Mr. Mulry favored institutional “care of those children who are prevented by circumstances from being placed in homes,” but he said in the report of the Committee: “There are homes in abun- dance throughout our cities, our towns, our farming sections, for every orphan child, if the people will but open their hearts and brighten their homes by studying in what way they may best show their love for their less fortunate fellow beings.” The famous White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children, held at Washington, D. C., in January, 1909, included about 200 representatives of orphanages, children’s homes, children’s aid societies, societies for the prevention of cruelty to children, juvenile courts, and other agencies from all parts of the United States and representing various religious faiths. The Conference adopted unanimously a series of Conclusions, including the fol- lowing: “HoME-FInDING: As to the children who for sufficient reasons. 19 INTRODUCTION must be removed from their own homes, or who have no homes, it is desirable that, if normal in mind and body and not requiring special training, they should be cared for in families whenever practicable. The carefully selected foster home is for the normal child the best substitute for the natural home.” The use of foster homes for the care of children whose parents are in temporary distress but who may be able to resume their care later is less common than their use for permanent care, but it already prevails widely in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Mary- land, and Pennsylvania, and is gradually extending into other states. It has been tested with gratifying success on a large scale by the Department of Public Charities of the City of New York. This method also was noted by Mr. Mulry in his report of 1899, when he said: “It is the opinion of some interested in the work . that the payment of board in families would facilitate securing good homes for all children to be placed out.”” It was noted alsoin the Conclusions of the White House Conference as follows: “For the temporary, or more or less permanent, care of such children different methods are in use, notably the plan of placing them in families, paying for their board, and the plan of institutional care. Contact with family life is preferable for these children as well as for other normal children. It is necessary, however, that a large number of carefully selected boarding homes be found if these children are to be cared for in families. . . . Unless and until such homes are found, the use of institutions is necessary.” The author of Child-placing in Families has undertaken to re- duce to terms the principles and standards of approved child- placing. He speaks with authority, having had eleven years of actual experience in the work, and eight years more in which he has watched that of others. He has also made use of the advice and criticism of those engaged in the same undertaking. After having watched for thirty-five years the working of the plan of placing-out children and having shared in it for ten years, the writer of this introduction is keenly alive to the need of such a manual. Heretofore there has been no text book for the guid- ance of those who are called to take up this complex and delicate task. They have simply had to “learn by hard knocks” and the poor children have had to suffer for the mistakes made. 20 INTRODUCTION There has not even been agreement in different parts of the country as to what was meant by “child-placing.” In some com- munities it is applied chiefly to the boarding-out of children in family homes; in others, almost exclusively to the placing of chil- dren in free homes without the payment of board. As the author points out, some of the agencies which have placed-out children have not even been willing to admit that they did this work. Heretofore there have been no established standards. The most active and best organized agencies have gradually come, it is true, to agree on many points; but, even among these, diverse views are held on such important matters as the need for receiving homes, the number of children that can be cared for by one agent, and whether unmarried mothers should be urged to care for their own children, and, if so, for how long. But there are many agen- cies, institutions, and individuals who dispose of children, body and soul, with little more thought or conscience than they would give to the disposal of surplus kittens or puppies. It is to be hoped that this book may help to awaken the public conscience on this subject. The historical study in Chapter | brings out the fact that placing children in family homes is a well-accredited plan of ancient stand- ing, and that it was used by many orphanages in Europe and America long before Mr. Brace in New York and Dr. Barnardo in London organized their great child-placing societies. The author shows conclusively that child-placing is a most technical and responsible work, to be properly done only by people of a high degree of judgment, conscience, and training. He wisely opposes the employment of inexperienced or sentimental people, emphasizing the fact that the little children who must be given over to the care of strangers are in no way to blame for their sad plight, have no volition as to what is to be done with them, and depend entirely for their welfare, happiness, and future oppor- tunity upon the faithfulness and skill with which the task of placing them is performed. We are under double obligation, therefore, to guarantee the quality of the agents who are to under- take it. Dr. Slingerland justly urges the need of thorough case work in order to find out, first, what children are proper subjects for the 21 INTRODUCTION child-placing method, and what ones have parents or relatives who can and ought to care for them, as well as those disqualified by disease or mental weakness; second, the kind of treatment, medical, educational, or vocational, and the kinds of homes they need in order to insure their future. It is probably fair to say that, out of about 1,500 institutions and agencies in the United States which place children in family homes, not 25 are doing such case work as would be recognized as adequate by any well-trained worker. The manual makes it plain that the selection of the foster home is a crucial matter—not only a home which may be suitable for some child but the home that is best suited to the needs of the par- ticular child in hand. It appears also that there is danger of mis- take in selection; the possession of wealth or social standing, or even the philanthropic impulse of the prospective foster parents does not always prove that the home is one to be chosen for the particular boy or girl in hand. It is made plain also that the care- ful fitting of the child to the home and the forming of happy rela- tions between it and the foster parents, at the outset, are indis- pensable in order to insure a good result. The faithful watch-care of the child in the foster home is seen to be the essential corollary of the child-placing method. We recognize the guilt of the father, perhaps out of work, who deserts his family, and of the mother who abandons her baby; but what shall be said of the conduct of a voluntary association which, having put a child into the home of strangers, leaves it for one or two or three years without once trying to learn whether it is well treated and the foster parents are doing their duty? Yet there are scores of placing-out agencies which grossly neglect to meet this imperative trust. Hastincs H. Hart. a2 PART | HISTORICAL AND GENERAL BASIS We are born to be grouped together and brooded by love, and reared day by day in that first of churches, the family—Henry Ward Beecher. He who helps a child helps humanity with a distinctness, with an imme- diateness, which no other help, given in any other stage of human life, can possibly give again.—Phillips Brooks. There are some children for whom the institution is much better than the individual home. But for the average normal child—for your child should it lose you—the home is the place where you would want it to grow up, - and the home is therefore where we should see to it that the children of those who can no longer look after them are brought.—Julian W. Mack. CHAPTER I A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING needy and homeless children, is a recognized branch of social service. It has a history, a special terminology, and an assured place in modern philanthropy. It should be studied both as a system to promote juvenile welfare and as a section of sociology. People at large should be made acquainted with its aims, methods, and relations to other philanthropic service, while social workers should study its plans and principles, its possi- bilities and limitations, in order to direct its practice along lines of real social welfare. The demand for the historical as well as the practical outlines of a theme is especially urgent in the student of sociology. Meth- ods and practices rooted in religious convictions and held by the race for centuries, are the basis of much of our modern thought on the subject. Many things about child-placing in families will therefore be plainer for a brief look at the past. The Family. The first and elemental social organism is the family. To be complete it must contain both parents and chil- dren. Upon it depend the reproduction and the preservation of the race. Various social elements operate to destroy family life, to produce homelessness and to leave children in distress and danger, jeopardizing the future of individuals and even of society itself. It is not our present function to dwell upon the necessity of family protection, or upon the best methods of preserving families un- broken. These services belong in another field. Child-placing predicates broken families—a deeply regretted social fact. It also implies the rescue of the juvenile fragments and uniting them to other families. Founded on the thesis that the family circle is the proper place to rear the normal child, it utilizes the home to protect children rendered helpless through the casualties of war, 25 C HILD-PLACING in families, as a means of providing for CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES the ravages of disease, or the accidents and incidents of common life. Ancient Tribal Conditions. The elementary precursor of child- placing was found in the original tribal conditions of primitive races. The tribe was simply an enlarged family. All of its mem- bers were in some degree related. Children who by the misfor- tunes of war or of the chase, or who because of disease lost their parents and became dependent, were simply included in the family group of relatives. Ancient Cities and Nations. The collection of independent tribes into alliances, and the erection of walled cities for defense and community habitation, led to the breaking down of tribal barriers, to free social intercourse and to general intermarriage throughout the communities, and to a loss of direct tribal re- sponsibility for dependent children. The nations of the ancient world with three exceptions—the Babylonians, the Jews, and the Athenians—seem to have left no records of social or general pro- vision for children robbed by misfortune of their natural guardians; and the Babylonian laws appear to relate to such children only after citizens had voluntarily rescued them from homelessness by adopting them into their own families. Code of Hammurabi. These Babylonian laws are found in the recently unearthed code of Hammurabi.! That pre-Semitic civ- ilization which had its seat in Mesopotamia is noted not only be- cause it is the earliest known, but because it contains the most ancient laws relating to women and children. Hammurabi, a Sumerian king of Babylon, identified ‘by the Assyriologists as the Amraphael of Genesis XI1V-1, reigned about 2250 B.C. This code shows that the adoption of children was a common practice at least 4,000 years ago. But while formally recognizing adoption, the laws instead of being framed to guard the welfare of the child seem rather framed to protect the adoptive parent if the child should become rebellious, or if others should lay claim to him. Here is emphasized the property right to children, exercised with- out limit by all barbarous tribes in every age, and hardly outgrown by some supposedly civilized nations of the present time. Bible students will note that Hammurabi reigned about the time when, 1 Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. III, pp. 115-121. 26 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING a thousand miles westward from Babylon, Abraham adopted into his own family Lot, his brother’s son; and that this was several hundred years previous to the time when Moses, the great law- giver of the Hebrews, became the adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter. The Jews. The earliest chronicles of legal child-placing are found in the Old Testament scriptures, and in the Talmud, that body of Jewish and canonical law not included in the Pentateuch. Of all the peoples of antiquity the Jews alone made the care of de- pendent children a special duty under forms of law. From the time the national life began with the giving of the Law, immedi- ately after the Exodus from Egypt, about 1500 B.C., they placed orphan and fatherless children in selected family homes. It is significant that this fact obtains in relation to that nation defi- nitely declared to be God’s chosen people. The Pentateuch, especially the Book of Deuteronomy, includes the first laws and precepts on record in behalf of orphans and the fatherless.2 Elsewhere in the Old Testament, and especially in the Psalms, are found many references to these original laws and their application. Psalm LXVIII-5, 6 declares that God is “A Father of the fatherless,” and that He “setteth the solitary in families.” In the Talmud are found special laws to guard the inheritance of orphans, and enactments to provide for abandoned and foundling children. The methods employed in this earliest provision for dependent children make it the more interesting to the modern student of child-placing. Under these ancient Jewish laws and customs, children lacking parental care became members of the households of other relatives, if such there were, who reared them for adult life. Foundlings and other children without close relatives were probably taken into the homes of child- less couples, who brought them up as their own.? In the Talmud is this suggestive statement: “The blessed man, ‘that doeth righteousness at all times,’ is the man that brings up an orphan 1See the Holy Bible, especially the Books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteron- omy. 2 Deuteronomy XIV-28, 29; XXIV-21; and XXVI-12, 13. 3 Foundlings, Julius H. Greenstone, Jewish Encyclopedia, Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1907, Vol. V, p. 441. 27 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES boy or girl until marriage has given him or her another home.””! Child-placing in families, under definite forms and legal require- ments, is therefore nearly 3,500 years old, and originated among the Jews. Greece and Rome. Both early Greece and Rome practiced the exposure of unwanted infants, sometimes, as in Sparta, in order that the state might contain none but healthy citizens, sometimes from economic reasons. In Greece, even as late as in the age of Plutarch (A.D. 46 to 120), parents, because of poverty or for other reasons, put their unwanted children out to die or to be rescued by strangers. It should be said, however, that the Athenians made some provision by national law for orphans provided they were well born, that is, of citizen stock, or were the children of fathers fallen in battle. The motive was not humanitarian, but rather a means of conserving a population depleted by war. The dictates of patriotism also required that children of men who had died for their country be cherished, particularly if they inherited property. They were therefore cared for and educated up to the age of eighteen years, and under a form of guardianship were given into the care of citizens of high standing who were willing to assume the burden.2 Aristotle declared against all almsgiving to the poor, saying that it only prolonged useless lives, and no Athenian is recorded as advocating the care of dependent children as a matter of humanity. ; As for Rome, in that city, writes Professor Ryan: “Two places were formally set aside for the exposure of infants who were un- welcome to their parents. The proportion of abandoned children that was rescued was very small, and the purposes for which they were rescued were cruelly selfish. Under the Roman law they were slaves.’” Early Christian Conditions. At the beginning of the Christian era, and for several centuries later, the Roman empire practically ruled the world. In matters of the status of children, so far as 1 Orphan, Max Seligsohn, Jewish Encyclopedia, Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1907, Vol. IX, p. 438. 2 Orphans and Orphanages, Charles F. McKenna, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton and Co., New York, 1907, Vol. XI, p. 323. 3 Foundling Asylums, Prof. John A. Ryan, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton and Co., New York, 1907, Vol. VI, p. 159. 28 . A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING national action was concerned, the situation after the dawn of the new era remained almost unchanged until the influence of Chris- tianity modified the practices of the people and the laws of the empire. Very many of the first Christians were originally Jews, and Jewish ideas and methods in regard to the care and adoption of children were naturally carried into Christianity by the followers of Christ. Method of the Early Christian Church. It has been stated that under Judaism the method of providing for dependent children was by placing them in foster families—the families of relatives when available, or, if such were not available, in other Jewish families. In the early Christian Church the same type of service prevailed for nearly or quite two hundred years and never has been wholly displaced, although in later centuries institutional care was substituted to a large extent, especially in European countries. Out of the persecutions of Nero and other emperors came the necessity of caring for multitudes of orphan and other dependent children. Relatives and even church associates were unable to meet these increasing needs. After all possible free homes had been utilized, the Church began boarding children with worthy widows, paying for the service by collections taken in the various congregations. This was the real genesis of the boarding-out system, revived, not originated, in the nineteenth century.? Child-caring Institutions. So far as is known there were no formal institutions for dependent children until about the close of the second century. The first were community homes for the Christian widows who cared for orphans, as mentioned in the pre- ceding paragraph. These widows, organized into a society or order, and holding an honorable position in the Church, apparently began to unite in groups about 200 A.D., not only for association, but also for home and living purposes. When a number thus came together in a specially large dwelling, bringing with them their own children and the orphans for whose care the Church was paying, a community or institution was established? 1 Christian Charity in the Ancient Church, Dr. Gerhard Ulhorn, Charles Scrib- ner’s Sons, New York, 1883, p. 90. 2 Op. cit., p. 184. 20 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES These seem to have been the only child-caring institutions until after the recognition of the Christian Church by Constantine early in the fourth century. Then the institutional age really began and special houses in which the poor were assembled and fed were erected. Among them were “orphanages for orphans and wards, and there were houses for infant children.”! Within a hundred years institutions spread all over the empire. It was the time of the establishment of many monastic orders and sisterhoods, with their convents and nunneries. Hospitals, homes for the aged, and orphanages were attached to the monastic centers. Some of these orphanages were the so-called “endowed charities,” and were the first known endowed institutions for children. Thus, with a bound, institutional care sprang into prominence, and as a provision for orphans and other destitute children has ever since held a place alongside of child-placing. For a time insti- tutions almost eclipsed the original type of child welfare work, but although in many nations it became secondary, child-placing was never abandoned. Hundreds of orphanages were erected and filled, but all through the ages the infants deposited at the doors of the churches were “taken in charge by the church authorities, with a view to their adoption by families.’’ The Modern Period. Fora thousand years, over what might be called the middle period of its history, the character and methods of child-caring, under the auspices of the Church, continued, but with a more or less widening of the areas of work. The modern period in child welfare may be said to have begun when in 1633 St. Vincent de Paul, that great religious leader of the seventeenth century, founded the Sisters of Charity, a sisterhood which has ever since devoted its main energies to the care of needy and un- fortunate children. The devastating war between France and Austria had made children the most acute sufferers from want and homelessness. St. Vincent de Paul collected from the provinces as many as possible of these orphans and dependents and placed them in the care of the Sisters of Charity at their Paris orphanages. 1 Charity and Charities, Charles Stewart Loch, Encyclopedia Britannica, Elev- enth Edition, Cambridge, England, Vol. V, p. 873. ? Foundling Asylums, Prof. John A. Ryan, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton & Co., New York, Vol. VI, p. 159. 30 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING Three towns alone are said to have furnished over 1,000 orphans under the age of seven years.! In the meantime through this period, Jewish child welfare work had continued on its original basis. Scattered by the edict of the Roman Emperor Titus when Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 71 A.D., and without compact national life for centuries, racial and religious forces nevertheless were strong enough to maintain the individuality of the Jewish people, and to continue the cus- toms and practices central in their unique civilization. Among these, as has been indicated, was the systematic care of orphan and neglected children, the old method of child-placing in families being still in constant use, although by the middle of the nine- teenth century many institutions for continued care had begun to be established? A precursor of some of the meretricious modern methods of ex- ploitation was the old English child-placing for profit. Four hundred years ago our English forebears were accustomed prac- tically to enslave well-grown, dependent children for work in factories and industrial service, using a system of indentures that later crossed the ocean with our ancestors, and was repeated in the early colonies of America. In 1562 national sanction was given by the English government to an apprentice system amounting to child slavery, an evil that it never fully corrected until less than a century ago. Meanwhile the indenture system came over to the colonies, and, although it is now happily almost extinct in its original form, it placed its imprint upon all child-placing of partly grown children in the entire nation. No social worker of today advocates or approves of child-placing for profit. Some even deprecate any formal wage contracts for large boys and girls, on the ground that these favor the people who seek such children with the desire merely to exploit their services for a small financial re- turn to the worker. Written agreements, however, may easily avoid the faults of ancient indentures, adequately recognize the 1 Orphans and Orphanages, Charles F. McKenna, Catholic Encyclopedia, Rob- ert Appleton & Co., New York, 1907, Vol. XI, p. 323. 2 According to Rabbi Ginsberg of the New York Jewish Theological Seminary, the first Jewish orphanage in Europe was established in London, England, about 1830, and the second in Frankfort, Germany, in 1848. 3 The Quarterly Review, Vol. LXVII, 1841, pp. 175-176. 31 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES needs and rights of the child, be safeguards in dealing with those who take children into care, and by their psychological effect be a moral if not a legally enforceable protection. Renaissance of Child Welfare Work. The real renaissance of child welfare work, including child-placing in families, came in the nineteenth century. In fact, the latter part of this century saw more new developments and more various child-caring organiza- tions than had appeared in the previous thousand years. And the first sixteen years of the twentieth century revealed a similar ad- vance, the whole amounting to a complete revolution in ideas, methods, and conditions of child-caring. French Boarding-out System. One of the earliest and most significant of the nineteenth century developments in child-plac- ing was the Napoleonic decree of 1811, under which the French people boarded-out dependent children at national expense. Some provision for normal living for these poor infants was urgently needed, for the number of foundlings in the asylums of France at the beginning of the century had become enormous, amounting, on March 14, 1800, to 63,000, according to the Minister of the In- terior. Three classes were beneficiaries under the decree of 181 1— foundlings, abandoned children, and poor orphans. The defini- tions of these classes as given in the decree are instructive: “Foundlings are those born of unknown parents, who have been found exposed in any place, or been taken to the hospitals intended to receive them. . . . Abandoned children are those born of known parents and at first raised by them, or by other persons for them, who are abandoned by them, the whereabouts of the parents being unknown, or there being no means of recourse to them. Orphans are those who, not having either father or mother, have no means of subsistence.’’! In the definition of foundlings, the reference in the statement, “those taken to the hospitals intended to receive them,” is to the foundling asylums of that time, which by law were provided with revolving cribs, or “tours,” fixed in the walls or doors of the insti- tutions, so that when the “tour” was turned outward the mother could place her child in it and retire unseen. The asylum people, 1 Lallemand, Leon, Histoire des Enfants Abandonnés et Délaisses. Alphonse Picard, Paris, p. 272. 32 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING warned by a bell, would then turn the crib toward the interior and receive the child. Of this method of receiving foundlings Professor Ryan writes: “This device completely shielded the person who abandoned the child, but it also multiplied unneces- sarily the number of children abandoned. Hence it has been al- most universally abolished, even in Italy.’ The Napoleonic decree arranged that newly born foundlings should be placed with a wet-nurse as soon as possible; that until then they should be bottle fed or nursed by wet-nurses in the found- ling asylum; that crippled and infirm infants should be reared in the asylum; that at six years of age as many of the boarded-out children as possible should be placed with farmers, the price paid for their board to increase each year up to the age of twelve. At this period the boys in a state to serve were to be held at the dis- position of the Minister of Marine; the others were to be appren- ticed out to the factories. The girls at the age of twelve for whom no other disposition had been made were to be apprenticed to housewives, seamstresses, and other work-women or to factories. To finance this boarding-out system provision was made for ap- propriations from the national treasury, the sum of 4,000,000 francs being annually set aside for the payment of wet-nurses and the boarding of the foundlings and abandoned children. Provi- sion was made for additional funds, if found to be necessary, and for proper supervision, the administrative commissioners of the asylums being enjoined to have each infant visited at least twice a year by a special commissioner, a physician, surgeon, vaccinator, or other person. With some modifications due to changing circumstances, and as prompted by experience, this general plan is still in operation in France. Several features of it, especially the wet-nursing of foundlings and boarding them out in country homes, may well be carefully considered by Americans of the twentieth century. The Teutonic Empires. Both modern Germany and Austria have numerous orphanages, but also constantly and systematically » practice child-placing in families. In both of these empires there are immense numbers of illegitimate children, one important cause, 1Foundling Asylums, Prof. John A. Ryan, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton & Co., New York, Vol. VI, p. 159. 3 33 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES according to some authorities, being their military systems and large standing armies. (About 1914 it was declared that over 200,000 babies were born out of wedlock in Germany every year.! The number born in Austria is not available, but it is supposed to be proportionately large.) In Austria, to obtain asylum nurses and attendants to care for the foundlings until they can be placed in families, mothers of children born out of wedlock are practically subsidized to come openly with their babies, and by taking service in the institutions win special rights and privileges for their chil- dren. Two striking paragraphs by Prof. John A. Ryan in the Catholic Encyclopedia contain interesting information on the care of illegitimate infants in the Teutonic empires: “Tn Germany the asylum method seems never to have been as common as in Italy and France. Today that country has no foundling asylum in the strict sense of the term. The prevailing practice is to place the infant temporarily in an institution, usually an orphan asylum, and then to give it in charge of afamily. Both the public authorities and the religious communities follow this system. “Since the days of Joseph II (1765-1790) foundling asylums have been rather general in Austria. When the mother engages herself to serve in the hospital for four months as a nurse, the child will be taken in and kept permanently; that is, until it reaches the age of ten or, in some asylums, of six years. In case the mother does not reclaim it at the end of this period, it is turned over to the magistracy of her legal residence. When the child is not taken subject to this condition, it is placed in a family as soon as a suitable one can be found. The asylum in Vienna is the largest in the world, having under its care either within or without its doors more than 30,000 children every year. Of the seventy odd thousand infants received during ten years, only 902 were legiti- mate.’”? 1See Norway’s Treatment of the Illegitimate Child, Katharine S. Anthony, The New Republic, Aug. 21, 1915, p. 70. Also, according to an editorial in the Chicago Tribune, in January, 1918, Dr. Engel, Berlin Town Councillor, stated in a recent report that the illegitimate births are 10 per cent of the entire number of children born in Prussia. 2 Foundling Asylums, Prof. John A. Ryan, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton & Co., New York, 1907, Vol. VI, p. 160. 34 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING Dr. Barnardo’s Homes and Child-placing. One of the most striking developments of the latter half of the nineteenth century was the National Incorporated Association for the Reclamation of Destitute Waif Children, otherwise known as Dr. Barnardo’s Homes, operating in England and the colonies of the British Em- pire. This philanthropic work began in 1866, when Dr. Thomas P. Barnardo aided ‘his first homeless boy in London, and gradually extended under the efforts of its founder, until in 1899, it had assumed proportions of widespread public interest and advantage and was duly incorporated. The purpose from the beginning was and now is: “To provide a home and afford a start in life to desti- tute, orphan, waif, stray, maimed, and sick children who otherwise have no helper.” Between 1866 and the close of the year 1915, a total of 82,126 children were rescued from want, distress, and homelessness and cared for in numerous institutions for a time. Some were then returned to their own rehabilitated homes, but the vast majority were placed in selected families, first in England only, later also in Canada and other British colonies. Up to the close of 1915 an aggregate of 25,779 children had been sent across the Atlantic for distribution in Canadian families, 294 of them during 1915. Many were also sent to other parts of the British Empire.2 American Organizations. Child-placing in families by incor- porated societies, using paid trained workers and operating by systematized methods, was the most important development in child welfare work during the latter half of the nineteenth century. The first of these modern agencies in the United States was the Children’s Aid Society of the City of New York, founded in 1853 by Charles Loring Brace. Its original purpose was to send home- less city children to distant country homes, with little or no pre- liminary institutional care. The organization has constantly enlarged its scope and activities, and after more than half a century of service, now cares annually for hundreds of children at a cost of over half a million dollars.? 1 Statistics from Fiftieth Annual Report of Dr. Barnardo’s Homes, 1915. 2 The Sixty-fifth Annual Report of the New York Children’s Aid Society for the year ending June 30, 1917, gives the following figures: Placed in family homes, 312; in families under supervision, 2,337; at Brace Memorial Farm for Boys, 524; sheltered in lodging houses, 4,743. Total expenses for the year were $517,520, 35 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES In 1868 the Massachusetts State Board of Charity originated the method of boarding-out dependent children in private families at public expense. The plan soon became popular and the work rapidly expanded. Private organizations followed the example of the state board and began boarding-out their wards. Nearly 20 institutions for dependent children ultimately closed their doors and retired from the work. While no exact figures are obtainable, workers in the child welfare field have estimated that at least 10,000 dependent children of Massachusetts are now provided for in boarding homes by public and private agencies, and that the annual cost of such work exceeds a million dollars. Most of the prominent American organizations whose chief purpose is to place the homeless child within the portals of the childless home, accomplish also a great deal of family rehabilita- tion, relieve temporary destitution, and make arrangements for the admission of special cases into remedial and reformatory insti- tutions. Among the most noteworthy are the Henry Watson Children’s Aid Society of Baltimore, founded in 1860; the Boston Children’s Aid Society, founded in 1864; and the New York So- ciety for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, founded in 1874— the first society of that type in the world; the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, founded in 1878; the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania, founded in 1882; and the association now known as the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society, which began its work in 1883, under the name American Educational Aid Association. The largest affiliated group of child-placing agencies in this coun- try is the federation known for many years as the National Chil- dren’s Home Society.2, The original and typical society of this which sum included, besides the branches of child welfare work noted above, the operation of its industrial schools, and extensive fresh air and charitable work for women and children. 1The Thirty-seventh Annual Report of the State Board of Charity of Massa- chusetts (1915, pp. 196, 222) shows that its Division of State Minor Wards had in care that year a total of 5,938 infants and older children, nearly all of whom were in boarding homes at an aggregate cost to the state of $646,084. It is probable that at least an equal number of children were similarly cared for during the same year by private organizations within the state, at as great a financial expense. 2 At the annual meeting of the National Children’s Home Society in Pittsburgh, in 1917, it was decided to broaden its scope and increase the number of organiza- tions eligible for membership. The secretary, Marcus C. Fagg, thus states the 36 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING group was the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society, founded at Chicago by the Rev. M. V. B. Van Arsdale, a Presbyterian min- ister. The movement, which was independent in origin and more comprehensive in scope than that of the Children’s Aid Society of the City of New York, soon spread to other states. The national federation followed. In 1917, 34 of the states of the Union had active societies that were members of this federation, and organiza- tions in at least two other states were seeking recognition. The Children’s Aid Society of the City of New York has held a nominal membership in this federation since 1900. Modern Jewish Work in America. The Jews, as has been stated, were the originators of child welfare work under legal sanctions and as a national duty. In the nineteenth century renaissance of child welfare work they seem to have been specially stimulated, both abroad and here in America. The establish- ment in London in 1830 of their first orphan asylum was immedi- ately followed in New York by the founding of a similar institu- tion. In his book on Jewish Philanthropy, the latest exposition of principles and methods of Jewish social service in the United States, Dr. Boris D. Bogen writes: “The institutional care of orphans received the approbation of the Jews as early as 1832, when the Hebrew Benevolent and Orphan Asylums were estab- lished in New York City. In 1855 the New Orleans Jewish Orphans’ Home was established. The Hebrew Sheltering and Guardian Society of New York was founded in 1879. There are similar institutions in different parts of the country, notably Phila- delphia, Cleveland, Brooklyn, Milwaukee, and others, with a capacity of about six thousand.’ The placing-out system has also found numerous modern ex- ponents among American Jews. “While the results of the insti- action taken: ‘‘ The name of the federation was changed from ‘National Children’s Home Society’ to ‘National Home and Welfare Association.’ It is intended to make eligible for membership all deserving child welfare agencies in the United States and Canada. The enlarged federation hopes to avoid all narrow and limited con- ceptions of child saving, and to advocate and practice the best modern and scien- tific methods of child welfare work. All future meetings will be devoted entirely to informative, instructive and associational conference purposes.’ For further description of this association, see p. 48ff. 1 Jewish Philanthropy: An Exposition of Principles and Methods of Jewish Social Service in the United States, Boris D. Bogen, Ph.D., The Macmillan Co., New York, 1917, p. 160. 37 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES tutional treatment were satisfactory,” continues Dr. Bogen, “still the general antagonistic attitude against congregate systems of child caring has also spread among the Jews. An institution neces- sarily lacks home atmosphere—the most important adjunct in child life; it neglects individuality and is detrimental to the free de- velopment of character.’ In this modern Jewish movement for the systematic utilization of private homes in the care of dependent children, both Dr. Lee K. Frankel and Dr. Ludwig B. Bernstein have been especially promi- nent. Dr. Frankel maintains that while in some cases institutional care of children is necessary, for instance, when both parents are living, or in the case of semi-orphans, in the case of full orphans the placement system is more advisable. The number of full orphans now in Jewish institutions is estimated at about 10 to 12 per cent of all the children in care. Dr. Bernstein, although he is the super- intendent of one of America’s most important orphanages, is credited by Dr. Bogen with being “the most enthusiastic adherent of the placing-out system, and the arch enemy of the congregate system.’ But the modern child-placing movement among the Jews seems to have made greatest progress in the Middle West. “The plac- ing-out and adoption system has been especially favorably re- ceived in Chicago,” declares the same author, “ where through the enthusiastic and generous support of Mr. Julius Rosenwald, and the co-operation of Miss Minnie Low of the Bureau of Personal Service, a special society was organized, known as the [Jewish] Home Finding Society of Chicago. This organization, besides sup- porting widows with dependent children, is finding homes for children for adoption. In 1915 this organization cared for 192 widows with 576 children, besides placing-out 180 children in boarding homes and succeeded in causing the adoption of eight children.’’ Extent and Variety of Work. The extent of the modern move- ment for child-placing in America can best be suggested by the fact that in 1910 Hastings H. Hart, in his book, Preventive 1Op. cit., p. 160. 2 Op. cit., p. 161. 3 Op. cit., pp. 163, 164. 38 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHILD-PLACING Treatment, of Neglected Children, listed 107 public and private societies and agencies for this work.1_ By 1917 the number had be- come very much larger, it being estimated that in that year there were over 200 organized child-placing agencies in this country annually finding homes for at least 50,000 children. Nearly as many more children are annually placed in families by child-caring institutions. Public agencies have multiplied in recent years, and now compose no small part of the whole number. Examples are the New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians and the Chil- dren’s Welfare Department of the Ohio Board of State Charities. Child-placing in “free homes,” those where there is no payment of board, is used mainly for children requiring permanent care, and a large per cent of those so placed are given full membership in the families by legal adoption. The boarding-out plan, use of which has immensely increased in recent years, applies espe- cially to children for whom only temporary care must be provided, although in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania children are kept indefinitely long periods on board at the expense of public and private agencies. Nearly all child-caring institutions do more or less child-placing in families. Many retain their wards only a limited time, until they are ten, twelve, or fourteen years old, and then find them places in selected private families. Other institutions give some- what definite vocational training, and then locate their wards in family homes where their services at once make them self-sup- porting. All child-caring institutions must at some age dismiss their wards, and the usual method when that age arrives is to obtain a place for a child in a private home as an accepted inmate or paid worker, before withdrawing institutional care and support. Considerable child-placing is done by directors of the poor and the juvenile courts, although many public officials now prefer to secure the aid of regularly established agencies for such work. A vast amount of child-placing has also always been done by private individuals, such as physicians, clergymen, lawyers, nurses, midwives, keepers of maternity homes, and the officers of hospitals and other institutions, 1 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Charities Publication Committee, New York, 1910, pp. 145-193. 39 CHAPTER II MODERN CHILD-PLACING DEFINED \ , 7 ITH this slight historic review and with the foregoing descriptions in mind, the theme of this study can now be constructively defined and some of the essentials of modern work indicated. It is not an easy task to define child- placing in families accurately and comprehensively in these days. The term no longer means the “homefinding” of past generations; the simple placing of a strange child inafosterhome. It now im- plies law, method, organization, investigation, and social as well as individual betterment. Child-placing is so widely useful and so vitally important that its definition, fundamental principles, organizations, and essential methods, should be matters of com- mon knowledge and the basis of community action. Legal Definition. The only legal definition of child-placing in families known to the writer is to be found in Article 16, Section 300, of the State Charities Law of the State of New York. “The term ‘place-out” . . . means the placing of a destitute child in a family, other than that of a relative within the second degree, for the purpose of providing a home for such child.’ In order to obtain a consensus of opinion as to what constituted a satisfactory definition a note of inquiry, quoting the New York definition, was sent to about fifty of the leading child-placing agencies of the United States. On the basis of the replies received, a number of which will be found in Appendix B, the writer has constructed a working definition which has been submitted to and found satisfactory by a number of social workers: A Working Definition. “Child-placing in families is placing destitute and neglected children, temporarily or permanently, in families other than their own, for the purpose of providing care and homes for them.” 1See Annual Report of the State Board of Charities of the State of New York, 1916, Vol. III, p. 216. 40 MODERN CHILD-PLACING DEFINED There were two ways of making the definition—to try to put into it the elements and conditions necessary for modern and syste- matic child-placing, or to define the work in its simplest form, and bring out in corollaries the requirements of good child-placing according to the ideas of leading experts. The latter method was chosen. The definition given is intended to cover all child-placing, good or bad, standardized or unstandardized, by individuals, societies, or institutions. But certain standards have come to be generally recognized by well-organized child-placing agencies as essential to the right doing of the work outlined in the definition. Corollaries. The most important of these standards are indi- cated in the following corollaries: 1. The work is highly responsible because it involves the most sacred interests of the family and the entire future interests of the child. 2. It is a technical branch of social service, requiring expert agents and exact methods, and should be done only by public officers duly qualified for such work, or by trained representatives of public or private organizations that have been approved by a competent state authority. 3. Nearly all institutions for dependent and delinquent children are engaged in child-placing. An institution does placing-out work when it selects homes, or secures positions including homes, for any number of its minor wards, and by authority of its guardian- ship officially arranges for their location in such homes, either as paying boarders, free inmates, or paid workers. 4. Children may be placed-out in any of three ways: a. On board, the board being paid by parents, guardian, agency, or public officer, or partly by one and partly by another. b. In “free homes,’”’ without payment of board, the expense of care being supplied by the foster parents. c. In “working homes,” at wages which may or may not leave a surplus beyond the child’s board and clothes. 5. Children placed with relatives of the second degree; that is, in the homes of grandparents, brothers, or sisters, should not be reported as “placed-out,” but as “placed with kin.” 4l CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES 6. Children remaining in homes for less than seven days should not be reported as placed-out. This rule, adopted by the United States Census Bureau in 1910, should be accepted for statistical purposes. 7. Careful studies of the causes of family break-down, of juvenile dependency and delinquency, and of the results of child-placing in families, are requisite to a wise and progressive educational and preventive program. 42 CHAPTER III CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS [oa placing of dependent, neglected, or delinquent children in family homes must be standardized in all of its relations and work. The haphazard methods of other days can no longer be approved. They too often defeated the very object they were intended to accomplish, and supposedly rescued boys and girls have frequently been cast into an environment that in- jured body and spirit, and sometimes destroyed even life itself. The minimum requirements of a child-placing agency should be established by the commonwealth. Proper state authority should be exercised, not only over the agencies already in operation but also over those in process of formation. Many states have very little legislation covering these matters, and corporations for child care not classed as financial enterprises may be established freely and continued indefinitely without examination or supervision. The time has come to call a halt, and in the name of humanity to put child-caring work of all sorts upon a higher plane. Organization Elements and Relations. The following outline gives the proper minimum requirements for child-caring organiza- tions, with especial reference to child-placing in families. 1. At least five reputable and responsible citizens of the com- monwealth, the group including both sexes, associated as a board of incorporators or a board of trustees or managers, should present for approval to the proper state authorities, articles of association or incorporation, defining the proposed child welfare work, the methods to be used, and the objects to be accomplished. 2. No incorporation should be allowed or charter granted until the project and plans shall have been investigated by said state authority whose approval shall be based upon reasonable and satis- factory assurance on the following points: a. The good character and intentions of the applicants. 43 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES b. The present and prospective need for the service intended by the proposed organization. The employment of capable trained or experienced workers. . Sufficient financial backing to insure effective work. e. The probability of permanence in the proposed organiza- tion or institution. . f. That the methods used and the disposition made of the children served will be in their best interests and in that of society. g. Wise and legally drawn articles of incorporation or insti- tutional charter, and related by-laws. h. That in the judgment of said state authority the establish- ment of such an organization is desirable and for the public welfare. a9 3. All child-placing in families should be done by approved agencies and institutions that have satisfied a competent state authority that they are reputable and properly qualified to do the work, and that pledge themselves to: a. Investigate all cases of children offered for reception care- fully and thoroughly. This implies the individual and family “case study” so urgently insisted upon and de- scribed elsewhere. b. Examine and treat children according to their needs. So- cial, dietetic, medical, and psychological treatment while in temporary care, and the careful fitting of children into new homes or institutions are here implied. Provide sympathetically and considerately for the happi- ness and the recreational needs of the children; first, as insuring pleasant and normal living conditions; second, as an essential part of their development and education. d. Personally inspect and judiciously select all family homes used. The use of trained paid agents, expert in child- placing work, is always essential to high class service. . Give all placed-out wards adequate supervision. Each agency or institution must supervise its wards after placement, and proper state supervision of all organiza- tions and their work is also a social necessity. 44 a oO CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS 4. Child-placing in families by unauthorized individuals, such as nurses, midwives, physicians, and clergymen, should be pro- hibited by law; and placing-out by public officers should be done only by those who are connected with proper agencies or institu- tions, or who have been appointed to and approved for such work by competent authorities. 5. Commercial lying-in homes and maternity hospitals should be allowed to operate only when duly licensed after thorough ex- amination and approval by the state authorities as to the desira- bility of establishing such institutions and as to buildings, equip- ment, facilities for proper service, and the character of the management and employes; and all such institutions should be forbidden by law to place out children. 6. Certificates of approval from a competent state authority, renewable annually, should be required of all organizations car- ing for dependent, delinquent, or defective children, including both child-placing agencies and institutions for continued care, whether or not they receive support from public funds. 7. The appropriation of public funds to private agencies or in- stitutions, if granted at all, should be absolutely limited to such as are approved and certified by a proper state authority; and all such funds should be granted only on the basis of specific service rendered for children found to be proper charges upon funds raised by taxation. They should never be given in lump sums without audit or definite application. 8. Every child-caring agency or institution should be required to keep adequate records of all of its wards and of all its work. Definite forms and sets of records should be provided by the state, to secure both efficiency and uniformity.? 9. There should be in each commonwealth a central state super- visory board or department, with authority to cover all matters indicated in the preceding paragraphs. This supervisory power may be vested in a state board of control, a state board of chari- ties, or in a special agency, perhaps called the board of children’s guardians. 1See Elements of Record Keeping for Child-helping Organizations, Georgia G. Ralph, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1915. 45 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Some Operating Essentials. The most important essentials in the operation of a child-placing organization are a wise board of administration, a competent executive officer, and a capable staff of workers. 1. The Board. The society or association should have an in- telligent and efficient board of managers, composed of both men and women, preferably not more than fifteen in number. They should represent all sections of the state or tributary territory, but should be so located as to make it possible to secure a quorum at business meetings. There should be no figureheads on the board. To encumber the list with the names of prominent people who have no special interest in child welfare and who have No intention of doing anything to promote it, is foolish and inex- cusable. In order to make the organization a success, each mem- ber should count one in real interest and personal service. 2. The Executive. The board should secure, as the active and responsible executive, a competent superintendent, who can be entrusted with broad authority to plan and prosecute the work of the organization. The superintendent should be a person of tact and adaptability, so as to work for and with the board of managers, and yet of initiative and independence, so as to meet the pressing emergencies of this position. This executive may be of either sex, but must be well educated, of high character, and should have had some special training or practical experience in social work. He or she ought to have at least the ability which would be required for a high school principal or a county superintendent of schools; and should receive a salary at least as large as would be paid to people in such positions. The work is strenuous and important. Broken down teachers and superannuated ministers are unfitted for and unequal to the task. Only men and women strong in body, gifted in mind, sagacious in judgment, and highly conscientious, should be selected for such executive positions. 3. The Workers. The staff of workers, headed by the superin- tendent, is the main requisite for the active operation of a child- placing society. Even in a children’s home or an orphanage the staff of employes has been called “the soul of the institution.” Institutions for the continued care of children must have grounds, buildings, and much general physical equipment in order to carry 46 CHILD~PLACING ORGANIZATIONS on their work. But in child-placing agencies, where the physical “plant” is comparatively small and unimportant, practically all of the emphasis should be placed upon the workers. Each should be carefully selected on account of competency for and adaptation to such service. Training and experience count, and should have due recognition. The quality of the executive will be clearly shown by the staff of workers which he collects and commands. The agents of such societies should be technically qualified to do expert “case work’’; that is, to study comprehensively any child’s family history, environment, and personality, and in a general way its physical, mental, and moral condition.1 They should be able to diagnose the social and personal requirements of the children studied, in order to determine whether or not these necessities can be supplied by parents and other relatives, under competent advice; and to decide upon the type and amount of private or public aid required for the children’s welfare. They are to influence hundreds of immature lives. Their words and actions are to guide and control many impressionable young spirits. Upon their wisdom and judgment will depend the future welfare of the children, especially those whom they place in private homes, and of the families in which they are located. Only workers of a high type are fit for such service. All employes of child-placing agencies should be reverent people. They may be Catholics, Jews, or Protestants, but they should be imbued with love of God and their fellow men. Real humani- tarian spirit, deep sympathy for the needy and unfortunate, and a special love for children, are essential in those who compose the staffs of child-placing agencies. All should have a good academic education, and preference should be given to those who have social training and experience. One of the greatest faults of many societies is the effort to save money by employing a cheap grade of employes. High grade helpers are in demand, and wise employers are willing to pay more than minimum wages and salaries to win these better workers. A number of the child-placing societies must offer higher salaries 1The principles and practice of case work are declared and illustrated in Social Diagnosis, by Mary E. Richmond, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1917. 47 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES than they are now paying in order to obtain and hold workers able to give service according to modern standards. Agencies served by religious orders like the Catholic or Episcopal Sisters, or the Methodist or Lutheran Deaconesses, who are unpaid or at most but nominally compensated, may secure such service without financial recompense; but the average organization, employing ordinary workers who, although interested in child welfare are de- pendent upon their earnings, must pay living salaries; and the additional money put by such societies into strengthening the staff will be returned quickly in the better quality and larger amount of work done. The number of trained workers is increasing. There are many well-educated candidates for positions as begin- ners. It is not necessary anywhere to use inferior assistants. The executives that will retain and the boards that will tolerate incapables ought to give way to those more in harmony with the spirit of the times. Better Work Demanded. If in some localities child-placing has been in bad repute, the reason may probably be found in the unauthorized and unsystematic methods employed. The work has been done without organizations, or on a low standard of ideals and equipment. The fault is not in the plan, but in its mode of operation. Poor placing-out gives uncertain and often exceed- ingly bad results. Good placing-out gives almost uniformly satisfactory results. There is an increasing demand everywhere for high grade child-placing, and that means better and more progressive organizations. Work and methods that were per- missible even ten years ago are now deprecated, or abandoned. Only well-equipped standard organizations, manned by trained and progressive officers, can hope to retain the confidence of the people and successfully do the child-placing work of tomorrow. Private Organizations for States. The forms, methods, and actual work of modern child-placing agencies can best be detailed and understood by a study of typical organizations. The Na- tional Home and Welfare Association, for many years known as the National Children’s Home Society, a fecleration of 34 homogeneous organizations for state-wide work, affords a good general Ameri- can illustration! This organization is described somewhat in 1 For earlier mention of this association, see pp. 36, 37. 48 CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS detail, not because it is superior in its elements or methods to other standard child-placing societies, but because it covers many states and is everywhere organized on the state-wide plan. The several state societies of this federation differ greatly in the completeness and efficiency of their organization, and in the degree to which they realize the ideals which they represent. The main work of the members of this federation is to rescue orphan and homeless children, give them more or less personal preparation, and then place them in selected private families. In the development of the work many state societies have broad- ened the scope of their activities, and now ‘stand ready to take up the case of any child in trouble and seek to solve the problems related to its welfare.” The general plan. on which the societies in the federation are established embodies many excellent ideas, and its simple but practical elements are here outlined: 1. Executive. A state superintendent, with a central office, and the necessary clerical force. 2. Operative. District superintendents, covering assigned districts, usually a number of counties, and generally with a local headquarters for each in its own part of the state. The district superintendents generally perform a fourfold duty: (a) Receiving into the care of the society homeless and dependent children; (b) finding homes, and fitting suitable children into them; (c) supervising children after placement; (d) raising money to carry on the work. A few societies have separated the financial work from the work with children and homes. Leading authorities declare that this should be done by all. 3. Receiving Home. Most societies have a central receiving home, for the temporary care of children awaiting place- ment. Here all are given medical examinations, and many of them also are psychologically studied, to correct defects, cure ailments, and determine the best possible disposition to be made of them. 4. Detailed Organization. As representatives of the general society it is customary to organize local advisory boards, 4 49 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES composed of influential men and women, in every im- portant town and city of the state. 5. Co-operation. Each society seeks close co-operation with directors of the poor, juvenile courts, humane societies, associated charities, hospitals, and other institutions, in order to be brought into connection with needy and neglected children of all classes, and to be able to pro- vide in the best possible way for their welfare. Other Private Organizations. The great majority of private child-placing agencies in the United States operate over limited areas, such as cities, counties, or districts with vague boundaries, sometimes including parts of several states. Some of the best and strongest organizations in the country are of this type. 1. Nonsectarian Agencies. Typical among these are the Bos- ton Children’s Aid Society, operating in that city and adjacent counties in Massachusetts; the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsyl- vania, serving in Philadelphia and the eastern half of that state; and the Children’s Agency, a department of the Associated Chari- , ties of San Francisco, operating in that city and its environs. | These differ widely in the details of their work, but are alike in important respects: A large part of their work is boarding-out children requiring temporary care; they exemplify the best modern methods of investigation, selection, and supervision, and the two last named have been officially selected by the public authorities for the placing-out of large numbers of children. Other typical agencies of this class, but devoting themselves principally to the placement of children in free homes are: the New England Home for Little Wanderers, with headquarters in Boston, a child-placing work as broad as the title indicates; ‘the Good Will Farm, at Houghton, Michigan, operating in the northern part of that state; the Cincinnati Children’s Home, which adds to special institutional care excellent child-placing work throughout southern Ohio; and the Cleveland Humane Society which operates mainly in northern Ohio. The great majority 1Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Charities Publication Committee, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1910, P- 145. 50 "SSVI ‘UALSADYOM ‘ALFIOOG GNSIY] S,NSAGHD WALSAONO AK AJJUNOD ay} UT aWOP] Sulprvog V SN A\C S Boarded-out Because Her Mother Is III Typical Boarding Home in The Country BosTON CHILDREN’S AID Society, Boston, Mass. 50b CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS of the private child-placing organizations are finding free homes for normal children who are permanently dependent. 2. Denominational Agencies. Typical among these are the Catholic Home Bureau of New York, which places children for about 20 institutions in New York State; the Catholic Children’s Aid Association, with headquarters at Newark, New Jersey, engaged in placing-out children for a group of Roman Catholic institutions in the northern part of that state; the Catholic Hu- mane Society, of San Francisco, mainly devoted to boarding-out Catholic children assigned to the society by the juvenile court of that city; and a group of Lutheran Kinderfreund Societies, lo- cated in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Ne- braska, New York, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, which are entirely engaged in the placement of children in free homes. The Jews are active in child-placing both through special agencies and through departments of their principal orphanages and homes. Typical Jewish child-placing agencies are the Juve- nile Aid Society, of Philadelphia, the Home Finding Society of Chicago, and the Eureka Benevolent Society, of San Francisco. The Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society, Pleasantville, New York, has about 600 children in residence at its fine cottage orphanage, and about 300 more on board in selected Jewish families. The Hebrew Orphan Asylum, New York City, has about 1,200 children in the asylum, and more than 500 boarded-out in carefully chosen families. Considerable child-placing is done by the Jews in a number of the larger cities of the United States. Public Child-placing Agencies. In all parts of the United States some child-placing is done by public officials, such as judges and poor directors, by methods common for generations. More is done by officers directly appointed for such service. In many states child-placing is done incidentally by probation officers of juvenile courts. The parole departments of many reform and in- dustrial schools are in effect child-placing agencies. Child-placing organizations controlled by municipal, county, and state authori- ties, and supported by public funds, are increasingly numerous. There seems to be a strong conviction among experts in social work that the public authorities, representing all the people, should not only supervise and standardize all private agencies, 51 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES but should also enter directly into many phases of child-helping work. Mr.C.C. Carstens says: “Few . . will now deny the public the right to undertake all forms of child-helping work when it is done ineffectively or not at all from private resources. For the near future public boards or departments should devote them- selves to such children’s work as is based on principles that are well established, require the more permanent care, are more general in their application, or contain an element of compulsion or control.’”! The Massachusetts State Board of Charity has its Division of State Minor Wards, which without an institution, except for one or two temporary boarding houses of small capacity, and using the boarding-out method almost exclusively, gives care and training to hundreds of dependent children in that state. The division has constantly in its care approximately 5,000 children, and about 500 are annually received and discharged. A number of states have institutions called State Public Schools, for the temporary care and preliminary training of dependent chil- dren, who are then placed-out in private homes. The first insti- tution of this class was opened at Coldwater, Michigan, in 1873. It was built on the cottage plan, and it was provided by law that the school should be “only a temporary home, while the child is on its way to its own place in the family.” The Michigan system was soon adopted by the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Colorado; and in spirit and methods, although not in name, by several other states. The Colorado institution is now called the State Home for Children. The District of Columbia has a District Board of Guardians established in 1893, on a plan derived from the Indiana County Boards of Children’s Guardians, that uses private institutions for temporary care, and to some degree for the permanent care of children unsuitable for family placement. The New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians, established in 1897, was the first state board of this kind. It does not maintain a receiving home, but its wards are kept at board in families until free homes are found. It nowalso passes upon all applications for mothers’ pen- sions throughout the state. 1 A Community Plan in Children’s Work, C. C. Carstens, Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915, p. 95. 52 CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS State boards of charities in Indiana, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Maine and other state organizations in Illinois and Iowa do more or less child-placing in families. The Iowa Board of Con- trol of state institutions has three child-placing agents for the placing-out of inmates of the two industrial schools and the Sol- diers’ Orphans’ Home. Five other states besides lowa—Maine, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois—have Soldiers’ Orphans’ Homes. The Iowa and Illinois homes in recent years have cared for other classes than children of soldiers and sailors, and have authority to place their wards out in family homes. The Indiana institution receives only children of soldiers, but has authority to place-out. The Ohio and Pennsylvania homes house children of soldiers and sailors only and do no placing-out. Indiana has county boards of children’s guardians that are ex- pected to place-out in families all suitable dependents. The Kansas State Orphans’ Home, formerly the Soldiers’ Orphans’ Home, in theory at least is merely a state receiving home, from which the children are as soon as possible distributed to selected private families. In 1916 this Kansas institution had about 200 children in care, and over 500 wards placed-out in family homes. The Montana Children’s Home is authorized by state law to place- out its dependent children, using as its agency the Montana Chil- dren’s Home Society. There are over 40 of the states of the Union that have legally established official agencies or institutions for the placing of children in family homes, either at board at public expense or in free homes for adoption. Juvenile Courts and Child-placing. Juvenile court laws throughout the country usually confer placing-out powers on the juvenile court, but most juvenile courts have wisely refrained from exercising that power. The juvenile court of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, at Pitts- burgh, recently engaged in an interesting experiment. It estab- lished a child-placing division in its probation office. The head of this division was a probation officer who was an expert in such work. For some time this officer and her assistants kept an aver- age of about 200 children out at board in private families, besides placing some children in permanent free homes. It is believed, however, that, as a rule, juvenile courts can ob- 53 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES tain better results in placing-out work by co-operating with well- established private child-placing agencies, or, if such are not available, by the formation of a regular and permanent public agency distinct from the court. Most juvenile courts are generally already overloaded with work, and have more to do than the judge and his probation officers can properly accomplish. To take on also the function of child- placing means usually that the work must be done hastily and imperfectly; often by officers unqualified or at least inexperienced in this branch of social service. The ideas and attitude of some social workers toward child- placing by juvenile courts is expressed as follows: “ We have strong convictions against the juvenile court becoming its own placing- out agency. We think that when it does so it unwisely mixes judicial with administrative functions, and substitutes a temporary arrangement within a probation office for the work of a perma- nently established organization. Owing to ordinary party affilia- tions, it opens the way for political pull to endanger the quality of the work done. In placements for adoption and permanent care the court agency is likely to locate children in too close con- tiguity to unworthy parents, other interfering relatives, or former friends of the family.” In some of the larger cities the juvenile court has developed judges whose names are honored everywhere for their splendid work in this new judicial field; as well as probation officers who are models of efficiency in that line of service. But it must be confessed that in many of the smaller cities, and especially in rural communities, the juvenile court has failed to measure up to its ideals and its possibilities for practical results. In some places the ordinary make-up, policy, and methods of the juvenile court are against success in child-placing, some judges and probation officers being political appointees, who serve a constituency and must arrange their methods and work to conserve influence and retain popularity. Usually such officials have neither the spirit nor the technical knowledge necessary to proper child-placing in families. Moreover, the juvenile court in its relations to the people is required to be a rapid-action machine. Its probation officers 54 CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS must make quick investigations, and when a case is called the judge is expected to render an immediate decision. This may do for the direct application of law, and in regard to certain social needs and conditions; but it is impossible to do child-placing properly with- out prolonged study and deliberation. It takes time and patience to investigate and “prove up” a family, and to fit a suitable child into it. Frequent visits after placement, to supervise the work, together with regular relations for several successive years, are essential to ultimate success. These require time and attention, impossible for the ordinary juvenile court to give. For these reasons the juvenile court is out of its sphere when it becomes its own placing-out agency. Even wise and devoted judges and efficient probation officers are handicapped by their lack of time in which to do the work properly, by their lack of training in child-placing, and by the limited tenure of their official positions. Practically all of these objections are met when the court declines to constitute itself a placing-out organization, and assigns children needing such care to well-organized, permanently established, and state approved agencies not directly connected with the tribunal itself. New York Children’s Home Bureau. A most interesting ex- ample of a public child-placing agency was recently undertaken in connection with the Department of Public Charities of the City of New York. In June, 1916, this metropolitan department, which supports from city funds over 20,000 dependent children at an annual expense of over $5,000,000, organized a Children’s Home Bureau for the express purpose of boarding-out and placing-out children in family homes rather than commit them to asylums. Although so recently established the bureau in September, 1917, had placed nearly 1,000 children in boarding homes, and was re- ceiving more than 100 children every month. Of this movement former Commissioner John A. Kingsbury said: “The Poor Law of the state provides for the placing of children in homes; Section 664 of the City Charter not only contemplates it but it seems clearly to give preference to boarding-out and placing- out children in family homes rather than to commit to asylums; various institutions of Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths accept and practice it; the Mayor and Comptroller approve 95 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES this policy. Notwithstanding all this, the cit¥ of New York has continued the policy of committing children to private chari- table institutions while other progressive cities and states through- out the Union have abandoned it, or declined to adopt such a plan. Many of the more progressive states, like Massachusetts, for the past decade have been rearing their dependent children in family homes. I have freely put myself on record and expressed my in- tention of translating into action the provisions of Section 664, of the Charter, which authorize the Commissioner of Charities to place-out and board-out children dependent upon the city of New York. “On the 15th of June, 1916, | announced that I was organizing a Children’s Home Bureau for this purpose and stated that as soon thereafter as the organization of the Bureau was completed children under eight years of age, for whose care and maintenance application was made to the Department of Public Charities, would be placed in good foster homes of the religious faith of their own parents. Owing to the epidemic of infantile paralysis, I did not begin this work until the 15th of October. | had not expected at the outset to place more than one-fourth of these children in homes, but with the exception of a few Jewish children for whom family homes were not available, no child under eight years of age has been committed to a charitable institution since last October. With the exception noted, every child who has been found to be in need of the City’s aid has been placed with a good foster mother. This was the extent of my announcement and is the result of the new policy to date. . . . Our child-placing work will be con- fined largely to young children, for it goes without saying that the younger a child is, the easier it is to place him in a good foster home. Practically speaking, there always will be a great many children over eight years of age for whom suitable homes cannot be secured.””} In view of the fact that for a century the city of New York had been caring for dependent children mainly in institutions, the prog- ress of the new movement was followed with intense interest. State Boards of Children’s Guardians. The Community Plan 1 Charities Bulletin, Department of Public Charities, New York, John A. Kings- bury, Commissioner, March, 1917, pp. 26, 27. 56 CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS in Children’s Work, presented by C. C. Carstens at the National Conference of Charities and Correction in 1915, included what is probably the most definite and most favorably considered plan so far devised for a state agency to provide for dependent chil- dren. It was offered as “the best type of organization to become the nucleus for the most helpful form of development.” The plan should be carefully noted by all students of child welfare. It is as follows: “The state board of children’s guardians should be an unpaid board of not less than seven persons appointed by the governor, the board to choose its own executive head without political inter- ference, and he in turn to choose his assistants with the approval of the board. This board must equip itself: “1. To supervise and perhaps to administer public aid to mothers with dependent children in their own homes. “2. To receive into its care as wards of the state all for whom a petition is filed with it and whom upon social inquiry it seems ad- vantageous to accept as dependents. No court action shall be deemed necessary to make these dependents the wards of the state but they shall not be permanently entrusted to any family or other institution without court proceedings for guardianship or adoption. “3. To place out or place in institutions for temporary or per- manent care all who are dependent for any reason. For this pur- pose a special staff of trained visitors is needed so that this, which is at present the most important part of a state board of children’s guardians’ work, may have ample facilities for the task. “4. To enforce maintenance proceedings against the putative father and to give illegitimate children a measure of the oppor- tunities enjoyed by other children, the board shall become the guardian of all illegitimate children ipso facto, and, wherever possible, without removal from the mother. “s. To offer suitable children for adoption into suitable families. No finer social service can be rendered than fitting an attractive, homeless child into a suitable childless family, but it is difficult to see how a greater wrong could be done a child than to undertake adoption proceedings carelessly in its behalf. “6. To become the licensing agency for maternity homes and maternity hospitals and to inspect such institutions. While this 57 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES service might be attached to various other departments with al- most equal justice, the service is distinctively a social one and re- quires the knowledge and experience of child-helping workers. “7. To maintain a receiving home or homes if needed for chil- dren that are not suitable for being placed-out, or, if they have been tried in an individual home, to be further placed-out.’’! Institutional Child-placing. Many institutions are operated with the definitely expressed intention of giving to their inmates only temporary care, and of returning them, as soon as can wisely be done, to the normal conditions of society. Others have a regular age of dismission, at which time the institution makes some provision for its wards’ future by securing positions, which gener- ally include being received into a family home, before releasing the children from control. But probably a majority of American child-caring institutions have no definite plans or methods for securing the future welfare of their wards, and confine their efforts to providing physical care and elementary education for them during the uncertain period of their stay. It is evident that ultimately all institutional children must re- turn to ordinary social conditions; that all who are immature when dismissed ought to have guidance and control until they are re- established and able to do for themselves; and that to provide this guidance places upon child-caring institutions a responsi- bility not to be lightly disregarded. Therefore the four succeeding paragraphs indicate action that might be wise and desirable. 1. Large institutions, whether under public or private manage- ment, that undertake to place-out their own wards, should organize a department of child-placing, put a trained agent in charge of it, and operate it according to the best ideals of modern child-placing agencies. 2. Small institutions, unable to provide specially trained agents for placing-out work, should do one of two things: join with several other institutions to organize a suitable agency, as the Catholic orphanages of northern New Jersey have done, or ally themselves with established child-placing agencies, as more than a score of child-caring institutions have done in Philadelphia. Only thus + A Community Plan in Children’s Work, C. C. Carstens, Proceedings of National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915, pp. 97, 98. 58 CHILD-PLACING ORGANIZATIONS can child-placing from small or average institutions be done creditably, so as to secure the welfare of all concerned. 3. As child-placing requires many facilities and especially expert agents, it can best be undertaken by strong, well-equipped, permanently established agencies. In our judgment it would be a great advance if all institutions, large and small, would help to organize and maintain such regular agencies, would co-operate closely with them, and have all of their wards placed by them. 4. Whether children are placed by special agencies or by child- caring institutions, the essentials of good work are the same. The advice given in later pages on classification, reception of children, selection of homes and children, and after-supervision must be held to apply as truly to institutions for continued care as to regular child-placing agencies. Yet in harmony with the fore- going recommendations, most of the suggestions in this manual are worded with special reference to the agencies rather than to institutions. 59 CHAPTER IV CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN T is well to have clearly in mind the classes of children that call | for the services of child-placing agencies. It should be remem- bered that while the central task of such organizations is to find good family homes for normal dependents, to whom may be added some of the wilful and wayward usually classed as mild delinquents, these wards must be sorted out from the unfortunates of all kinds and conditions, and that duty and humanity will fre- quently if not always demand that some adequate provision be made for the unplaceable remnant. Our next step, then, is to group and classify the various children with whom the public and private child-helping organizations have to deal. This classification is intended to assort, combine, and describe children on the basis of their personal or social necessities, and not to indicate merely their legal relations. The statutory definitions may be mentioned or quoted, but the main purpose here is so to arrange and illustrate the juvenile elements for whom the agencies and institutions labor, that each may be easily recognized, right treatment be indicated, and proper assignment to a suitable organi- zation at once be suggested. Strictly legal definitions vary widely in the different states, and change more or less with every legislative session. No good pur- pose will be served by trying to harmonize these legal terms. So- cial definitions also vary widely in different sections of the country, and are changing rapidly under the impulses and developments of modern community service. It is hoped that the grouping and classification employed will afford a definite basis for sectional com- parison, and help to make a little more stable some of this change- able social terminology. Classes by Causes. Child-placing agencies have to do mainly with children who are beyond the preventive stages of action, and are already dependent on aid from outside the family circle. The 60 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN need is not always or necessarily financial. It may be social or moral. The separation of children from living parents may be either temporary or permanent. Most of those provided for by the agencies are included in the following types: 1. Children so seriously neglected in personal care as to need outside assistance and protection. 2. Those physically or morally endangered by their surround- ings, who require removal to improved environment. 3. Those deserted or abandoned by their parents. 4. Those badly diseased or distressed by deep poverty. 5. Poor and unprotected orphans and half-orphans. The children indicated in classes 1 and 2 are typical cases of neglect, where parents or guardians have failed to meet their responsibilities; those in class 3 are the victims of the worst sort of parental neglect; those in 4 may or may not be neglect cases; and those in 5, while specially in need of aid and care, are sufferers from misfortunes rather than from wilful neglect. Children may be normal or abnormal in body and mind, good or bad in personal conduct or character, but for one or more of the indicated causes they are outside of the conditions of ordinary life and require some provision for their welfare. Neglected Children. Most of the children defined in the laws of the states as “neglected”’ have living parents or legal guardians. The term implies a failure in care and control of someone supposed to be capable and responsible. The Indiana law thus defines this class of children: “A child who has not proper parental care or guardianship, who begs or receives alms, is employed in a saloon, or lives in unfit environment, is termed a ‘neglected’ child.’”! Neglect is the antecedent condition from which a majority of the ills that afflict childhood arise. The loss of parents by death, the disability of parents due to disease, and dire poverty for which parents are not responsible, account for less than half of the juvenile dependency in America. Neglect and its results, more than all other causes, call for the creation of child-caring organizations and the continual prosecution of child welfare work. Because of it 1Summary of State Laws Relating to the Dependent Classes, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1914, p. 78. 61 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES the child often becomes wayward, truant, lawless, and ultimately incorrigible. By reason of neglect, prenatal and postnatal, many children are afflicted with blood diseases, or are deformed, crippled, anemic, neurotic, or tuberculous. Therefore the term “ neglected”’ child refers not merely to a class of unfortunates but also to con- ditions leading to adverse results, and serious neglect generally causes its victims to become dependent, delinquent, or defective. Neglected children are even more related to preventive than to remedial measures. As a condition, neglect is not usually the direct basis for the re- ception of children by child-placing agencies, although in a multi- tude of cases it precedes the taking of such action. It is the source from which a constant stream of children flows to the courts and other official bodies. Such children are legally classed as “neg- lected’’ to bring them into consideration, but it is a preliminary and not a final classification. If parents cannot be persuaded or compelled to do their duty, the child is generally declared de- pendent, delinquent, or defective, and proper care and protection are provided. So, although a majority of the children who pass through the courts are taken in charge because of some form of neglect that brings them within the purview of the civic authori- ties, they are generally assigned to the agencies for placement in homes under another classification. Dependent Children. According to the laws of Indiana: “A child who is dependent on the public for support, or who is desti- tute, homeless, or abandoned, is termed a ‘dependent’ child.’’ In some states the laws give no separate definition of dependent children, and they are included with the “neglected”’ in paragraphs arranging for their disposition and welfare. The Indiana definition is clear and concise, but leaves unexpressed many characteristics of this important class. The distinctive peculiarity of those properly listed as dependent is that they are the helpless and innocent victims of various calami- ties, social deficiencies, or parental failures, and are unable by their own efforts or volition to preserve their lives, or with life sustained properly to develop their bodies or their characters. 1Summary of State Laws Relating to the Dependent Classes, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1914, p. 78. 62 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN Dependency implies many things besides lack of means for sup- port. Parents who are able to furnish their children the necessities of life are often unfit to provide “the elements essential to their physical, mental, or moral growth.” Dependency may therefore be caused by lack of provision for the welfare of children by parents or other relatives able to support them, but who in spirit, character, and moral influence are unfit to have them under their control. These conditions give rise to partial dependents, a class rather indefinite, yet numerous and important. Partial dependents may be those supported in part by charity or public funds, or they may be children wholly supported by their parents but to a greater or less extent controlled and supervised by philanthropic organizations. Children, whether wholly or partially dependent, may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of near relatives, or may be taken entirely away from relatives. The assistance from outside the family, whether financial support, environmental protection, or character development, is the essential element in the dependent relation. It will be sufficient for our present purpose to divide dependent children into four principal sections: deserted children, foundlings, needy children, and orphans, understanding that delinquents and defectives in the main are also dependents in their economic rela- tions to the state and people. 1. Deserted Children. These are children one or both of whose parents have disappeared, leaving their progeny dependent upon public charity. A minor distinction sometimes made is to term the children “deserted’’ when the parents are known, and “aban- doned”’ when the parents are unknown. Deserted children are generally in family groups. In probably nine-tenths of all de- sertion cases the father alone deserts his family. When both parents are definitely missing, the action is held to imply a desire to sever entirely their connection with their progeny. After the failure of vigorous and systematic efforts to locate the deserting parents, the courts usually nullify their parental rights and assign the children to suitable child-caring organizations. 2. Foundlings. These are usually mere infants, supposedly 63 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES born out of wedlock, whose parents are unknown and who have left them secretly where they expect them to be found and cared for, either by private persons, public officials, or proper institutions. Whenever a foundling is discovered, it is the duty of the authori- ties to make vigorous efforts to find the abandoning parents, and, if they can be discovered and identified, to induce them to take up their rightful burden in the care of their offspring. Some authorities also class as foundlings the children left by known mothers at foundling asylums; but such use of it violates the very meaning of the word. Such children are unwanted, or cast off, or in many cases deserted; they should not be called foundlings. 3. Needy Children. A numerous section of dependents is here classified as “needy children,” not to express a legal relation, but to define a series of social necessities. All of these require action, either through public or private instrumentalities. The needs are varied. Some are financial; others are moral and environmental. Some can be met without removing the children from their own homes; others demand the use of other family homes or of child- caring institutions. Those included under this head are the children of diseased, insane, feeble-minded, destitute, immoral, cruel, or criminal pa- rents, who for a variety of reasons are taken into public or private care, and generally are accorded partial or entire benevolent sup- port. To define the status of this great group of dependents, they are classified in three principal divisions, according to the type of service required in their behalf: a. Children of parents who are worthy and otherwise well quali- fied to rear their children, but who are diseased, distressed, or destitute. Such children can best be aided in their parental homes; and this work is usually done by such organizations as associated charities, widows’ pension bureaus, and the directors of the poor.! b. Children of deserving parents that are unable to provide a home, but whose disability is probably only temporary. In this case the children should be cared for temporarily by public or private charity, in selected private homes or in child-caring insti- 1 Introduction to the Study of the Dependent, Defective, and Delinquent Classes, and of Their Social Treatment, Dr. Charles R. Henderson, Heath and Company, New York, 1901, pp. 98-102. 64 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN tutions. The rights of such parents should not be nullified, nor their separation from their children be made any more complete than is necessary for the welfare of all. c. Children of very incompetent, really feeble-minded, viciously cruel, or positively criminal parents, who should be wholly separ- ated from them and provided for permanently in selected private homes or appropriate institutions. Such action should invariably be based on orders from courts of competent jurisdiction. The disposition of children from parents of the types indicated in section c of group 3 is one of the hardest problems faced by agencies. Nearly every such family of any size has young members seriously defective, physically or mentally, or both. Some of these defectives may be so improved by treatment or surgical operations as to become available for ordinary placement in families; others must be segregated in suitable institutions. To handle a few families of this sort, and endeavor to place the children so as to secure their welfare and at the same time protect society, will con- vince any intelligent executive of the necessity for general co- operation in social work. 4. Orphans. These are children who have lost their parents by death. When only one parent is deceased, the children are called half-orphans. Foundlings and other abandoned children, who in a real sense have lost their parents, are often loosely classed as orphans by social workers; but such use of the term is incorrect, and is unfair to those to whom it really belongs. It is estimated that only a little more than 10 per cent of ‘the children in orphan asylums and children’s homes are full orphans; but destitute orphans, while small in number as compared to other classes of dependent children, on account of their extreme need and helplessness have given a name to more agencies and institutions than have all others combined. Homeless and desti- tute orphans are of course fitting candidates for places in free homes as members of families. Many half-orphans, because of the poverty, illness, bad character, or other incapacity of the sur- viving parent, also need the temporary or permanent care which can be given in boarding or free homes. Delinquent Children. In the laws of at least five states and the District of Columbia, the term “delinquent” as applied to chil- 5 65 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES dren includes only such as are shown before a court to have vio- lated state laws, or town, city, or county ordinances “defining crime, and which involve moral turpitude.” In the laws of other states, and in general practice, the term is much more broadly used. It is quite commonly made to include children who in- dulge in waywardness, truancy, cruelty, incorrigibility, associating with those of ill repute, petty thievery, and supposedly malicious mischief, as well as what in adults would be criminal. No doubt it would be best if the term “delinquent” could be confined to the more serious cases and applied only by courts of law and justice, so that comparatively innocent or unintentional offenders should not be stigmatized by its application. But we are obliged to take things as they are and accept the definition in general use, hoping for a wiser application of the term some time in the future. This may come from the harmonizing and codifying of juvenile court laws and practices, for which a strong propaganda is now in operation. The relation of juvenile courts to the work of child-placing in families has been discussed in the chapter on child-placing organizations. Recognition of the vague and elastic definition of “delinquent” now extant necessarily includes among so-called delinquents many boys and girls who are simply wilful and undisciplined, or ignorant and undeveloped, and who ought to have a chance to make good under favorable auspices. The child-placing agencies have large duties toward this class, whom social workers sometimes call “mild delinquents.’”’ They should quite freely assume the guar- dianship of such children and locate them in well-chosen families. Under proper supervision and right personal direction the majority of them will turn out well. Many others, who are really and formally delinquent, having committed somewhat serious offenses, are also best served and oftenest saved to good citizenship by being placed in good families on supervised probation or parole.2- In such environment most of them will grow up useful and successful citizens. 1See Chapter III, pp. 53, 54, 55- ? For extended studies of delinquents, see Delinquent Child and the Home, Breckinridge and Abbott, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1912, and Juvenile Court Laws in the United States Summarized, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Charities Publication Committee, New York, 1910. 66 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN Defective Children. This class includes children who are: (1) feeble-minded or insane; (2) epileptic; (3) physically crippled or deformed; (4) seriously diseased. Temporary and in many cases permanent provision must be made for such in: (a) homes for the feeble-minded and the epileptic; (b) special hospitals for the treat- ment of children; (c) orthopedic institutions; (d) convalescent homes or custodial homes for cripples. Arrangements and insti- tutions for the deaf and the blind are not considered in this con- nection, as they are usually classed as educational rather than as charitable or philanthropic. The term “defectives,’’ in the sense it is desired to apply it here, refers to specially serious defects, and should be technically used in reference to children within the purview of child-helping or- ganizations only when they require extended hospital treatment, orthopedic surgery, or continued institutional care. There are others, however, afflicted with minor ailments or blemishes, in- sufficient to justify the application of the term “defectives,” but requiring attention, who nevertheless should be given a paragraph in this description. It is said by experts that from 50 to 67 per cent of the children in the public schools of America are in some way defective, and need treatment for ailments of the eye, ear, nose, throat, teeth, skin, or nutritional organs.1. Dr. Walter S. Cornell, of Philadel- phia, says that the children of the poor, living in insanitary con- ditions and poorly nourished, show double the relative number of nose and throat defects found in children of a better social class. Child welfare workers, school authorities, or health de- partments, should carefully examine and thoroughly treat chil- dren brought under their observation who are thus afflicted. Such immediate attention to these minor ailments may prevent lifelong imperfections, and send even the children of poverty out to the enjoyment of normal opportunities. It is not right to apply the term “defective child”’ to one who has some, or even many, of these minor defects which medical or surgical skill can quickly remedy. The mention of them is perti- nent because of the duty which handling such slightly defective 1 Medical Inspection of Schools, Gulick and Ayres, Survey Associates, New York, 1913, Pp. 37. 67 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES children lays upon child-helping organizations. But the technical defective is much more gravely, and often even vitally, affected, and requires more extended and complicated treatment. There are two general groups of defectives for whom special provision must be made. 1. Physical Defectives. Among physical defectives there are two distinct sections—the diseased and the crippled or deformed. These may overlap to some extent, but many are diseased who are normal in body, and many are healthy although bodily abnormal. a. Diseased Children. This section includes those seriously ill from diseases requiring comparatively long periods of hospital care, like anemia and malnutrition; or acquired or constitutional diseases, like tuberculosis and syphilis. It does not refer to minor ailments, such as the ordinary children’s diseases—mumps, measles, whooping-cough, and the like. The physically diseased should have the best hospital treatment available; and of course the great majority recover and become normal. Some, including those in the advanced stages of tuberculosis, are incurable, and should be placed where they may have proper care and reasonable living conditions. b. Crippled or Deformed Children. The crippled are those who are so weakened or maimed by disease or accident as to be deprived wholly or partially of the use of a limb or limbs; and the deformed are such as are distorted or misshapen, or defective in limbs or organs, perhaps from birth, and perhaps from the effects of diseases or calamities. The loss or uselessness of limbs or members, and malformations such as curved spines, weak or crooked legs, club feet, harelips, and faulty eyes and other sense organs, are the sort of imperfections indicated by this section. It is not intended to include minor imperfections, such as en- larged tonsils, adenoids, decayed teeth, or eyes of unequal vision, for although important, these may generally be remedied quickly by experts. The physically crippled or deformed should have the benefits of modern orthopedic surgery and good institutional care during the generally extended period of convalescence from opera- tions. Some crippled and deformed children are incurable, and most of this class need lifelong care in appropriate institutions. 1 Care and Education of Crippled Children in the United States, Edith Reeves, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1914. 68 i Fs “SSVJW| ‘NOLSOG ‘SUSUFGNVA\ ATLL] YOI IWOH ANVIONY MAN A1OLCIOGK] [BILD pux awop SUulAsa22y SAS 68a Typical Group at the Receiving Home A Neglected Boy Results After Eight Years in Good Family Homes CHILDREN’S Alp Society OF THE City OF NEw YORK 68b CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN 2. Mental Defectives. One of the greatest social problems in America is the large and constant increase in feeble-mindedness. Less than a decade ago the world woke up to this fact—for the problem is not confined to America but is world-wide—and realized something of its portent. We now know that almost every or- phanage contains some feeble-minded children; that every child- placing agency unavoidably handles some every year; that from 15 to 50 per cent of the delinquents in the reform and industrial schools are of subnormal mentality; and that the special institu- tions for the feeble-minded are crowded and have long waiting lists. The situation demands immediate, definite, scientific, and systematic action. Diagnosis is one practical essential, long neglected but now generally demanded and increasingly applied. It is not too much to ask that all child-placing agencies and child-caring institutions arrange for the psychological examination of wards, in order to determine their relative mental ages and possibilities. Any that show possible signs of mental disease should be treated by skilled psychiatrists. The merely backward should be identified, and efforts made to assure their speedy advance to normality. The constitutionally defective should be definitely determined, and should be placed in proper institutions. To put alow grade mental defective in a family home where a normal child was expected is a social crime, once to be condoned because of ignorance, but now inexcusable in a well-ordered and progressive child-placing agency. Psychology and Classification. Many social workers, especially in the smaller communities where trained specialists are not avail- able, are puzzled as to their duty and the proper means to be em- ployed when specially stupid, backward, erratic, or neurotic chil- dren are under consideration. They must utilize the best guidance and facilities within their means and reach. Generally better assistants and equipment are available than the large body of social workers have realized, or have felt the necessity of obtaining. This is especially true onthe lines of psychological and psychiatric 1See Abnormal Children, Bernard Hollander, E. P. Dutton & Co., New York, 1916; and Mental Deficiency (Amentia), A. F. Tredgold, M.D., second edition, Wm. Wood & Co., New York, 1914. 69 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES service, as related to the feeble-minded, the mentally undeveloped, the emotionally erratic, and the definitely neurotic. Psychology is the science of the mind or soul. It is an immense and in many ways an abstract subject, but it has numerous concrete and practical divisions. Among these are some that directly apply to the estimates and measurements concerned in the diagnosis of relative mental age and the health and disease of the human brain. In order to determine whether or not a child is mentally normal, one must be something of a psychologist; and in the scores and even hundreds of doubtful cases that come to the average agency or institution there is constant and important work for the expert student of this science. Clear knowledge of modern methods of classifying mental defectives, at least in general outline, is of great value to all child-welfare workers, but cannot in these days be a substitute for the employment of psychological specialists. In recent years some universities have been giving courses in applied psychology, with especial reference to the diagnosis and treatment of exceptional children. These courses are for teachers, social workers, and others interested in community problems. The instruction includes the Binet-Simon and other tests for de- fects, the recognition of moral and emotional abnormalities in children, and the application of social and educational remedies. Those taking the courses also study vital statistics, the family, marriage and divorce, eugenics, educational standards for normal children, and other subjects necessary in preparation for work in clinical psychology. When these courses are completed the gradu- ate may not rank as an expert psychologist, but is certainly an ad- vanced student of psychology. Such a “psychologist” is able to give wise and practical as- sistance in determining the relative mental age of a child, whether or not it is merely backward or constitutionally feeble-minded, and the social and educational treatment needed for its welfare. Such psychologists will also quickly apprehend the existence of mental maladies, although perhaps not equipped to treat them. The clinical psychologists, that is, well-advanced students of mentality and personality, who are making a specialty of children’s work, are rapidly increasing in numbers and general availability. They are now to be found in most cities and large communities. 70 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN One of them should be on the attending or consulting staff of every child-placing agency and child-caring institution. The great majority of mental deficiency cases are those of mere. weakness or backwardness. In many there is a lack of original brain quality or power. In others there is a brain enfeebled by disease, or by lack of proper nutriment. In still others the mental powers are undeveloped by reason of bad environment. But in a great number of cases the brain is actively diseased and requires the services of a specialist in mental maladies. The technical title for such a specialist is psychiatrist. He is usually a physician of some accredited school, who, in addition to general psychology, has made a specialty of mental diseases and their treatment. He may be called a psychological physician. His work in connection with children’s institutions will be to diagnose and control emo- tional and neurological conditions that adversely affect the in- mates, and to treat those afflicted with serious mental maladies. Psychiatry was formerly thought of only in connection with hospi- tals forthe insane, but in recent years it has come into much more gen- eral noticeand use. Its present practice covers many forms of men- tal abnormality besides those requiring custodial care in asylums. In common terms, the relations of the psychologist to the psy- chiatrist are well illustrated by those of the general practitioner to the medical or surgical specialist. The psychiatrist is an ad- vanced psychologist, who devotes his efforts to the cure of mental maladies. And both psychologists and psychiatrists are de- pendent upon the social case worker, or the elements of social case work, for much of the information used in scientific diag- nosis... Dr. Walter E. Fernald, Superintendent of the Massa- chusetts School for the Feeble-minded, says: “An accurate and incontestable diagnosis of one of these borderline cases can be made satisfactorily only after a thorough examination of the patient, knowledge of the family history, personal history, espe- cially the story of his infancy and early childhood, school history and records, social and moral reactions, sex habits, emotional stability, associates, interests, and the fullest inquiry as to his 1]n the spring of 1918 the author observed the practical demonstration of this at Moosehart, the institution for children of the Loyal Order of Moose, at Moose- hart, Illinois. 71 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES general information and practical knowledge.”! This implies the desirability of the close co-operation of the social worker and the psychologist, and the use by the latter of the results of case work by the former. In the same article Dr. Fernald also says: “In the present state of our knowledge, the behavioristic interpretation and evaluation of the anthropological and pedagogical expressions of the individual, his practical capacity for social adaptation and for meeting new situations, his power of ethical inhibition and control, his effective balance, are also as truly scientific as the result of the formal intelli- gence tests. This is written with a full appreciation of the contributions of clinical psychology to the means of diagnosis of mental defect. The writer would not willingly attempt to diag- nose a borderline case of mental defect, or any other degree of de- fect, . . . without a thorough psychological examination. The intelligence test findings in these cases are of value as addi- tional evidence, but they are not conclusive, and should be correlated with sufficient evidence in the other possible fields of inquiry.’’ In untechnical words, the actual intelligence shown by the tests at any one time is no certain criterion of the individual’s mental possibilities. The general physical condition must also be studied, and if possible in the light of previous family and social experi- ences; the health or diseased condition of the brain, the main organ of manifestation of the mind, must be determined, and if required the psychiatrist must give proper treatment, before the child’s mental capacity is finally settled. Many children have been de- clared constitutionally feeble-minded on direct intelligence tests alone, who were merely backward, as was proved by their later responding to care and treatment by advancement held to be im- possible to those really deficient in brain capacity. The need of great care and plenty of time in diagnosis is plainly evident. The steps to be taken in a proper diagnosis are several. Social and general case study is always required as a basis. A physical examination by a good physician is the second step. The psycholo- 1 Standardized Fields of Inquiry for Clinical Studies of Borderline Defectives, Walter E. Fernald, M.D., Mental Hygiene, April, 1917, National Committee for Mental Hygiene, Incorporated, New York City, p. 211. 2 Op. cit., p. 233. 72 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN gist follows with a scientific study of mentality and personality. In cases of mental malady, treatment by a psychiatrist is a neces- sity. Dr. Frederic H. Knight of Boston says: “The ideal arrange- ment calls for a routine psychological examination of every child by a competent psychologist, who should select out of the group examined the children who need psychiatric examination.” Mental Defectives Specially Classified. The details of the Binet- Simon and other related tests, especially those indicating physical conditions which are the cause of numerous mental abnormalities, such as the Wassermann blood test, can be obtained from various medical and scientific publications. This manual is prepared for the instruction and information of general social students and in- experienced social workers, hence it is not within its scope to pro- vide such technical medical or psychological directions. It is more necessary in this connection to provide what it is very im- portant that the social worker should have—a clear and untechni- cal guide to the classification of mental defectives, with sugges- tions as to what disposition should be made of them. For the information and assistance of such students and social workers, two standard definitions and a brief and untechnical classification of mentally subnormal children are here given. Dr. A. F. Tredgold, in his work on Mental Deficiency, following the conclusions of the Royal College of Physicians of London, England, thus defines amentia in three degrees of seriousness: 1. Low Grade Amentia. The idiot is defined as a person so deeply defective from birth, or from an early age, that he is unable to guard himself against common physical dangers. 2. Medium Grade Amentia. The imbecile is defined as one who, by reason of mental defect existing from birth, or from an early age, is incapable of earning his own living, but is capable of guarding himself against common physical dangers. 3. High Grade Amentia. The feeble-minded person is one who is capable of earning a living under favorable circumstances, but is incapable from mental defect existing from birth, or from an early age, (a) of competing on equal terms with his normal fellows; or (b) of managing himself and his affairs with ordinary prudence.! 1 Mental Deficiency (Amentia), A. F. Tredgold, M.D., William Wood & Co., New York, second edition, 1914, definitions arranged from pp. 91-94. 73 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES The following definition of mental defectiveness by Dr. Walter S. Cornell is suggestive and authoritative: “Feeble-mindedness may be defined as original lack of normal mental capacity. By ‘original’ is meant before the end of the child period or about the twelfth year, although actually 95 per cent of the feeble-minded are born so because of hereditary in- fluences, or injury to the head during labor. By ‘normal capacity’ is meant approximately the mental capacity of an eleven- or twelve-year-old person. . . . Probably over one-half of all the feeble-minded, and certainly three-fourths of all those found as state charges in our public institutions, are degenerates. They represent the running down of the human stock, and the poorly formed brain is paralleled by numerous defects of the other organs of the body.’ Based upon these illuminating definitions, and using also sugges- tions from the systems of Martin W. Barr, of Elwyn, Pennsylvania, and Henry H. Goddard, of Vineland, New Jersey, the following classification scheme was prepared for a previous volume, Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, and is again offered as compre- hensible to the average layman and probably not objectionable to the expert psychologist: 1. Idiots. Those of the lowest class of mental defectives are termed idiots. These require asylum care, are very slightly im- provable, and none ever exceeds the mental capacity of the average child of two years. 2. Idio-Imbeciles. Those of the next grade are called idio- imbeciles. They also require asylum care, are more improvable, in a limited way can be trained to assist others, and in mental capacity are equal to the average child of from three to five years: 3. Imbeciles. Those of the third grade are generally called imbeciles. They require custodial life and perpetual guardian- ship, are morally deficient, can be trained in some manual and industrial occupations, are often plotters of mischief with a genius for evil, and in mental capacity are equal to the average child of from six to nine years. 4. Morons. Those of the highest class of the constitutionally 1The Feeble-minded World, Walter S. Cornell, M.D., Department of Public Health and Charities, Philadelphia, Bulletin, 1911, pp. 1, 2. 74 CLASSIFICATION OF CHILDREN mentally defective recently have been called morons. They re- quire long apprenticeship and colony life under protection, are trainable in the manual arts and many mental acquirements, lack mainly in will, balance, and judgment, and in mental capacity grade with the average child of from ten to twelve years old. 5. Dullards. Another class, not distinctly defined, is that of the backward or mentally feeble. These are sometimes wrongly included with the morons, from whom it is often difficult to distinguish them. But morons are constitutionally defective, and can never become normal in mentality. Dullards are normal in their mental powers and processes, which have been enfeebled by disease or retarded by lack of opportunity. They require special training to develop their latent powers, and usually medi- cal attention, a prescribed diet, and improved environment. The special schools for backward children are established partly to meet their needs, and partly to define and give adequate attention to imbeciles and morons. It will be seen that experts in the treatment of the feeble- minded require asylums and custodial care for all classes except some morons and the backward children. It is probable that most of those in the dullard class would be benefited by care and train- ing for months, perhaps even years, in special institutions. In many cases defective home life is the cause of the backwardness. But the problems of adequate provision for the constitutionally deficient are so great, and their need is so pressing, that it is scarcely worth while now to plan for more than a legitimate ex- tension of schools for the backward to other communities. Defectives of the moron type are often capable of earning a living under favorable circumstances, especially after definite training. But owing to their mental defects, they are not able to compete on equal terms with normal associates, nor can they manage wages or property with ordinary prudence. A few exhibit a one-sided development, showing great ability in some special field, or aptitude for acquiring certain accomplishments. The de- linquent feeble-minded mostly come from this group, which is described as not so much immoral or criminal as unmoral—in- capable of appreciating moral distinctions. The feeble-minded girl of child-bearing age, to whom so much attention is now being 75 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES directed by social workers, is often of the moron class. In all of them mental development is arrested, the childlike type of mind continues through life, and custodial care, or at least careful guard- ianship, is a necessity for both their own welfare and the safety of society.! Subnormal Children Sometimes Placeable. Recent researches, and the increasing experience of psychologists and other social experts in applying tests of mentality, each year make easier and more certain the definite classification of the mentally deficient. While institutional care is essential to all the lower classes, there are many of the moron class who will be far better off in family homes than in institutions. The families in which they are placed must be selected with especial reference to the humane and honor- able care of such wards, and of course must have full information as to the children’s mental limitations; and proper public or pri- vate agencies must keep such homes and children under special and permanent supervision. Dullards, not being constitutionally deficient, may often be most quickly renewed in physical and men- tal vigor and greatly improved, if not wholly brought up to normal conditions, by placement in first-class family homes. A most interesting plan has been worked out by superintendent Charles Bernstein of the State Custodial Asylum for feeble-minded women, at Rome, New York. Dr. Bernstein finds situations for high grade feeble-minded young women to do domestic work by the day. They return at the close of the day to the institution or toa branch home established by the institution in the city. Dr. Bern- stein seems to have demonstrated his ability to work his plan suc- cessfully. It remains to be seen whether it can be successfully worked by others. 1Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1915, pp. 266-270. 76 PART TWO THE TECHNIQUE OF CHILD-PLACING The placing of a dependent child in the neighborhood of its own home is as a rule wise and successful only when it is desirable to maintain the per- sonal relationships of the child, either with its parents or with some local friends or relatives. In those many cases where a child has been taken by a - court order from immoral, cruel, or persistently drunken relatives, the wel- fare of the child demands that the foster home be found at such a distance from its own home that interference from its unworthy relatives shall be unlikely—Henry W. Thurston. The opposition to state supervision of private charity, once so decided, is gradually lessening as the reasons for it are more sanely weighed. That there is a growing sentiment in favor of some supervision is evident from the utterances at state conferences of many persons connected with private institutions of charity. They recognize the reasons for such super- vision; the protection of the benevolent from impostors, the prevention of abuses to inmates, and the encouragement of benevolence by throwing about it the guarantee of public authority that the wishes of the benefactors will be effectually carried out. . . . The success of such supervision of private charities will depend upon the spirit in which it is conducted. But the same may be said of any state supervision of institutions, whether public or private. If irritating and mischievous, it will add to the burdens of the administrators and the confusion of the institution; if kindly, tactful, and wise, it will help forward the institution and encourage its administrators.— Father Francis H. Gavisk. CHAPTER V RECEPTION OF CHILDREN HE reception by a person or organization of a single child or a family of children into care and guardianship, the ac- cepting of the responsibility of their support and training for citizenship, is a matter of prime importance and not to be lightly undertaken. When we multiply individuals and families by scores and hundreds, as we must when we consider the annual work of an ordinary child-placing agency, and continue the process and the relations for years and decades, with an enlarging army of growing children in care or under supervision, the gravity of the proceeding is enhanced by every advance in time and numbers. It is the duty of the people to demand, and of the state to re- quire, that only properly established, well-equipped, carefully examined, and fully approved public and private agencies and institutions be allowed to receive into their care and control the dependent children of a nation. The admission methods and conditions in the reception of chil- dren by private child-placing agencies, now to be considered, apply also with almost equal propriety to both private‘and public institutions for continued care. Social workers should have clear conceptions as to what is involved in the reception of children by organizations, and should insist that every agency or institution have a high ideal of its mission. Some of the principal processes included in the reception of children are the diagnosis of persons and conditions, the formal transfer of responsibility to the agency, and the actual assump- tion of the personal care of the children. We assume in advance that every worthy organization desires to obtain such transfer of control properly and legally, and that in receiving a child the agency will always make the investigations and examinations 79 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES without which its services are likely to fall far short of the require- ments of duty and humanity. What Reception Involves. Some of the ideas, processes, and personalities involved in the reception of children by child-helping organizations should be emphasized. Temporary care always implies incomplete case study, deferred legal decisions, possible rehabilitation of homes, or possible support by relatives other than the parents. Care of children under such circumstances, while always important, is far less vital in its requirements than when home ties are entirely severed. The legal formalities of reception may be largely omitted. Legal relations are not necessary. An organization may, out of pure charity and sympathy, at once meet emergencies without red tape or more than simple inquiries by way of research. In many cases it will matter little whether the chil- dren are assigned to a child-placing agency or to a child-caring institution. It is comparatively unimportant during the brief period involved whether the care given be institutional or family. Yet when the boarding-out of such children can be carefully and systematically done, as is the case in Boston, Philadelphia, and San Francisco, this method of care should generally be given the preference if the children are normal in mind and do not require hospital treatment. When the reception is the prelude to permanent care, that is, for a probable period of years, the case is different, and the im- portance of the action is greatly magnified. The formalities of case and family study, of regular commitments by courts of law, and of medical and psychological examinations, are all proper and pertinent. Emergency cases may be given immediate aid and temporary care while the necessary red tape is being unwound; but no children should be counted permanent wards until every essential social and legal requirement is met. And the receiving organization should be convinced that it is able to do more for the children than any other agency or institution, or should have the power to reassign the work to those who can best care for and develop them. In permanent cases the care and responsibility are not limited to weeks or months, after which the children are to return to the guardianship of blood relatives. The organization takes the place 80 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN of parents and other relatives, becomes accountable for the wel- fare of its wards, and assumes the responsibility of providing di- rectly or indirectly for their care, education, and training for citizenship. The assumption of so great a liability, covering a term of years and a large, if indefinite, financial obligation, is so serious and important that no organization should lightly or hastily accept it. On the other hand, no court or other recog- nized authority should assign a child or children to any person or organization without satisfactory assurance that the welfare of such wards and of society will be promoted by its action. Receptions According to Function. Each agency or institu- tion has, or should have, a special mission or function, according to which it orders its receptions and accomplishes its work. Each is supposed to give at least really needed care or service to some special or depressed class of children, and to do the work better than it can be done by any other available organization. The type, character, capacity, and facilities of the organization de- termine the class, age, sex, and numbers of children received. Institutions usually limit their receptions to members of definite general classes, as dependents, delinquents, or defectives; or to groups within such classes, as infants, or orphans, or boys or girls of certain ages. To do good work according to modern ideas the type of buildings, the equipment, and the staffs of workers must be fitted to the classes served. Agencies, which arrange for and handle many children without more than a very brief period of direct care, are able to extend their work over several and sometimes all classes of children requiring benevolent aid. Some agencies, like the associated charities and societies for the prevention of cruelty ‘to children, are related mainly tofamilies and social groups. Others, like the child welfare associations, engaged in the distribution of pure milk and the prevention of infant mortality, or the children’s home societies, devoted to finding homes for the homeless, specialize and do direct work for children. Those that assume the care of children and have definite methods of promoting their welfare, are the organiza- tions whose functions are now being considered. Sacredness of the Work. This work includes the obligation of case study, of the careful selection of homes and environment, 6 81 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES of the wise fitting of children into families, and of constant and adequate supervision until their wards are grown and self-de- pendent. Dr. Hastings H. Hart says of such a work: “This is a divine mission. ‘A Father of the fatherless and a God of the widows is God in his holy habitation,’ says the Psalmist; and he continues: “God setteth the solitary in families.’ It is the mission of the Children’s Aid Society to put itself in the place of God, and to undertake to decide for an innocent and helpless child who shall be his father, who shall be his mother, where shall be his dwelling place, what shall be his religious training, what shall be his in- tellectual training, what shall be his industrial training; in short what shall be his whole opening and opportunity in life; what shall be his destiny here and hereafter. . . . This mission calls for the highest degree of wisdom, conscience, and fidelity.” This vivid statement does not overdraw the seriousness and far-reaching importance of that relation which begins with the reception of a child by a child-helping organization. The large number of or- ganizations in the United States now doing careless and haphazard child-placing should soberly study their fields and their missions, adopt approved modern methods of service, and prepare facilities for work of high quality, before taking another ward into care. Requests to Receive Children. Every agency should guard its admissions by requiring written applications from responsible persons in all possible cases. Usually a printed form should be provided so as to obtain detailed and uniform information. This red tape should be insisted on for the protection of the organiza- tions and the welfare of the wards. When parents, guardians, or relatives apply for the reception of the children, many significant details of family history can be obtained. When applications come from court or charity officials, representatives of churches, or workers in philanthropic organizations, often no family history or other needed information is given, making special research necessary. The agency should be sure both that the applicant has authority to act and that the case is one requiring such assistance, before making any decision. 1 Address to Children’s Aid Society of Western Pennsylvania, 1912. 82 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN Taking Children from Parents. A social worker of former years once declared: “The fact that a parent is willing to give up a child is prima facie evidence that the child should be taken from that parent and placed in a foster home.” Such arguments have been entirely outgrown in most places. It is not always best to take children from parents who are willing to give them up. The situa- tion may merely call for missionary work in the form of moral teaching, clear information, or physical help. Many a case of apparent lack of love for children has proved on investigation to be five parts ignorance, four parts desperation because of poverty, and perhaps one part heartlessness. It is a serious thing to relieve parents of their parental obligations. It is often our duty to persuade or constrain them to care for their own children. The family relation is not to be lightly broken, and parents should be held to their parental duties except for the most urgent and com- pelling reasons. On the other hand it is not right to leave children with parents regardless of the parents’ character and fitness to rear them. Those who are immoral, positively criminal, afflicted with con- tagious or infectious diseases, or decidedly deficient mentally, are unfit to bear or rear children. The state and philanthropic or- ganizations must sometimes step in to save the progeny already in existence, and take measures to prevent further reproduction by these classes. The entire legal severance of parental ties may be demanded to promote the welfare of the children and safeguard the interests of society. In every case the needs and character- istics of each person involved should be thoroughly studied, and the care and education of all children really dependent should be arranged with all possible wisdom and devotion. Reception Sources. While the legal basis upon which children may be received varies in different states, the reception sources of agency wards most commonly productive are four in number. 1. The Courts. It is now almost universal to have district, or county, or superior courts hold special sessions as juvenile courts, in which all matters pertaining to dependency or delin- quency in children are adjudicated. Child-placing agencies re- ceive many of their wards from such courts. Many social workers 83 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES urge that all be thus received. Dr. Hart says: “The guardian- ship of a child should never be changed without a court decree.” 2. Poor Officials. The directors of the poor, county commis- sioners, or other local officers connected with the distribution of relief, usually have authority to assign dependent children to agencies for care, although in some states full legal control depends upon the courts. 3. Relatives and Friends. A majority of the children cared for by both child-placing agencies and child-caring institutions are re- ceived directly from relatives and friends. In many cases the care desired is only temporary, and the agency or institution does not become guardian of the persons of such children. Frequently partial or even full payment for the cost of support is pledged by widows or widowers, or deserted wives or husbands. They, or well-to-do friends, often appeal to such organizations for the care of children to avoid the stigma of appeal to courts or poor boards. In a majority of the states many children are also fully surrendered to the agencies and institutions by parents and guardians through a written release giving entire control and guardianship of the persons of the children to the organizations. The legal powers of such surrenders, especially in the matter of consent to adoption, are more fully considered in later pages. 4. Other Agencies. Churches, charity organization societies, humane societies, social settlements, and other similar organiza- tions closely connected with charitable work and the improvement of the conditions of the poor, often aid needy or orphan children to find care and guardianship by suitable agencies and institutions. In a study made by the writer of 18,048 children cared for by the agencies and institutions of Pennsylvania, the reception sources were found to be as follows: Juvenile courts, 23 per cent; county poor boards, 7 per cent; relatives and friends, 57 per cent; and other agencies, 13 per cent.? Case Study. Careless receptions in the earlier years of modern child-placing agencies were only a little less common and regret- table than equally careless placing-out of children. Neither can 1See pages 133 to 140. 2 Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1915, p. 232. 84 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN be allowed in the light of twentieth century experience and re- quirements. What is technically called “case study,” or syste- matic investigation of the children themselves, their families, and their former environment, is now a part of the everyday work of all up-to-date organizations. The following paragraph expresses convictions based on both study and experience: “The careful investigation of every case where the dependency of a child or a family of children is under consideration, is no longer a matter of choice but of necessity. Social welfare work has pro- gressed to the point where neglect of case study by an agency or an institution is counted almost criminal. It is not enough to accept statements of alleged facts by persons most interested in having the child accepted by the agency or admitted to the institution. Personal investigation of the child and its family, the conditions and the environment, by trained or experienced agents, is now re- quired by the practically unanimous voice of the social service world.””? Formerly, limited inquiries were generally made by superin- tendents, district superintendents, special agents, or by institu- tional committees on admission and discharge, as to the circum- stances and conditions leading to the appeal for help. Very often even these regular workers had little conception of the problems involved, or how a real investigation should be undertaken. Chil- dren were usually received when a superficial study of the situa- tion seemed to warrant such action. Sometimes only a few min- utes, seldom more than a few hours, were devoted to inquiries. The result was that thousands of children who should have been provided for otherwise, were wholly separated from relatives and friends and placed-out among absolute strangers. The newer and better method, now rapidly becoming universal, calls for careful preliminary study by trained workers in every case; efforts to solve family problems and to preserve family life wherever possible; search for and utilization of more distant rela- tives when they can be found and induced to aid needy children of their own blood; and for the children really homeless, neglected, dependent, delinquent, or defective, custodial care or family 1Child Welfare Work in California, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916, p. 213. 85 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES placement of precisely the sort which they are found to need. All of this is facilitated by co-operation with other organizations, and by bureaus for the confidential exchange of information.! Medical Examination Needed. Before or at the time a child is accepted and received by the child-placing agency, whether for temporary care or as a permanent ward, an examination should be made by a competent physician. This examination should be as elaborate and complete as an examination for life insurance, and should be fully recorded on proper blanks. In some cases the ex- amination will show that the child is not a subject for agency care, and should without delay be assigned to a special institution. In others it will at once be apparent that the child should be isolated because of specific or other contagious disease, or should go to an infirmary for special treatment. In still other cases, physical conditions will be revealed that will not prevent reception by the agency but will set its agents quickly at work preparing the child for minor operations on eye, ear, nose, throat, and skin defects.? Detailed Diagnosis. That the reception of children by a child- helping organization implies the obligation of thorough case study cannot be too often or too positively emphasized; so at the cost of some repetitions attention is asked to some of the elements of a detailed diagnosis. In order to know whether or not to receive a child and what to do with him or her after reception, an intensive study of many matters is absolutely essential. The ordinary cases of dependency usually require the division of the inquiry into two related sections. 1. Study of the Family. The personalities of parents and other relatives must be traced. Their character and standing in the community, their mental strength and education, their vocations and financial ability must be ascertained. It is also necessary to know their physical condition, the state of their health, whether or not they have tuberculosis, syphilis, or any other infectious or transmissible disease; their personal habits in regard to intem- perance, gambling, begging, or other objectionable practices; their 1Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1915, pp. 240, 241. 2 Admission and Discharge of Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1916, p. 4. 86 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN religious faith and church connections; their personal relations to the child or children involved, as to affection, control, and disci- pline, proper training, kindness or cruelty. If inability or unfitness to give the children proper homes and care is shown, it will be necessary to estimate whether or not such disability is merely temporary or is incurable and permanent. The study of the family should not be limited to the parents. It should include if possible all other near relatives, grandparents, brothers, sisters, uncles, and aunts. Often within these degrees of relationship some will be found fit, able, and willing to care for children whose parents have died, failed, or broken down. Blood is thicker than water. Homeless little children have a mighty pull upon the heartstrings and pocketbooks of their own kin. It is the agency’s duty to utilize that pull whenever it is proper to do so, rather than to call upon community benevolence. 2. Study of the Child Itself. This involves not only the child’s personality at the time of examination but also matters related to past experiences, present conditions, and future prospects. Six lines of inquiry are suggested: a. A study of the child’s heredity, to discover if possible whether it is likely to be a victim of feeble-mindedness, insanity, epilepsy, or syphilis; or liable to develop tendencies toward alcoholism or tuberculosis; b. Of the child’s previous environment, associations, and op- portunities—its home life, school work, church and Sunday school privileges, neighborhood conditions, and personal companionships; c. Of the child’s physical condition. This will include a thorough examination by a competent physician in regard to the eyes, ears, nose, throat, teeth, skin, heart, lungs, digestive apparatus, and all bodily organs and functions; d. Of the child’s mentality. This involves a psychological ex- amination by an expert, using the Binet-Simon and other tests, for all children over three years of age, to determine normality or abnormality, special aptitudes, relative mental age, and educa- tional progress. In some cases additional study will be required if children are found erratic, emotionally upset, or nervously dis- ordered, in which case a psychiatrist should be consulted. e. A social study of the child is exceedingly important, in order 87 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES to determine what kind of a home will be best for it. This will determine its disposition and preferences, its likes and dislikes, its attractiveness or unattractiveness; and in an older child its acquired habits and manners. The facts obtained should be definitely recorded. f. A study of the vocational experience and possibilities of chil- dren old enough to have worked, or who will soon be of an age to begin to work for wages, is also recommended. Accurate Records Needed. It will not be possible to make good use of the many facts obtained in a detailed diagnosis of this kind unless carefully prepared forms are used to secure uni- formity, and unless all such records are filed and preserved. In connection with each child’s reception all possible facts, reports, letters, photographs, and legal documents bearing upon the case should be collected, arranged systematically, and filed for future reference. To this original collection should be added the various papers that record the progress of the case to its completion, when the child finally passes out of the care or control of the organization. The forms and filing cases required for the above work are numerous, practical, and not excessive in cost. They can quickly and easily be adapted to the necessary records of any agency or institution. To provide the special forms and systems needed by child-placing agencies is beyond the scope of this manual, but a book has been published that will, at small cost, give the needed suggestions and information.! Formal Reception. There should always be a definite basis for the reception of children by an agency, such as a court order, an agreement with directors of the poor, or the less desirable plan of a written release or surrender from parents or legal guardians. The natural desire to avoid red tape or unnecessary formalities is fully appreciated. Yet it is so vitally important to have definite documentary authority behind receptions that it should never be omitted. Lack of formal releases or court orders may become a source of untold trouble, for without them the agencies have no valid claim or legal right to the children. 1See Elements of Record Keeping for Child-helping Organizations, Georgia G. Ralph, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1915, price $1.50. 88 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN There is also another side to the matter, almost equally im- portant, and yet too often overlooked. Such orders or agreements, with the historical data included in the case study, may in time to come be essential in establishing the child’s identity and his right to family recognition or his title to an inheritance, or help him to find his brothers and sisters. The papers in each case should be clear, legal, and as full and perfect as possible, so as to establish the rights and relations of the agency to the child, and also the child’s personal rights and relations to both the agency and the family from which he sprung. Reception on Surrenders. In most of the states it is legally permissible for parents to assign their rights and titles to their children by a simple written instrument, usually called a “sur- render.” The use of such instruments is so liable to abuse, and so fraught with danger to the welfare of all concerned, that their general employment is deprecated, and it is urged that the rights of parenthood and guardianship commonly given or transferred under them be everywhere limited by law. The use of surrenders has been found very convenient in the case of unmarried mothers who desire to escape publicity and wish to rid themselves humanely but completely of children born out of wedlock. Often such action is hastily and unnecessarily taken under the spur of financial distress, the advice of unwise friends, and the nerve-broken condition of unwelcome motherhood. A reasonable delay, counsel from wiser friends, efforts to consummate deferred marriage or to win the co-operation of parents and rela- tives, will often render a complete separation of mother and child unnecessary. If the right to sign a complete surrender did not - exist, many better solutions of the problems of illegitimacy would be possible. Laws should be enacted forbidding parents thus to dispose of their children, and requiring a court proceeding to trans- fer parental rights to others or to an incorporated child-caring organization. In cases where it is proper and desirable that publicity should be avoided to favor an unfortunate mother, this can be done, as in Illinois, by allowing the mother to file in court her “appearance and consent” without appearing in person. This does not inter- fere with the adjudication of the case by a disinterested and re- 89 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES sponsible court, the judge first deciding whether or not the child should be provided for separately from the mother, and then pro- ceeding with the making of the adoption. In the states where surrenders are valid, they are taken from all sorts of parents and under the most varied conditions of need and pressure. Married parents, in sickness and in deep poverty, are often asked to give up their children. Torn by the mingled forces that contend in their minds, on the one side love for their offspring and desire to be near them, on the other the claim that the welfare of the children will be secured by their surrender to some child-caring organization, parents often sign the release papers hardly knowing what they do. It is neither right nor wise to allow them to take the responsibility of this action under such circumstances; and it is neither safe nor judicious to give to agencies and institutions the power to obtain full control and guardianship in this way. In fact there are so few cases where the surrender method of reception can be wisely and safely used, that in our judgment it should be entirely abolished. The only document of this nature that should be permitted is a written agreement providing for temporary care, under which no legal or vital rights are involved. But surrenders exist today and probably will continue to be legal in many states for years to come. The wording of most sur- renders includes especially the relinquishment of parental control over the persons of the children, the release of all claims upon their services during their minority, and the conferring of the guardianship of the persons of the children upon the society or institution arranging the reception. Such documents are often made the basis of authority on which the organization later con- sents to the full legal adoption of such children by the families in which they have been placed. A discussion of the last men- tioned matter is given in the chapter on the selection and place- ment of children.! The agencies and institutions should have full control and guardianship of the persons of the children in per- manent care and the right to consent to their adoption; but this authority should be conferred under proper statutes by courts of competent jurisdiction. 1See Chapter VIII, p. 133. 90 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN Reception by Default. In some states a parent who has placed a child in an institution for care, agreeing to contribute period- ically to its support, loses all right to the child if he or she fails to communicate with the institution for a certain period, or omits the promised financial contributions. In some states this period is only one year, in others three years; but at its end, if the parent is lost sight of or has not fulfilled his obligations, the child auto- matically becomes the legal ward of the institution. This is even worse than the severance of parental relations by a signed sur- render, and ought to be abolished everywhere. Reception by Favor. There are faulty bases of reception other than the lack of legal or proper papers. The work is supposed to be purely altruistic, but altruism may select its subjects. Not always is the selection so made as to avoid legitimate criticism. A child whose admission will guarantee a certain public appropria- tion or a reasonably certain payment from a willing parent, is almost sure to be admitted anywhere; but for a child without financial backing some doors swing on rusty hinges. There is always plenty of room for the child who has money or influential friends behind him; but some institutions can be officially “full” at any time when unbacked or unprofitable children are offered. Court Process Best Basis. The only proper basis for the recep- tion of wards in permanent relations, including the legal guardian- ship of their persons, as has been said, is by a regular court process. Parents are generally under such stress of feeling and such com- pulsion of poverty, when arranging for the care of their children, that they are unfit to exercise good judgment or wisely forecast the future. A judicial order, after the patient hearing of evi- dence by an impartial judge, is the only right basis for the com- plete separation of parent and child. The most progressive states, especially Illinois, have already taken statutory measures to limit the use and authority of instruments of the “surrender” kind, have abolished the automatic control of children after parental default or apparent abandonment, and have arranged to have any complete severance of parental ties and rights accomplished by regular court process. Papers and Records. It is vitally important that copies of all court orders, agreements with poor directors, duly attested sur- 91 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES renders from parents or guardians, and all such papers, should invariably be obtained and then as carefully and systematically filed in fireproof receptacles. Offices deficient in fireproof storage can do as some societies are now doing—make a copy of each document for office use, and file all originals or certified copies in some bank vault or other fireproof depository. Official Reception. The authority formally to receive wards is usually lodged in the agency’s executive officer—the superinten- dent, manager, or executive secretary. He studies the reports of the case workers and of the medical examiner and notes the court order or other papers in the case. Sometimes he will order a personal supplementary study of the child before making a decision. When sure the agency should receive the child, his affirmative completes the formal reception. In a few agencies and most institutions all receptions are passed upon by a committee on admission, usually drawn from the mem- bership of the board of trustees or managers. When the executive officer is not a person trained in social service, and the committee is reasonably advanced in ideas and devoted to the work, this plan is probably as good as can be devised. But too often a com- mittee on admission so selected lacks both training and experience in social work, and is but superficially interested in the problems of dependency. The result is that the committee is neither able nor willing to attempt any technical study of the cases presented for consideration. Very frequently children are admitted or rejected by these committees, not upon accurate knowledge of the children or their condition, or upon grounds of social needs or institution duties, but upon lesser considerations of temporary finance or institutional convenience. Institutions so served would be vastly benefited if their committees of admission would attend conferences of social workers; and it would be better still if some would study a term or two at schools of philanthropy.! Co-operation and Reassignments. Very few child-placing agencies confine their work entirely to children suitable for actual placement in family homes. In fact, it is almost impossible al- 1See The Job of Being a Trustee, and Admission and Discharge of Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. 92 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN ways to avoid receiving some unplaceable children. Sometimes all the children of a family must be provided for, part being candi- dates for institutional care as defectives or delinquents, others to be assigned later to relatives, and the remainder to be placed in selected families. Every year many complex cases will arise, calling for agency action but demanding great flexibility of rules and ability to adapt the methods of the organization to the situa- tion. Co-operation is here especially desirable for the organization and a real blessing to the better served social unfortunates. Formerly many agencies thought it a reflection upon their work when children were changed from their control and guardianship to some other organization. It was counted creditable to worry along some way with all sorts of cases, giving some kind of care to them, if once they were definitely accepted as wards. These organizations seldom made any real effort to define the condition, physical or mental, of their wards, and were content to blunder along indefinitely with repeaters or unplaceable children. The day of such narrow views is past. The “take any child” and “do everything” policy is superannuated. If all sorts of children are taken, it is with the understanding that by proper co-operation they will all be provided for in ways to secure their welfare. This, more distinctively than any in the past, is the co-operative era, the era of mutuality in service. It is now quite generally realized that in its central and prin- cipal work no one organization should assume or is able to perform all of the varied functions of the child welfare movement. Large communities have many allied organizations, usually working in fairly complete co-operation. Smaller communities generally have less varied organizations, and it may be necessary for some of them to multiply their functions to some extent. The multiplicity of efficient organizations in every state now makes co-operation both easy and essential. The needed service to depressed humanity can be rendered best by closely relat- ing all approved child-helping organizations: Child-placing agen- cies, orphanages, children’s homes, humane societies, societies for the prevention of cruelty to children, associated charities, rescue homes, general and children’s hospitals, social settlements, public 93 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES relief officers, probation officers, juvenile and domestic relations courts, and all sorts of city, county, and state institutions. Selfish customs and inadequate state laws still make it difficult in many places to arrange desirable reassignments quickly and legally. The writer in past years, when superintendent of a large child-placing agency, often had to keep incorrigible delinquents or unplaceable morons a long time in too close association with normal dependents, simply because uncodrdinated official action and legal red tape prevented speedy reassignments. The same conditions exist today in many states. There should be a proper legal basis for the expeditious reassignment of wards, and mutual agreements among the various social service agencies and indi- viduals, public and private, so as to secure this action whenever the welfare of the children demands it. In most cases, reassign- ments should become effective only upon judicial approval, to prevent injustice to the children and to safeguard the interests of the weaker organizations. Personal Reception. At the last we come to the child himself, and his entrance into the custody of the agency that has become his guardian. If possible this element of reception, the actual taking of the child into agency care, should have even more special consideration than any other. The agent who first takes the child in charge, the matron of the receiving home who welcomes him to that temporary abode, the attendants who minister to his wants, should all be kindly, tactful, and sympathetic. It is sometimes forgotten that we are dealing with real person- alities, boys and girls with sensitive natures, longing hearts, and inquiring minds. Many times the writer has been greatly troubled because these hearts and minds were ignored, or were treated with disregard or even contempt. He has heard the terms “brats” and “paupers” used in the presence of the children themselves as indifferently as though they were unthinking cattle; their points of defect or excellence talked over before them, very much as though they were pigs or puppies. And in the arrangements for their disposition too often social workers forgot the children, in striving to do what was best for the society or to make a finan- cial showing at the end of the fiscal year. It has been said that under the repetition of case work agents 94 RECEPTION OF CHILDREN grow mechanical, that they cease to “rejoice with them that do rejoice and weep with them that weep.’’ This is not true of the better class of social workers. On the contrary, quite the opposite is true. Enlarged knowledge and increased experience in people of right character only tend to render their sensibilities more acute and to broaden the reach of their sympathies. Constant contact with human distress is a severe strain upon the hearts and minds of all who engage in the service of depressed or troubled humanity. Nurses, physicians, and social workers are especially subject to such strain. But however hard it may be upon the worker whose sympathies are often deeply drawn upon, the wards of every society should be recognized as children; and no formalities, legalities, habits, or organization customs should prevent each one’s receiving a proper portion of genuine love, sympathy, and tenderness, along with food, clothes, and shelter. Neither the children nor their families should become merely “cases.” 95 CHAPTER VI RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS extensive find it necessary to operate as a part of their work small institutions, usually called receiving homes. The receiving home or temporary shelter has several important functions. It is a wayside inn on the road from homelessness to a home. It is a clinic for medical and surgical examination and treatment; a place for psychological examinations, in order that the mental age and characteristics of children may be ascertained. It is a school for brief courses in manners and conduct; and, in addition, a place where human love and sympathy and Divine teaching and promise may reach lives that have too often pre- viously suffered physical, mental, and spiritual neglect. A receiving home should have all of the excellencies required in a first-class institution for the permanent care of children. It should add to these a number of facilities not essential to such institutions. The sun set long ago on the day when any sort of shelter, managed in any old way, was good enough for “charity children.” A receiving home must be a high-grade institution. Physical Essentials. The simplest form of the chief physical essentials in modern receiving homes may be condensed into three paragraphs. 1. Central Location. Assuming that the agency is to do a state-wide work, or at least to cover a considerable district, the first essential is a location reasonably central in the territory served and easily reached by public conveyance. Some receiving homes are greatly hindered in their work by locations a mile or more from the nearest street railroad. 2. Site. The site selected should be both attractive and sani- tary. Good views are educational. The tract should be large enough for ample building space, attractive lawns, and roomy 96 N cess all child-placing agencies whose work is at all SIONI11] « ODVOIHD ‘ALAIOOS CIV GNV JWOH S,NaNGTIHD SIONITI] aWO}{ FUIAIaIaY UOJSULAT ga Cato Rm FP Tout eG | Gartakry = 400 th corndor vou Conrider (bh - ¢ Boys (ayctaker Dr Room ABOyo =H ot Altic Flor Pan he Cater | Toikt Cost Je Lite Ones Auris i be ot f (a Ico (arctaxer Condor —— Lunen toro hon Fpcy th Cov ft fin P= Hyon {ow | art | Abi (Cooks Ged oii Scent Floor Plan poe Veranda i foc gh Sco o Dmg Hom Day fom a i ea il ries Hal Veo. A} een fituben Fen JH tng aon fe : ce ne oom Mekrons Room mp net |e) Br Flor Plan Evanston RecetviNnG Home—FLoor PLans 96b RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS playgrounds. It should be within easy reach of gas, water, sewer mains, and electric connections. Better pay double price for the right site than to do without such necessities. 3. Buildings. The original conception of a receiving home was a single building of considerable size, with a general dining room and large dormitories, whose prototype was the ordinary congre- gate orphanage. Most of the receiving homes now in operation in this country were the fruits of this conception, as several illus- trations in this volume clearly testify. Since the beginning of the twentieth century many modifications have been made. The improvements have included both interior rearrangement and the addition of other buildings to the central structure. No doubt if they were now to be replaced, cottage groups would generally be erected instead of single large buildings. Type of Buildings. Officers and managers of child-placing agencies now have the results of more than a quarter century of experience to guide them in deciding upon the type of buildings best adapted to their use as receiving homes. Some still favor the original type, but others have declared in favor of special cottage groups. Both must have adequate mention. 1. Single Buildings. When a single building is used, one with a capacity for about 50 children will generally be large enough for the average state society. The Iowa Children’s Home Society, between 1899 and 1910, had a home with a capacity for 40 chil- dren, and an average on hand of 29, and yet over 400 children each year passed through its halls. The majority of child-placing so- cieties will do less than this amount of work. The building used for a receiving home should be safe. It should be of either fireproof or slow-burning construction, and especially adapted to its line of work. A few societies are using old and poorly constructed buildings, aptly described by an out- spoken critic as “unsanitary fire-traps.” They will doubtless be abandoned soon for better structures. In erecting receiving homes especial attention should be given to interior arrangements. The dormitories should be small and varied, and there should be a number of individual rooms for both boys and girls. Ample and carefully arranged quarters should be provided for the officers and attendants. Bath and toilet facilities should be especially 7 97 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES abundant. The problems of adequate light, heat, and ventilation should be worked out with extreme care. Parlors are second in importance to playrooms. Either in the home itself or adjacent to it should be quarters for new children, separate from the main group, where they should be kept until it is reasonably certain that they bear no contagion; also a suitable infirmary, with a room equipped for minor operations. Full details cannot here be given. The two great essentials are sanitary conditions and con- venience for first-class service.! One of the best single building types is the Evanston Receiving Home of the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society.” 2. Cottage Group Plans. In recent years leading social work- ers have suggested the advantages of groups of cottages in place of single large buildings. Responding to definite inquiries from established child-placing agencies, the Department of Child- helping of the Russell Sage Foundation has described and recom- mended the erection of receiving homes on the cottage group plan. The general location and site requirements remain about the same as already presented, but instead of one large and rather costly building the plan calls for two or more cottages. Modern and sanitary frame or brick structures of the size needed can be erected at about the same cost as equal capacity under one roof. It is probable that the cost, exclusive of the site, need not exceed $1,000 per unit of capacity; or, for instance, to accommodate 50 children, $50,000. Two arrangements of the cottage group plan are presented, one for 36 and one for 60 children. a. Two Cottage Plan. Dr. Hastings H. Hart responded to a request to recommend receiving home plans in these words: “| would suggest that you erect two buildings instead of one. I would much rather have three than two. “Have a separate house for 12 boys, in which they will have sleeping rooms, a living room, and a playroom; which last may be in the basement. The boys’ cottage should contain three single sleeping rooms and three rooms for three beds each. On no account arrange for two boys ina room. Of course there will be a room for 1See Cottage and Congregate Institutions, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Charities Publication Committee, New York, 1910. 2 See picture and plans on pp. 96a, 96b. 08 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS the housemother. This cottage is not expected to have a dining room and kitchen. “Build a larger cottage to contain the girls and the little boys. Make arrangements for 12 older girls, for whom there should be three single sleeping rooms and three dormitories to contain three girls each. Make provision for 12 little children, five years old and under. These may all be put into one dormitory, or there may be two dormitories for six children each. This cottage should contain kitchen and dining room for the entire family, both chil- dren and adults. The employes should eat in the same dining room with the children. “The larger cottage should also contain suitable apartments for the employes. The matron should have a small sitting room, bedroom, and bath. A nurse should have a small room adjoining the little children’s dormitory. Another attendant should have a small room adjacent to the girls’ dormitory. It will also be neces- sary to have sleeping quarters for the cook, the laundress, and perhaps an additional employe. One or two rooms for these workers may be provided on the upper floor of the boys’ cottage. With the housemother of the boys’ cottage, this definitely provides for six or seven workers and 36 children. “T should advise by all means that no provision be made for nursing babies at the receiving home, but that all such be boarded out in carefully selected private homes; the compensation for such board to range from $2.50 to $5.00 per week, according to amount of care needed. A very young baby or a sick baby will require © more care and more compensation than a healthy child between six months and a year old. It will cost no more to board these babies than it will to keep them in the receiving home, and it will be a much safer proposition. Boarded-out babies should be under the watchful care of a physician and a visiting trained nurse. “Several things are essential in planning any such home. First, all dormitories except single rooms should be located on corners so as to give cross ventilation. Second, the kitchen should also have cross ventilation. Third, there should be plenty of porch room in order that the children may get out of doors in bad weather with- out getting into the mud and storm. Fourth, the best of plumbing is a necessity. Cheap plumbing is always extravagant in the end. 99 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Fifth, good floors are a prime essential. If hardwood floors are used, maple is the best material. If southern pine is used, every piece should be selected with the utmost care. Sixth, if possible employ a competent architect who knows something about plan- ning children’s institutions.” b. Three Cottage Plan. This contains an administration or utility building and two residence cottages, each with a capacity for 25 children. Special detention quarters in the main building provide for 10 newcomers, so that the total capacity is for 60 children. The administration building should have on its main floor the society offices; reception rooms, one of which is to serve as a school- room if needed, or as a general gathering room for social occasions, using ordinary tables and chairs instead of fixed desks and seats; and a general dining room and kitchen, with pantries and re- frigerators. The second floor should provide detention quarters for newcomers, the capacity not to exceed 10; an infirmary, with an operating room and facilities for medical and psychological ex- aminations; rooms for several workers; proper bath and lavatory equipment; and a sewing room with clothing storage. The base- ment may contain a laundry with power washers and wringers, and a steam or hot-water heating plant to supply all of the build- ings. Or the heating plant and laundry can be locatedin a rear wing or in an entirely separate building, leaving most of the base- ment available for a gymnasium and general playroom. . One cottage should be used exclusively for the boys five years of age or older. This cottage, like the one for 12 boys in the two- cottage arrangement, need not have a kitchen and dining room, as all of the meals would be provided in the general dining room. The sleeping quarters should contain five single rooms, four rooms for three beds each, and an eight-bed dormitory. The main floor should provide quarters for the housemother; a kitchenette for special uses, such as heating water, getting up lunches, making candy, and popping corn; a general sitting room, and a playroom. The other cottage should be used for the girls and all children under five years old. Ten children from one to five years old can be grouped for care in special rooms, with an attendant of their own. Quarters for the older girls should contain five single sleep- 100 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS ing rooms and a ten-bed dormitory. A housemother and one at- tendant, perhaps at times two attendants, one of whom should be a trained nurse, will be needed for this cottage. The workers and all of the older children will take their meals at the general dining room, but a kitchenette with appliances for sterilizing milk, pre- paring lunches, and cleaning utensils, with a small dining room, will be necessary. While the capacity will be the same, the classes served and the work done will require that this cottage be some- what larger than that for the larger boys. Not including the office workers, this plan to care for 50 or 60 children will require a matron and from eight to ten attendants, besides the cook, laundress, and janitor. If a little more capacity is needed and the means are available, another cottage can be added to good advantage, to be devoted entirely to newcomers instead of quartering them in the main building. Such a cottage, arranged for the accommodation of both sexes, would divide its capacity of about 20 so as to care for about 12 boys on the second floor and for eight girls on the first floor. It should be provided with its own kitchen and dining room, so as to be used when necessary 4s a complete domestic unit; but ordinarily the inmates would be served in the general dining room, after the meals of the main body had been eaten and the children had gone. Such a cottage would add 20 to the ag- gregate capacity, making it 80, for the quarters provided in the main building could be utilized for special cases, perhaps of the oldest children. The additional cottage would improve the qual- ity and convenience of the plant. Working Force. The employes and other persons who care for the children during their stay in the home have been called the soul of the institution. Very properly, as standards advance, the requirements in regard to the working force call constantly for higher and better types of workers. Let us divide those concerned into three groups for consideration. 1. General Employes. Only persons of clean character, sym- pathetic nature, and good working ability should be employed. It is not enough merely to love children; a worker must be capable along some definite line of work. The matron should have special social training and experience, be soundly religious without being 101 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES narrowly sectarian, and possess good executive ability. There should be at least one trained nurse. It is a mistake to try to save money by using too few employes or by hiring a cheap grade of workers. Overworked and underpaid employes mean invaria- bly slighted details, extravagant use of supplies, failure to study the needs of individual children, and nervous strain that reacts in crossness, irritability, hasty judgment, and often harsh treatment of the children. A receiving home needs more workers in ratio to the average number of children in care than an orphanage. The children are an ever-changing group. Many come from quarters filthy and infested with vermin. They must be bathed, examined, fitted with new clothing, made to feel at home, and given other indi- vidual attention. A majority must have immediate medical treat- ment or minor operations by experts. All must be comforted, their nerves quieted, and assured that they are among real friends. And all must be prepared as soon as possible to go out to new homes. The average orphanage requires a worker for each six children. The receiving home should have at least one for each four children of the average in care. The officer in charge of a receiving home usually is called “matron.” The term “superintendent” is seldom or never em- ployed, as that title is generally borne by the executive officer of the agency. 2. Medical Staff. The examination given to children at recep- tion is only preliminary. Real medical attention should begin as soon as the child is personally in the agency’s care. Mr. C. Spencer Richardson writes thus: “Many of the children have been victims of poverty, ignorance, or indifference; and bodily defects which might easily have been corrected by prompt attention have been allowed to develop unchecked. The first obligation of those to whom the guardianship of a child has been transferred is to remedy the harm which home neglect has caused.’”! A few societies employ but a single regular physician, who is only nominally paid for his services, and is not called unless there is serious illness. Where such an arrangement is in force, to carry 1 Physical Care of Dependent Children in Institutions, C. Spencer Richardson, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1916, p. 6. 102 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS out the duties implied by the quotation just given is impossible. Many societies have a medical staff, often giving extensive service without financial compensation, and composed of several attend- ing physicians of both sexes and several specialists. The staff method is much to be preferred. It gives immediate counsel and aid on all lines of disease and defectiveness, and enables the society to begin at once the required treatment. In addition to the gen- eral practitioners, acting as attending physicians, the staff should include a dentist, an oculist, an ear, nose and throat specialist, a dermatologist, and an orthopedic surgeon. 3. Psychologist. Closely related to the medical staff, but not necessarily connected with it, is another necessity of the modern child-placing society—the psychological expert whose duty it is to determine the mental age and possibilities of the children. The writer believes that it would be of great advantage to have each ward examined, and his or her mental age and peculiarities re- corded. At least each child that shows evidence of backwardness or abnormality should be tested. It has been the common expe- rience of all child-caring agencies that in spite of all possible pre- liminary precautions some feeble-minded, neurotic, or otherwise abnormal children are received. Study of all by a competent psychologist is the only way to obtain guidance for right action. All borderline or distinctly defective cases should have long and careful attention. Those merely backward should be recognized as soon as possible and so treated as to stimulate restoration to normal conditions. Those positively feeble-minded or epileptic should be humanely placed in a suitable institution. Let it be said again: Knowingly to place a feeble-minded child in a home where one of normal mentality is expected, is a social crime not to be tolerated.) Physical Care of Wards. “A reasonable standard of physical care in an institution,”’ continues Mr. Richardson in his treatise on this subject, “is one that is available at a moderate cost; that enables a child to assimilate the education offered; that includes the best methods, old and new; and that develops a sound physique 1See Abnormal Children, Bernard Hollander, E. P. Dutton & Co., New York , 1916, Chapters II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII. 103 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES to meet the requirements of later life.”! The receiving home has the child only a very limited time, but the physical care given should emphasize every one of these points. In view of the gen- erally inferior quality of its former environment, and the uncer- tainty and strangeness of that to which the child soon must go, the helpful and remedial possibilities of the receiving home should be utilized to the utmost. Every child should be stronger, health- ier, and more nearly perfect because of its stay in the receiving home. Several matters pertaining to the physical care of children may be touched upon in a little greater detail. 1. Dietary. The receiving home should not fail to have a care- fully arranged and varied dietary. Few are now giving sufficient attention to food values or to the necessity of building strong bodies. In some there is an excessive use of starchy foods, with nothing to balance them. It has been said that one of the deepest ruts of an institution leads from the kitchen to the dining room, meaning that at all seasons the same fare unvaried takes that track. Menus should not be selected because they are easy for the cook, but should be arranged and rearranged for the benefit of the children. Appropriate menus afford well-balanced, nourishing meals, appe- tizing and attractive to those who eat them. The Boys’ and Girls’ Aid Society of Oregon has put a graduate dietitian in charge of its receiving home kitchen and dining room, with good results in the health and development of its wards. The food cost is no greater, the meals are more varied and appetizing than formerly, they possess the proper elements to meet the needs of growing children, and the service is very much improved in every way. Others may well profit by this example and suggestion. The writer also calls attention to the Standard Dietary for an Orphanage, published by the California State Board of Charities and Correc- tions, in which can be found numerous menus for institutions for children, and much valuable information.? 2. Dining Room. Many receiving homes ought to improve 1 Physical Care of Dependent Children in Institutions, C. Spencer Richardson, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916, p. 4. 2 A Standard Dietary for an Orphanage, Adele S. Jaffa, M.D., State Board of Chari- ties and Corrections, San Francisco, Cal., 1914. 104 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS their dining rooms and their equipment. They are imitating the orphanages of fifty years ago. Long bare or oilcloth-covered tables, with backless benches for seats, are relics ‘of barbarism. Enameled metal dishes, often chipped and scaled so as to expose rusty patches, and rusty cutlery and spoons, should be replaced everywhere with a fair quality of china and plated ware. Table- cloths and napkins have a distinct educational value, to say nothing of the need for decent service. Chairs should always be provided, and cheerfully decorated walls should surround the transformed tables. Light and beauty should be utilized to make the youthful diners happy and promote the digestion of well- selected and properly cooked food. Silence at meals is an ancient prison requirement, and it is a disgrace to a modern child-caring institution to require it. These are not prisoners; they are young boys and girls whose only crime is that they have been neglected, abused, deserted, or robbed of their parents by death. They are entitled to all the joy and cheer and hope that belong to any children. Make the receiv- ing home meal time conform as nearly as possible to the ideal— the family group in the dining room of the ordinary private home. 3. Milk Supply. To disregard the sources and quality of the receiving home’s milk supply is likely to result in epidemics of typhoid, diphtheria, scarlet fever, sore throat, and bowel troubles, often involving deaths of both children and adults. When the cows, stables, and farm hands are dirty; when pails and cans are not sterilized; when milk is left exposed to flies and filth; or when the cows are actually diseased, the milk becomes alive with bacteria, and sickness and death are the result. Every executive officer of a receiving home should know, not take it for granted, that none of these things is true in regard to the milk supply of his institution. Nearly all the great dairies of the country as a matter of business find it profitable to sell clean milk, and many of them are pasteurizing it. However, less than 20 per cent of the smaller dairies of America use pasteurization, and in very many of them sanitary care is so neglected that pure milk is impossible! Personal investigation is the only way to 1 Physical Care of Dependent Children in Institutions, C. Spencer Richardson, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916, p. 13. 105 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES safety. Thus reasonable cleanliness may be enforced, and the institution itself can pasteurize the milk used with very little effort and expense.! 4. Bathing Facilities. Adequate bathing facilities include both an ample number of tubs, supplied with hot and cold water, and well-arranged showers. There is a physical and a moral tonic in frequent baths. In the older institutions, including some of the first receiving homes, one or two tubs for the use of all of the inmates of the building, whose capacity was anywhere from 30 to 100 children, were deemed sufficient, and a single bath a week all that cleanliness required. Treble or quadruple the number of tubs, and if possible daily baths, are now demanded in the same institutions; while in many cases showers have simplified and improved the service. Many superintendents now favor the shower for all purposes except for the special soaking and scrubbing of newcomers, for the babies and smallest children, and the frail and delicate ones, all of whom must be aided by attendants. A bathing pool is a fine thing but can be provided only by those financially favored. 5. Toilet Articles. Each child should have for his exclusive use a number of toilet articles, including comb, hair-brush, tooth- brush, tooth-paste, soap, and towels. It is usual to keep these in the wash room. Each child should have a small compartment or case to hold them, marked with his name. Towels should not be hung so closely together as to touch, for if this happens the danger is almost as great as in the use of a common towel. 6. Dormitories. Formerly it was customary to have large rooms with from 20 to 100 beds in them for institutional children. Now the tendency is for fewer children to occupy the same sleeping room, thus promoting modesty and healthfulness. Dormitories, as already indicated, should be small, seldom with more than 10 beds in a single room. Movable screens and curtains are used in some institutions to give a minimum of privacy to the larger chil- dren. Large boys and girls should be given either individual rooms or cubicles, or rooms for three, or four, never for two. 1Op. cit., pp. 16-18. 106 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS Every possible means should be employed to avoid or prevent the wrong and precocious development of sex ideas. It is very insanitary to crowd dormitories or smaller sleeping rooms. As a minimum each child should have about 50 square feet of floor space, and not less than 500 cubic feet of air sur- rounding him in his sleeping quarters. The New York law re- quires 600 cubic feet of air for each dormitory inmate in a child- caring institution. The space necessities are modified somewhat by the facilities for free ventilation. Some dormitories have only small windows on a single side, and with no cross ventilation can be healthful sleeping places for only a few children, and hardly for them. The ideal in this respect is reached in a few institutions, where large windows on three sides provide unlimited ventilation. The use of outdoor sleeping porches is also heartily advocated.! 7. Care of Infants. All child-placing agencies are called upon to provide for infants. Their temporary care pending placement in foster homes is a very important matter. The use of nurseries at the receiving homes has heretofore been the method almost universally employed. It is even now the common practice. Wherever receiving home nurseries are used, the best modern facilities should be provided, and every precaution taken to pre- vent the spread of infant diseases and epidemics. But, in the judgment of leading authorities on child care, nursery work for small babies in receiving homes should be abandoned. There- fore, in deference to this modern sentiment no description of nursery essentials is given. The approved plan of the best child-placing societies now is to care for no children under one year of age at the receiving home. All babies less than a year old should be boarded in selected private fam- ilies, no more than two or three to be in the care of one woman at the same time. This plan gives individual care to every infant, and pre- vents epidemics and the spread of bowel trouble and other diseases. The cost will be no greater than good nursery care, averaging from $3.00 to $5.00 per week per child, according to age and condition.” 1Op. cit., p. 16. 2 For special discussion of causes and conditions, see Infant Mortality: Its Re- lation to Social and Industrial Conditions, Henry H. Hibbs, Jr., Ph.D., Depart- ment of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1916. 107 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES 8. Clothing. The wearing of a uniform dress by the children has been abandoned in all up-to-date receiving homes. Fifty years ago it was a very common institutional practice. In recent years, however, the new emphasis upon the development of the individual child has largely eliminated uniforms, even in most orphanages. Receiving homes should not countenance dressing children like prisoners. Nor should such homes use the scarcely more desirable plan of clothing the home group from a mass of donated stuff, assorted by sizes, and not belonging to anybody in particular. Clean and attractive clothing, not necessarily expen- sive, definitely assigned to each child, so that it is his own, will help cultivate personality and self-reliance. 9. Cleanliness. “The standard of cleanliness for an institu- tion,” writes Mr. Richardson, “is that of the good housekeeper in a private home.” If this standard is maintained, the visitor will not meet at the door that “stale institutional smell’? which is inseparably associated with the average orphanage of the old- fashioned type. And of course the mingled malodors of ill-kept lavatories, filthy kitchens, littered storerooms, and neglected beds will be agreeably absent. Flies, those personal torments of chil- dren and evil carriers of disease, will be killed or driven out of doors, and every door and window will be equipped with first- class screens. Cleanliness is the basal essential of health and comfort in an institution. Yet while the necessity for cleanliness is absolute, like most other things it admits of degrees, and may be carried to the ex- treme. Housekeepers may be too careful, and may make every- body miserable. There is a golden mean in home cleanliness and order as well as in conduct. Also, the welfare of the children must not be sacrificed to maintain even this golden mean of cleanli- ness. Too much work must not be required of the older children. This consideration is one of the bases for more adult attendants than are usually employed. These should scrub floors, clean walls and ceilings, and do the other heavy work. Nor should the effort to keep the home clean and orderly lead to a denial of the proper use of all living rooms and playrooms to the children. ' The institution is for their benefit, and the plant should be used so as to make them as happy and as comfortable as possible. 108 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS Children’s Activities. There are four lines of activity neces- sary and desirable for the children during their stay in the receiv- ing home. They should all have a proper place and part in the apportioning of time and duties. 1. Work. A reasonable amount of the daily domestic work of the home should be done by the older inmates. Every normal child should be required to attend to suitable duties regularly; but some institutions are inclined to carry child labor to an un- warranted extreme. The small child of six as well as the larger boy or girl should render some service, but none should be ex- ploited for the benefit of the institution. The right and reason- able basis on which to determine the work for institution chil- dren is: What sort of work and how much of it would we assign to them if they were our own flesh and blood? The children in the receiving homes are not alien and barbaric sprouts of human- ity; they are the children of our unfortunate neighbors, and in the main are of the same fiber and natures as those of our own firesides. 2. Play. It is as truly a duty of the home to provide recrea- tion for the children in care as it is to give them meals three times a day. Play is a necessity of well-being in all people, but is espe- cially necessary to juvenile humanity. It is also an essential factor in education. The writer is inclined to think a play director about as indispensable to the home corps of workers as a nurse oramatron. At any rate, the nurse or matron must be a capable play leader to make the home work a success, if no one is employed specially as a play director. Keep the children happy, and they will be more healthful, learn more quickly, have better dispositions, and pay big dividends in improved conduct. Special equipment should be obtained, fitted to the kind and extent of the playrooms and playgrounds. Money expended for swings, see-saws, giant strides, slides, tether ball, and sand boxes for the smaller children; and apparatus for basket ball and other games, and suitable gymnastic appliances for the older children, will bring far richer returns than the same amount in drugs and medicines for puny and pining youngsters. Children that play freely and happily seldom get sick or make trouble for the care- takers. 109 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES 3. Education. Owing to the short stay of the average child in the receiving home, many societies feel it best to maintain a schoolroom of their own, and teach the children what they can in an ungraded way, until they are placed-out in families. At best they can thus keep the children in touch with school work, so that they may take their places as nearly as possible in the grades to which they belong when they return to normal school relations. Other societies feel that it is best to have the children attend the public school, even when they remain only a few days or weeks. When the school authorities will co-operate, the latter is probably the better plan. In some places school directors and teachers refuse to receive the agency children on the ground that they break into the progress of the regular classes, are a disturbing element to both teachers and pupils, and cannot possibly accom- plish anything worth while for themselves in the little time they are thus associated with the public school. That this argument is selfish, that it exaggerates the ills and minimizes the benefits of public school work by receiving home children, is proved by the experience of various societies whose children are welcomed at the public school, pass in and out with no friction or ill effects, and are better served than in the average private institution school. The use of the public schools is less expensive, the children are enabled to mingle with those from normal homes, and they have access to numerous school privileges and entertainments. Some societies have secured the assignment of public school teachers to teach in the receiving homes, or in school buildings on the home grounds; and this plan has some advantages, among which are uniform public school methods of teaching, and direct connection with the school work and privileges that the teacher represents. A few of the larger homes find it advisable to maintain a kinder- garten and primary school within the institution, and send only the older children out to the public school. In securing the site for the receiving home, this important question of schooling should be thoroughly canvassed, the location of public school buildings taken into account, and the spirit of the school teachers and officers definitely ascertained. 1See Education of Dependent Children in Institutions, C. Spencer Richardson, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. 110 RECEIVING HOMES AND THEIR FUNCTIONS 4. Religious Privileges. It is taken for granted that although probably nonsectarian the child-placing agency maintaining the home is religious in basis and character, and that it will desire to provide suitable training and privileges for its wards. Children especially need and are particularly susceptible to moral and religious influences and teaching. The receiving home will fail in one of its main functions if it is not permeated with the re- ligious spirit. This does not imply narrowness or sectarianism, nor call for bigotry or the making of the home disagreeable to child life by formalities and excessive services. There should be daily services or exercises within the home, attended by all, and made a real and vital part of the day’s doings; but the main spiritual stimulus must come from the officers and attendants in their personal and intimate relations with the chil- dren. These employes are for the time in the place of parents, relatives, pastors of churches, and other people who exercise help- ful influence over children in ordinary life. Theirs is the responsi- bility to set a daily example of right living, personal control, high purpose, sympathy, and spiritual teaching. Attendance at church services should be encouraged. It is a habit that should be early formed and the duty of it tactfully im- pressed. Sometimes all will be able to attend church but it will sometimes be best, for denominational or other reasons, to divide the children, part going to one church and part to another. Attend- ants should accompany them, as parents would, to look after their welfare and to aid the restless ones to keep their conduct in har- mony with the place and time. They should set the children a personal example of churchgoing. Three things in relation to the religious privileges of the children in receiving homes seem most important: a. That all should have adequate and suitable religious privileges; b. that their own faith, if established, or that of their parents, be honestly and wisely recognized; and c. that they be advised, taught, and accompanied to services, at proper times and places, by the workers at the receiving home.! 1See Development of the Individual Child in Institutions for Dependents, C. Spencer Richardson, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1916, pp. 3, 4. ITI CHAPTER VII SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES HE work of rescue and temporary care, which so far has held our attention, is only preliminary to the more im- portant duty of making proper and in many cases permanent provision for these juvenile dependents. As was previously noted, it is generally an accepted function of the child-placing agency to find suitable institutional care for the physically diseased or de- fective, the mentally subnormal or disordered, and those miorally incorrigible or ungovernably delinquent. There remain the main body of normal dependents, with some admixture of hopeful cases classed as mild delinquents, for whom the agency syste- matically seeks foster homes in selected families. This is the agency’s big task. General Placing-out. Child-placing in families is constantly going on in haphazard ways and by all sorts of people. Society at large does not recognize this fact, nor realize that it is the high- class organized agency that safeguards the home as well as the child. ‘Gradually the responsibility of this work has been per- ceived,” writes Dr. Hart, ‘‘and it has come to be recognized that when we put ourselves in the place of Providence and undertake to assume the responsibility of the whole future of the child, we assume a most sacred obligation. . . The heedlessness with which many people have met this grave responsibility is amazing. A public officer recently had his attention called to a boy whom he had placed in a very improper home. He said: ‘I am sorry to hear that he is not doing well. 1 will attend to the matter. | placed him there on general principles.’ There is a home for foundlings in one of the central states, where infants are faith- fully and beautifully cared for under the direction of a competent resident physician. The managers are reputable and well-inten- tioned people, yet it is their practice to give infants to women who 112 Interior of Foster Home, Highland, California CHILDREN’s HoME Society OF CALIFORNIA, Los ANGELES 112a As Child Was Received Same Child Four Months Later Life Saved by Boarding-out CHILDREN’S Alb SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA 112b SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES come and apply for them on no other credentials than such letters as they may have obtained from their friends, without subsequent supervision or watch-care.’’! Commercial maternity homes and baby farms are even worse in their methods. Dr. Hart thus clearly illustrates their work: “Many baby farms have been accustomed. to receive and dispose of infants for a fee of $25. A woman who lived in an inside flat, opening only on a court, herself entirely unfit to have the care of a child, upon being asked where she got the child, said: ‘I saw an advertisement in the paper, Baby for Adoption, so I went and got it.’ The question was asked: ‘Did they come to visit your home?’ ‘Oh, no,’ was the reply. ‘Did they ask you any ques- tions?’ ‘Oh, no; they said, ‘There is the baby. If you want it you can have it.”’’ Another woman, equally unfit for the care of a young child, on being asked how she obtained the child, re- plied: ‘I gave 25 cents and a canary bird for it.’ ’” Discussion of Methods. To find homes for reasonably normal and attractive homeless children, if the quality of homes offered and the probable future of the placed-out children be ignored, is a comparatively easy matter. Applications for children are usually varied and numerous. The line of least resistance is to accept them at their own valuation and turn over children freely to the uninvestigated applicants. That was the old way of placing-out, save as modified in some societies by written recommendations from pastors, family physicians, relatives, and the merchants with whom the families did business. It still prevails in many institutions and among the majority of poor directors; and hun- dreds of children are placed annually with applicants unknown and uninvestigated, by physicians, midwives, nurses, keepers of commercial lying-in homes, and other individuals. But the wise selection of a family home is a matter of no little difficulty, requir- ing the use of time, money, and trained workers. The selection of boarding homes, where certain classes of chil- dren are given temporary care for a consideration, and of per- manent homes, where children are taken as members of the family 1 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Charities Publication Committee, New York, 1910, pp. 228-229. 2 Op. cit., p. 228. 8 113 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES and fully supported by the foster parents, is made in much the same way. That is, the personal qualities essential in those who board children are about the same as those required for real foster parenthood. Yet the latter class calls for closer previous inspec- tion and more cautious final judgment. A mere boarder can be much more easily removed and relocated than a foster child. Also, many homes that are desirable for the boarding-out of chil- dren would not be acceptable for permanent placement. In in- ternal qualities they may be satisfactory, and suitable for use for infants and young children; but they may be in bad environment for continued residence, or in locations all right for babies but too far from church or school for older children. Or it may be that excellent people willing to board children may be financially unable to assume the free care of a child. On the other hand, homes desirable and suitable for the free and permanent placement of children are not often available for the care of ailing, puny, or deformed children, who must generally be provided for in selected boarding homes. The rule in such cases is, the more difficult the problems of care the higher the quality of homes necessary for such boarding purposes, and the greater the necessity for very careful selection. Let no one get the impression that the two main branches of child-placing, boarding-out and placement in free homes, are in any way antagonistic. They are the two hands of the system, and by them the children needing home care are lifted from dis- tress and destitution into improved living conditions. Sometimes the one hand, and sometimes the other, is best and most convenient to accomplish the service. It may be laid down as a general rule that in quality, free and boarding homes are not superior and inferior but simply different, to fit the required service, some being best adapted to one and some to the other, save that always adequate financial ability is demanded when foster parents as- sume the permanent care of a child. The full study of such a home therefore covers a few more items than are necessary in the study of the boarding home; so that what is essential in the selection of free and permanent homes may be counted as includ- ing what is needed in the selection of homes for boarding-out purposes. 114 SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES However, in the wet-nursing of foundling infants in the large cities, some organizations have successfully used for boarding purposes homes whose general quality would have precluded their use in other ways. The St. Vincent’s Home of Philadelphia, and the New York Foundling Hospital, for example, have employed as wet-nurses Italian women whose homes and environment are in many cases very poor. The women themselves are usually strong and wholesome, but ignorant, inexperienced, and lacking in knowledge of hygiene. Frequent visitation and careful super- vision by physicians and nurses aided in securing success. Many of the women so employed, however, could not have been trusted to care for bottle-fed babies, or to board older children, and chil- dren could not have been given to them for permanent care or for adoption; but as wet-nurses caring for babies only a short time, their employment was and perhaps still is considered per- fectly justifiable. Obtaining Applications. Various methods are employed by agencies to obtain applications for children. Some effective de- vices are: appeals for homes in leaflets inserted in general corre- spondence; advertisements in newspapers; displays of pictures and literature, and personal appeals at fairs, conventions, and con- ferences; and personal solicitation for homes in public addresses, especially those to church congregations. The writer during his eleven years’ superintendency of the Iowa Children’s Home Society, published a monthly 16-page bulletin of the society, the Children’s Home Herald, each issue averaging 10,000 copies, which contained attractive cuts and descriptions of children and appeals for foster homes. This little paper and others of similar type published by different societies brought to the various agen- cies many good applications. As the years pass the work of a society becomes generally known, the number of placed-out wards increases, and many families are led to apply for children because they have seen and known of the work and have watched placed-out children grow up in the homes of friends and neighbors. Child-placing work well done thus becomes self-stimulating and self-perpetuating. This last is the most effective means of securing a constant succession of good foster homes. 115 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Illustrative Examples of Selection. The plans and methods of two prominent child-placing agencies, each of which finds homes for hundreds of children every year, have been chosen as repre- sentative of the best modern systems of home selection in the United States. We are obliged to condense both of the descriptions. 1. Edwin D. Solenberger, General Secretary of the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania, one of the oldest and now one of the largest of the child-placing agencies of America, thus defines and describes the methods used by that organization in selecting and using family homes: a. Those applying to take children are asked to fill out an application blank containing about 50 questions relating to various phases of family life. In this way information is secured about such details as the age of husband and wife; their experience in the care of children; sex, age, health, and social condition of all members of the household; number and kind of hired help kept and where housed; church relations of the family and distance of church and public or parochial school from the home; if in the country, size of farm, ownership of land, live-stock, and house; if in the city, occupation of the man and probable ability to rear and educate a child; and sex, age, and description of the child desired. b. The answers in response to the various questions usually give not only a definite request for a specially described child, but also a distinct impression as to the sex, age, color, religion, and kind of child that might fit into the home. If the returns are promising, the second step is to obtain by correspondence confidential opinions from those who know the people and their home life as to the fitness of the family to receive a child. c. If these references respond favorably, the home is next person- ally inspected by a visitor from the society, who makes a written report concerning the character and personality of the applicants and the impressions made by the home and its environment. d. For the boarding-out work, particularly for babies or for children that are not normal, one has to find certain kinds of caretakers and homes. The growing practice of wet-nursing very young babies who are unavoidably separated from their own mothers, introduces other problems whose details must be dif- ferently worked out to meet the needs in each community. 116 SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES e. Some of the homes that are suitable for boarding-out purposes might not do at all for children who are placed for legal adoption, or to be raised without adoption but as real members of the family. And some free homes, excellent for permanent place- ment, might not be fitted to take certain classes of children as boarders. The whole matter calls for constant care in selecting and sifting all sorts of homes for all sorts of needs. f. A large waiting list of good approved homes, carefully: classified as to quality and the type of service for which they are available, such as this society constantly has on file, is a very valuable asset, as a similar list is for any child-placing agency. g. After placement, the wards of this society live with their foster parents as members of the family, sharing the social life of the community just as do other children. As they are placed with families whose religious faith corresponds with that of their natural parents, they attend church services and go to Sunday school with their foster parents. h. To do well the work of selecting homes, on a scale suffi- cient to meet the needs of a large community, requires a large staff of paid trained agents working under competent direction. j. The investigation and discriminating selection of the home, and the careful fitting of the child into it, are of primary impor- tance, but are only the beginning of the work. It is essential to exercise careful and constant supervision after the child is placed. Accordingly, the society agents make unannounced visits to the family to look after the child’s welfare. They also visit the school which the child attends and become familiar with the community life, especially those phases that may affect the child. Written reports as to the child’s progress in school, and information as to the condition of its health and its clothing, are received direct from the teachers. Reports are also secured at intervals from pastors in regard to the attendance of the child at church and Sunday school. 2. Dr. Hart, in his Preventive Treatment of Neglected Chil- dren, describes the method used by the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society. The society furnishes a blank form covering a wide range of inquiries and requires that the application be written out. 117 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES a. Many applications are rejected on their face. They show that the applicant is ignorant, or selfish, or that he lives in a bad neighborhood, or that he has not sufficient financial ability, or that the proper moral influences would be lacking. The appli- cations not so rejected are then subject to more definite investi- gation. b. A form letter asking confidential advice is sent to the mem- bers of the local advisory board of the society nearest to the appli- cant’s home; such boards, composed of groups of leading citizens, being organized in nearly all the towns and cities of the state. This form letter is accompanied by a recommendation blank, asking many definite questions, all to be answered in strict con- fidence, concerning the applicant, his family, his home, and its environment. If no board is available, such letters and recom- mendation forms are sent to pastors of churches, business or pro- fessional men, or other people in the community. c. If the written recommendations are considered satisfactory, the society next sends its own paid agent to make a personal visit and examination. A carefully prepared form is provided so that every matter of importance may be duly viewed and weighed. Only on a favorable report by the trained visitor is the home accepted for the placement of a child. d. The personal instructions to the visiting agent are so per- tinent that some of them should be considered by any person doing such work: “In making this investigation you are to bear in mind that the entire future happiness and prosperity of the child may depend upon the faithfulness with which you discharge this duty. The ultimate standard is this: Suppose that it was your own child, of like development and capabilities, who was to be placed in a family home: would you be willing that he should be placed in this home? This does not mean that the home is to be perfect and entirely above criticism. You must bear in mind that there are first-class, second-class, and third-class children, and there are first-class, second-class, and third-class homes. If a child is dull, stupid, untrained, or a bed-wetter, you cannot expect to secure as good a home as you could secure for a bright, attrac- tive, well-trained child, and it is true many humble homes of uncultivated people are permeated by a loving and faithful 118 SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES spirit, and will give conscientious care even to an undesirable child.’’! Indirect Selection. Mrs. Martha P. Falconer, formerly assis- tant superintendent of the ||linois Children’s Home and Aid Soci- ety, now the superintendent of Sleighton Farm for Girls, Darling, Pennsylvania, points out a method of selection which may be useful, although very limited in its application and requiring special wisdom in its operation. She says: “The indirect method of securing good homes is sometimes the best and easiest. Some of my best work in placing desirable children was done by per- suading families to take boys and girls into their homes as visitors. The selections were made with a view of supplying a known family need, of the child making its own favorable impres- sion, and of affection being inspired by association. Many fam- ilies that in our judgment might take children to rear hesitate to take the plunge without preparation, often learn to love their visitors and ultimately will give them permanent homes. The requirement that an agency must always have in advance a formal application, and the family agree to keep a child for a definite period, even on trial, is not necessary when the family is well- known, is permanently located, and first-class in character and financial ability. Toward such the ordinary rules may well be made flexible. If a very superior family will take a child as a visitor, such entrance into the home will often end in agreement for continued care, with the best of educational and other advantages.” Replacements. Many children do not remain in the first home selected for them, and must be replaced, frequently more than once, in new families and sometimes in new neighborhoods. For- merly the blame and critical comment for such necessity were largely directed toward the unfortunate “repeaters,” as these itinerants are called, but in recent years the censure for a large part of such changes has been more equitably distributed. The foster parents are often positively blameworthy and fail to give the boy or girl a fair chance to make good; and no small portion of the lack of permanence is due to the hasty, careless, and unsystematic methods employed in the placements. 1 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Chari- ties Publication Committee, New York, 1910, p. 236. 119 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES It is true that some children are “hard to manage”’; that others “do not wear well”; and that still others “fail to develop expected graces and good qualities.’”’ But it also is true that foster parents often find the task of rearing an unrelated child a bigger job than was anticipated; that others are so unwise in their treatment of foster children that they bring out temper, sulkiness, deceitful- ness, untruthfulness, and kleptomania, instead of the nobler quali- ties; and still others soon give evidence of selfishness and the mercenary idea that led them to take a child into their home. In many instances replacements, as indicated, are due to defects in the methods used and to a lack of expertness in the workers em- ployed. There was a failure properly to study the homes accepted, carelessness in the selection of children to fit the applications, and inadequate after-supervision. Without the expert study of a home, no one knows the type of child likely to win a permanent place there. Without special effort to select the right child, even when the home is well studied, every placement is a “‘gamble.’’ Without wise and tactful after-supervision, little differences and discontent grow into causes for separation. But in the very nature of the case, some replacements are un- avoidable. Some are the outcome of new developments that could not be foreseen. The death of one foster parent may render it im- possible for the other properly to careforachild. The birth of own children may make it inadvisable for a home to retain a child, although taken in a really altruistic spirit. The death of blood relatives leaving helpless children unprovided for may place upon people duties that preclude the retention of unrelated children. Financial losses, family quarrels, change in neighborhood condi- tions, need for different educational advantages, and other like legitimate causes, call for removals and the selection of new homes. Moreover, after even the most thorough study of the homes and the wise and careful fitting of children into them, certain elements that cause friction or discontent will evade discovery, or will develop after placements are made, and compel readjustments and sometimes a fresh start. “After all possible precautions are taken, placements are to some extent still a matter of ‘cut and try,’”’ declares Dr. Hart. “On trial it proves that the home needs a different child, or the child needs a different home, and 120 SELECTION OF FAMILY HOMES the change is made without any reflection upon any of the parties concerned. Only when people actually live together can the har- mony or antagonism of their dispositions and temperaments be fully determined. It is a great mistake to cherish the notion that replacements necessarily indicate any failure or defect in the child, the home, or the work of the society.” All social workers know that there are instances where many replacements are demanded if the welfare of the child and the home is to be properly conserved. Yet it is likely that some of those made by the average society could have been avoided. The writer, when superintendent of the Iowa Children’s Home Society, above mentioned (1899-1910), was responsible for ordering one child replaced 14 times, and several others 10 or 12 times. This was carrying the matter too far. “We always look after our placed-out children, and find them homes as often as is neces- sary,” remarked a complacent agency official recently. ‘Some are replaced almost every year.” Is it likely that such continual change is really necessary? Intensive study of all difficult cases is required, and the application of careful methods will greatly reduce the necessary replacements, especially the number of per- sistent “repeaters.” Only a part of the foregoing applies to the work of boarded- out children. Much of that work calls for only a brief stay in selected homes; and even when the boarded-out child is the per- manent ward of an agency, changes of location may be desirable for many reasons. Yet within certain limits, the fewer the changes of home and associations after placement the better for even the boarded-out child. Frequent transplanting of trees will stunt their growth. Frequent changes of homes, schools, discipline, companionship, and religious influences are bad for sprouts of humanity. Final Tests of Quality. The standard of quality in regard to approvable homes is both rising and simplifying year by year. The development of public conscience and the enlarged and length- ening experience of those directly engaged in placing children have combined to raise essential requirements while discarding some former technicalities. For instance, some organizations formerly demanded that foster parents should be church members. They 121 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES have found that church membership, while desirable, does not always warrant the expectation that a child would be happy and well cared for in the home; and that many excellent foster parents are not church members. While it is desirable that all foster parents be religious, the mere fact of church membership is not alone sufficient; personal character and habits must be carefully inquired into. Again, some societies once required that foster parents should own their homes as well as have a living income. It is now found expedient and justifiable to ignore or minimize home ownership in many localities, and to base decisions as to finance on reasonable probability of the continuance of an adequate income. Greater emphasis is being laid year by year on environment and the influences likely to surround the child as it develops. Formerly it was supposed that nearly all the best available homes would be found on farms, and placement in towns and cities was not specially advocated or magnified. Experience has demon- strated that many of the best homes are in populous centers, and probably more children are now placed in towns and cities than on farms. Thousands are still located in the country, and for the right classes of children no location is as good; but other classes of children find their proper and most favorable environ- ment in town. Recent developments in hygiene and sanitation, and the better opportunities for education, account in part for the turning of so many agencies to town and city homes for their wards. The realization that not all are fitted for farm life and work, and that varied vocational training and possibilities are available only in the towns and cities, are other factors in the change of view. In making decisions on the quality and desirability of homes, the three chief questions now are: 1. Are the applicants conscientious, personally suitable, and well qualified to assume the care of a child not their own? 2. Are the home and its finances proper and adequate for all the ordinary needs of the family, including such a child? 3. Is the environment, including school and church privileges, such as is likely to allow the child to grow up healthy and happy, and to develop into a good citizen? 122 CHAPTER VIII SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN approved application, and then be wisely and tactfully added to the family group, as that the quality of the home have conscientious investigation. Yet thousands of people, including some social workers, seem to think that if a home desires and is approved for some child, any child may be placed there and be a happy and desirable member of the family. Innumerable sad experiences have proved the contrary. Personal Visits Necessary. It is impossible to know and esti- mate many things about a home and a family without a personal visit to and study of them. Hence the emphasis laid upon such visits in the chapter on the selection of homes. The visits are not merely to ascertain general qualities, but also to determine the type and kind of children that are adapted to such homes. It is with reference to the kind of child needed to live agreeably with the persons and to fit into the physical conditions of the home, that a visit by a trained agent has its greatest importance. No letters from would-be foster parents, no fulsome commendations from associates and friends, can enable agency officers to size up the situation and select a suitable child half as well as can be done after an experienced placer of children has made a personal visit and obtained first-hand impressions. Of course some foster parents demand the right to choose the child they are to receive, and to visit the receiving home and per- sonally choose one from a group. After their own status as to character and sound stability has been found satisfactory, such action is not only permissible but in many cases it is desirable. Yet the wise social worker will be able to select the group of chil- dren shown, and in many cases direct attention to and influence the choice of the child best fitted to enter that home. But the 123 |: is as important that the right child be selected to fill an CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES visit to the receiving home, or at least the actual assignment of a child to the applicant, should in all cases be deferred until the home and its environment have been personally studied, in accor- dance with the recommendations of the preceding paragraph. Types of Children. “The fine art of the placing-out method,” writes Dr. Hart, “is the proper adjustment of the child to the home. You may have a good home and a good child, and the two good things may not have any adaptation for each other. For example, take a rather dull and backward but strong and good natured boy, with large bones, large hands and feet, and clumsy action; a boy who loves horses, cows and pigs, and outdoor life. Place that boy in a village home, with the clergyman, the merchant, or the phy- sician, and he will be a complete failure. He will track mud into the house, break the furniture, and spoil his clothes. He will make a poor school record, and will disappoint the hopes of his benefactors. Put that same boy on a farm, where he will go to school five or six months in the year, and he will make as much progress as he is capable of. Turn him loose on the farm, with people whose tastes run in his own line. He will be a complete success and will grow up to be a useful citizen. “On the other hand, take a boy of good parentage, with natural refinement, good features, small bones, small hands and feet; put that boy on a farm, where he will have to get up at five o’clock in the morning, milk five or six cows, attend a district school, with meager opportunities, and where he will be associated with people who lack refinement; and one of two things will happen: The boy will either deteriorate and go backward, or he will become discouraged and a complete failure. The farmer will return him on the ground that he is lazy, saucy, and above his business. Place that boy in the village home and he will be a complete success.””! A girl ward of the Iowa Children’s Home Society was gifted with great musical talent. She was what is termed “a natural musician,” and without previous instruction could take up almost any musical instrument and draw chords and harmonies from it that would delight any ear. By an unlucky accident she was 1 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Chari- ties Publication Committee, New York, 1910, p. 238. 124 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN placed in a home where the rattle of dishes, the clatter of milk cans, and the noises of farm animals and machinery were the only “music” allowed or considered profitable. The girl fairly pined away in such environment. She became morose, melancholy, careless, and disobedient; and was returned to the society as a failure. Careful study of her personality followed, and she was soon sent to a town home where the man of the house played the violin, and his wife was a superior vocalist and pianist. It was a home where music was loved and appreciated, and where the girl’s musical talent was delighted in and offered free and full expression. The girl was quickly transformed. She became bright, happy, ambitious, and devoted to her foster parents, who for their part soon loved her as though she were an own daughter. Personal and Racial Selection. It is also desirable in fitting children to applications, to select such as resemble one or both of the foster parents, or at least are not specially different from them in appearance. A strong contrast between parents and chil- dren causes endless remarks and calls for continued explanations, which are often irritating and sometimes embarrassing to the foster parents, and frequently a source of trouble to the children. This is especially to be considered when infants or very small children are taken with a view to subsequent adoption. The laws of most states properly require that so far as is prac- ticable placements of children be made in families of the same religious faith as that held by the children or their parents. It is also worth while to avoid mixing too diverse types or nationalities, as, for instance, the very swarthy with the decidedly blond. There need be no question of superiority or inferiority raised in a rule to limit placements generally to similar personal, racial, or national types, or to approximations of them in their American descendants. No good can come from, and much harm may be done by, wilful violations of customs and comity in the placement of children, even when the child welfare worker in so doing violates neither state laws nor his own conscience. Types of Placement. As has been stated, there are three types of placement in use by agencies and institutions. The form to be used in any individual case is determined by various considera- tions, among which are the needs of the child, its partial or abso- 125 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES lute homelessness, its legal relations, and its age and capacity for service. Clear conceptions as to the purposes and relations of these three types of placement are essential to good child-placing. 1. Boarding Homes. It is usual to recommend placement in family homes at board, the expense being borne or guaranteed by the agency, for such children as are temporarily separated from friends and relatives or whose legal status is not yet determined. Placement in boarding homes is also desirable for children who need to be retained in close touch with the organization longer than it is thought best to have them remain in a receiving home, for continued treatment of certain ailments, for convalescence from operations, and for other special reasons. Such use of private families in the care of dependent children is on the increase in many states. In several states the use of boarding homes has become even more comprehensive. This is especially true in Massachusetts, where boarding homes are used very largely, in place of insti- tutions, for all sorts of dependent children, both by the state itself and by numerous private organizations. To an extent un- known elsewhere, in Massachusetts boarding-out is a substitute for both temporary and permanent institutional care. In a lesser degree there is a similar use of boarding homes in New York, Pennsylvania, California, Maryland, the District of Columbia, and perhaps a few other commonwealths. As already stated, New York City in 1916 established an official agency, the Chil- dren’s Home Bureau, which placed in boarding homes over 100 children every month.! There is a large class of children who are sometimes called “partial dependents.’’ Organizations receive many children from parents who are only temporarily unable to provide suitable homes for them, and to whom most of them ultimately return. It is customary and proper to insist that such parents contribute to the support of the children during the period of separation, to as large an extent as is possible without hindering their efforts for the re-establishment of their homes. When children are taken from unworthy parents by court decree, it is also customary for judges to order the parents to pay according to their ability for 1 For fuller discussion of this bureau, see pp. 55, 50. 126 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN the support of the children, either in lump sums or in instalments as the money is earned. It is manifestly unfair to put the financial burden for the support of the children upon private charity or public funds, when those naturally responsible are able to bear a part or all of the expense. 2. Free Homes. Child-placing in families in most states refers to placement in selected private homes, as a member of the fam- ily, the entire expense of support and responsibility for training being assumed by the foster parents. Placing-out in free homes is the chief work of nearly all the state societies and other child- placing agencies throughout the United States. It of course implies reasonably normal conditions of mind and body, real homelessness, and complete separation from parents, relatives, and former guardians. Very seldom can free homes be obtained for temporary cases. Infants and the younger boys and girls are usually taken with the expectation of legal adoption. Even in Massachusetts and adjacent New England states there is a good deal of placing-out in free homes. In New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, the use of this type of placement is much more common. In the other Atlantic states, the central states, and westward to the Pacific coast, it is the standard and dominant type of child-placing. As stated in a preceding chapter, the modern form of doing this work through regular organiza- tions employing paid trained workers, originated in New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois and spread to all parts of the Union. 3. Working Homes. For large boys and girls, able partly or fully to earn their support, places are found in good families where they can have home conditions and protection, while at the same time beginning to do for themselves. Placement in working homes is practiced by both agencies and institutions, the latter thus dis- posing of such of their wards as do not return to parents or rela- tives when the age of dismission arrives. This type of placement is the successor of the old indenture system, brought over from England by the early emigrants, and in slightly modified form fastened upon many of the colonies. Modern usage requires careful selection of the homes; fitting the child to the proposed service; the payment of suitable wages, which are either given to or held for the child; safeguarding the 127 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES child’s interest by a definite agreement; adequate supervision after the placement is made; and reservation by the placing agency of the right to remove the child whenever in its judgment it is for his best interests. The placing of children in working homes, or wage homes as some organizations term them, is too carelessly done by many agencies and institutions. The emphasis is generally placed upon the wages to be at once received, although the boy or girl is usually qualified in the beginning for only the simplest tasks. Greater efforts should be made to place these larger wards where they can continue their education and obtain vocational training. The immediate earning capacity beyond what will assure food, cloth- ing, and shelter is of much less importance than the opportunity really to prepare for life and its duties. Our best authorities hold that it is the duty of society to provide for these children who lack normal home conditions, education and training equal to those of the average child of similar natural endowments. When placed in working homes, and beginning to earn their own way, let the first surplus above actual necessities go into schooling and such training as will fit these boys and girls to do better vocational service. If a child is going to high school and doing well do not worry about wages. Sending Children to Homes. Comparatively few children are placed in the care of foster parents at the receiving home. The ‘great majority are selected to fit the home by the agency officers, and sent out to the waiting family, perhaps several hundreds of miles from the society headquarters. The practice which form- erly prevailed of sending children on trains, unaccompanied by agency workers, tagged for care by train officials, and to be met at the end of the journey by the foster parents, is seriously objec- tionable. For hours and days the child is without the care of responsible protectors, and must enter his new home at a dis- advantage. He arrives at his destination tired, cross, and dirty, and often for this reason makes a bad first impression. He fails to receive a friendly introduction to his new people, and frequently goes to the home frightened and bewildered. It is hard on the child, and not just to him or to the applicants. The supposed financial saving is false economy. Therefore, every ward should 128 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN be placed in the direct care of the foster parents, and be definitely accepted by them, before the personal protection of the officers of the guardian agency ceases. First Impressions Important. As just indicated, many children are seen for the first time by the foster parents when they are brought to them by the agent for acceptance. It is apparent that first impressions on both sides are exceedingly important. The child should be at his best; clean, well dressed, cheerful in spirit, and full of expectancy of love and a happy home. Much depends at this point on the ability, experience, and natural tact of the society’s representative. Hundreds of promising selections have failed because of adverse first impressions, due to tactless or careless and slovenly work in bringing children and foster parents together. Hundreds more, less promising as arranged, have suc- ceeded because a wise child welfare worker was able to stimulate right feeling, provide a happy introduction, and give a favorable start to the new relations. Sex of Placing-out Agents. The children placed-out vary in age from infants in arms to girls and boys in their teens. It is perfectly proper for men to place boys in their foster homes, and in many cases the placement of the older boys should be made only by men. In the placing-out of infants it is seldom best or necessary for men to take them out to their new homes, although some men do such work tenderly and efficiently; but it is gener- ally desirable and advisable to have careful and experienced women do this delicate work. In the case of girls from very early years up, the placing-out agent should invariably be a woman. The writer is aware that thousands of babies and girls of all ages have been placed by men safely and successfully, but be- lieves that the time has come when the absolutely proper and eminently safe plan of employing women for this work should be adopted by all progressive agencies. In a few cases this will work a financial hardship; but relief from criticism of mere man’s attempts to care for infants on trains and elsewhere, and the assurance that no sex improprieties are possible in the transfer of girls from reception sources to receiving homes or from receiving homes to foster parents, will more than make up for the expense of the additional women workers required. 9 129 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Some social workers hold extreme views in regard to the sex of placing-out agents. Mrs. Martha P. Falconer says: “I believe all placing-out should be done by women. I can hardly conceive of a case where a trained and experienced woman can not do this work better than even an excellent and expert man.’’ The Cali- fornia State Board of Charities is trying to compel the agencies and institutions of that state to use only women agents for placing- out work and the visitation of children in foster homes. The idea has obtained a footing in other places. It is a “feminist reaction”’ advocated by some most excellent people. Nevertheless, even in the face of such advanced authorities, the writer believes that the position taken in the foregoing paragraph, which finds it possible and advisable to use men to place the larger boys, is a wise one. Placing-out Standards. At the National Conference of Chari- ties and Correction in 1914, Wilfred S. Reynolds outlined in a most suggestive way the requirements of child-placing, especially as related to “free homes.”” Among other matters he calls atten- tion to the following points: 1. Determine whether or not the child entrusted to your care is fitted to live in a free family home. 2. Require a written application, recording certain important facts relating to the home, to be filled out and signed by every applicant desiring a child. . A personal visit to the home of the applicant, by a visitor employed by and responsible to the organization having the custody of the child. 4. A written report showing the result of the visitor’s investi- gation, stating in no uncertain terms an approval or a rejection of the home. 5. The selection of a child best fitted to become a member of the applicant’s family. 6. A visitor should accompany the child to its new home, and in a most impressive manner pave the way for the initial acquaintance between the child and family. 7. A visit to the child and family not less than sixty days after placement, and sooner if the case demands. 8. Visits of supervision should be as frequent as each case Ww 130 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN demands, and in no case less frequent than once in six months, until legal adoption. 9. Each visit should be reported in writing, signed by the visitor, and preserved in the records of the child. 10. The custody of the organization should be maintained supreme until legal adoption or legal age. 11. Legal adoption, as a rule, should not be consented to until six months after placement. 12. Territorially, the placement of children in ‘free homes” should be restricted to distances within ready supervision of the organization legally responsible for the child. Transfer of custody from one individual or organization to another in a distant state should not be permitted.’’! Relatives and Placed-out Children. Whether or not relatives and friends of placed-out children shall be allowed to know where the children are, and communicate with or visit them in their foster homes, are very important and delicate matters. As a general rule, entirely distinct and different methods must be applied in reference to children boarded-out and those placed in free homes. 1. Children in Boarding Homes. A majority of the children placed in boarding homes are only temporarily under the control of the child-placing agency; the rights of the parents have not been nullified by the courts, and it is expected that the parents will ultimately reform or be able to rehabilitate their homes, so that the children may return to their care and control. Under these conditions the organization boarding-out the child usually permits letters to pass from parents or other friends to the chil- dren, and occasional visits to the children in their foster homes. Such is the practice of the Boston Children’s Aid Society and other standard private organizations. The policy and practice of the Children’s Home Bureau of the City of New York were thus stated by Mr. John Daniels: “While the visiting of children in boarding homes by relatives is nearly always a matter which requires mutual tact and forbearance if friction is to be avoided, it is nevertheless one of the most humanly necessary factors in the work. All of 1 Standards of Placing-out in Free Family Homes, Wilfred S. Reynolds, National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1914, p. 187. 131 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES the children boarded-out by this bureau are committed on account of dependency and never come to us through the courts on account of their own or their parents’ delinquency. Most of them have one or both parents living and are eventually returned to their own homes. In general, therefore, we do nothing to prevent parents from visiting their children in the foster homes, but co-operate in arranging such visits with reasonable frequency, usually about once a month, in order that the bond between the children and the foster parents, no matter how affectionate, shall not even temporarily replace that between the children and their own fath- ers and mothers. In a small number of borderline cases where the parents are, for instance, intemperate or prone to stir up trouble, visits take place at the bureau’s office. Only in a com- paratively few cases is visiting altogether prohibited on account of inherent defects in the parents, such as insanity, pronounced feeble-mindedness, or immorality.” 2. Children in Free Homes. A majority of the children who are placed in free homes have been permanently assigned to the child-placing agency either through an order of court or a formal surrender by parents or a guardian. Under either form of récep- tion the agency usually becomes guardian of the persons of the children, and there is seldom an expectation that they will at any time during their minority return to the parental home or control. Such conditions and prospects constitute conditions entirely dif- ferent from those considered in connection with boarding homes. The very fact that the agency has received full guardianship of the persons of the children, generally implies that it is desirable or necessary to separate them entirely from relatives and friends. The children are usually removed for placement to locations at a considerable distance from their former homes. Many, especially babies and small children of both sexes, are placed with a definite expectation that they will be legally adopted by the foster parents. Special affection between the children and the foster parents is cultivated. Permanence in the new relations is earnestly sought. The agency is bound to use its utmost efforts to protect the foster home from any intrusion by former friends and relatives, or inter- ference that will loosen the ties that are being formed. There- fore, as a rule agencies cannot disclose to relatives and friends the 132 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN names and addresses of foster parents who have given free homes to their wards, and are perhaps expecting to make them full mem- bers of their families by legal adoption. To allow visits under such circumstances is manifestly impossible; and if letters are allowed at all they must pass through the agency office in each direction, and be carefully scanned to prevent the inclusion of matter that will reveal the foster home. In some states laws have been enacted to protect agencies and foster homes from the efforts of relatives who seek to break these rules and interfere with the children after placement. The agencies should enforce the rules in a kindly spirit, and should give inquiring friends all the information they can without endangering the welfare of the children or the foster homes. Guardianship and Consent to Adoption. In many cases the natural and proper consummation of a happy placement in a free home is full legal adoption. Formal consent to adoption is re- quired in every commonwealth. In ordinary cases the consent is given by parents or by a guardian; in the cases of waifs or found- lings, by the mayor of a city, the judge of a court, or by some organization legally qualified to serve. In some states the old process still obtains, and adoption is accomplished by a written agreement—the parents or a guardian, as “party of the first part,”’ consenting, and the foster parents, as “party of the second part,”’ accepting the child as though it were their own, the document being duly attested and recorded, like a deed to property. Most states have advanced beyond this primitive method, which was inaugurated when children were chattels at the disposal of their parents, and have made adoption a regular court process, only to be consummated by judicial decree. Agencies and institutions are generally made the guardians of the persons of the children in their care, either by court orders or by parental surrenders; and in most of the states have been accustomed freely to give their “consent to adoption” when their wards passed into that relation. In recent years many complica- tions have arisen as to the extent of their authority, both under court orders and parental surrenders, and suits have been brought in several states to set aside adoptions on the ground that the organizations were not properly authorized to give consent. It is 133 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES claimed in these test cases that the authority either remains with the parents from whom the children were taken, or with the court that assigned the children to the agency or the institution. The present situation is chaotic in the extreme. Even the court deci- sions made do not clear up all the points involved. New and definite legislation in many of the states is the only complete solution of a number of these problems. Laws and Decisions. Some laws and decisions relating to the guardianship of the persons of children and consent to adoption may be mentioned for the reader’s information. They are examples of efforts to advance in these matters, although they do not yet indicate proper system and legal harmony. 1. Illinois. There are three features of the Illinois laws and customs that are of uncommon interest in this connection. It will be helpful to compare them with processes in other states: a. Personal Guardians Required. Based on court decisions affirming the right of parents or guardians to have their “day in court” when matters relating to the welfare of their children or wards were at stake, and the necessity of personal service on them, or service by publication if they could not be found, it was concluded that only an individual could act as the guardian of the person of a child, and that incorporated societies as such were ineligible. This conclusion was embodied in a statute requiring such personal guardianship. As an instance under this law, the superintendent of the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society has been appointed guardian of the persons of hundreds of chil- dren, who in other respects were the wards of the association. Like action and relations were required in all similar Illinois societies. The present form into which this legislation has crystal- lized is thus stated: “In every case where such child is committed to an institution or association, the court shall appoint the presi- dent, secretary or superintendent of such institution or association, guardian over the person of such child.’’! b. Guardianship by Default. When children are abandoned by their parents in Illinois, and are cared for by charitable insti- tutions, the defaulting parents automatically lose their parental 1 Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois (1916). Chapter 23, Section 176, p. 246. 134 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN rights and control, which pass in each case to the institution caring for such children. ‘When any child in this State, under the age of one year, shall be wilfully abandoned by its parents, and shall be taken and cared for by any charitable institution in this State, incorporated or otherwise, such parents so abandoning said child shall thenceforth lose all their right, control and authority over said child, and said right, control and authority shall thereupon become vested in said institution.’’! c. Appearance and Consent. The Illinois law requires that parents be notified of the pendency of case involving their minor children, especially as related to adoption, no matter how the agency or institution acquired guardianship of the child, save only such cases where the institution became guardian by decree of court entered in a suit where the parents were duly notified and the decree specifically authorized the institution to give the child out for adoption. The parents may file “appearance and consent” and thus waive the necessity of service of notice.” 2. Idaho. A number of other important matters are brought out in a decision of the Supreme Court of Idaho on the Jain and Priest cases, handed down in March, 1917. Only a brief synopsis of these can be attempted here, and the reader is referred to extended extracts from this decision in Appendix C.2 Owing to its great length the full decision cannot be cited, even in the appendix. a. Parental Surrenders Valid. Referring to the Children’s Home Finding and Aid Society of Idaho, the decision declares that under the provision of the act of 1909: “The Society has author- ity to receive, control and dispose of children under eighteen, when the father, mother, or person legally entitled to act as their guar- dian shall surrender them in writing to the society, or when the person legally authorized to make such surrender is not known and a notice is published in a newspaper.” b. Consent to Adoption. “Such corporation shall have author- ity when such child has been surrendered to it in accordance with 1 Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois (1916). Chapter 58, Section 1, p. 1398. 2 From letter of Hon. Harry M. Fisher, Judge of Municipal Court of Chicago. 3 See page 230. 135 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES any of the preceding provisions, and it is still in its control, to consent to its adoption under the laws of Idaho.” c. Commitment Guardianship. ‘When a benevolent or charit- able corporation is made the guardian of a child by order of the probate court . . . the court has the same control over such corporation as guardian as over any other guardian. Such guar- dianship may be terminated by said court in the same manner in which any other guardianship may be terminated.” d. Rights of Natural Parents not Nullified. “In cases arising under Section 2, where a child is taken from the parents without their consent on the ground that they are not proper persons to have custody of it, the law does not give the society power to consent to the adoption of the child, nor does it provide that the rights of the natural parents shall cease. In such cases the society simply becomes guardian of the child, subject to the control of the probate court.” e. Cannot Consent for Committed Children. “Such benevo- lent or charitable corporation, as guardian of minor children, has no authority to consent to their adoption when the children are not surrendered to it by the parents, but are committed to it as guardian by the probate court in a proceeding by which they were taken from the parents without their consent.” f. Section 2, Abused Child Law. Mr. Samuel Blaine, legal counsel for the Children’s Home Finding and Aid Society of Idaho, in a personal letter accompanying the Supreme Court decision, calls attention to a section of the Idaho laws, intimately related to the case under consideration and discussed in the decision. Mr. Blaine holds that the decision does not absolutely preclude consent to adoption by the society as guardian for children received under this section of the Act, but requires that the court order be absolute, and that a record to this effect be placed before the court hearing the petition for adoption. If the judgment against the parents is unconditional and absolute under this law, in the adoption of their children a guardian may act and the parents’ con- sent is not necessary. The provision is in Section 2703 of the Revised Codes, and is as follows: ‘‘A legitimate child cannot be adopted without the consent of its parents, if living, . . . except that consent is not necessary from a father or mother deprived of 136 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN civil rights, or adjudged guilty of adultery or cruelty and for either cause divorced, or adjudged to be an habitual drunkard, or who has been judicially deprived of the custody of the child on account of cruelty or neglect. If it can be shown satisfactorily to the judge that the parent or parents have abandoned it, or ceased to provide for its support, then it may be adopted by the written consent of its legal guardian.” 3. Massachusetts. The “Statute of 1903” is the basis on which action in regard to neglected children mainly has been taken in recent years. It is known as the Neglect Law, and provides for complaints by any person, hearing of cases by courts and trial justices, commitment of the neglected child to the State Board of Charity “until he attains the age of twenty-one years, or for a less time,” with the usual provisions for an appeal “to the superior court.” Its official designation now is Revised Laws, Chapter 83, Act of 1903, 334. At least two appeals have been carried up to the state Supreme Court, and these decisions include several matters of special in- terest to those engaged in child-placing work. While the decisions are not binding outside of Massachusetts, they are strong and sug- gestive precedents, likely to influence decisions anywhere in the United States, unless the statutes of other commonwealths ex- pressly contradict or nullify them. The decisions are very long, hence only the sentences directly touching parental rights, con- trol, and matters relating to adoption, are here quoted; and longer extracts from the decisions are given in Appendix C.! a. Parental Rights Limited. In the case of Purinton versus Jamrock (Mass. Reports, vol. 195, pp. 188, 189) is a definition of parental rights that should everywhere be accepted: “Parents have no absolute right of property in their minor children of which they can not be deprived without their consent. The right of property which parents have in their minor children is subject to their correlative duty to care for and protect their children, and the law secures their right only so long as they discharge their obligation.”’ b. Child’s Welfare Paramount. In the Flora Wares case (Mass. Reports, vol. 161, p. 72) the decision includes this im- 1 See pages 227-229. 137 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES portant declaration: “The object of the various statutes is to promote the welfare of the child. . . . The right of the parent is to be protected, but the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration.” c. When Mother’s Consent to Adoption Is Not Required. Under ordinary conditions parental consent to the adoption of a child is necessary; but when the child has been neglected, for a long time dependent upon public support, and placed with a suitable family, the parents lose their rights. In the Purinton versus Jamrock decision (Mass. Reports, vol. 195, p. 188) the court says: “The consent of the mother of the child to the adop- tion shall not be required if she has suffered such child to be sup- ported for more than two years continuously, prior to the peti- tion, as a pauper by the Commonwealth.” d. Parental Religion Not to Bar Adoption. In Massachusetts, as elsewhere, there is general expectation that children will be placed for adoption with people of their own religious faith, or that of their parents; but this is not always practicable, and where other matters are favorable difference of religious faith is not a bar to adoption. In the Purinton versus Jamrock decision (Mass. Reports, vol. 195, p. 188) this point is thus treated by the court: “On a petition for the adoption . . . if it appears that the child was taken from her mother by reason of the mother’s mis- conduct and that the mother acquiesced in a judgment giving the custody of the child to the State board of charity and for several years suffered the child to be supported . . . by the Commonwealth, the fact that the mother is of a religious belief different from that of the petitioners, who intend to educate the child in their own religious belief, does not make the granting of the petition unlawful or improper.” e. Limitation of Habeas Corpus. A writ of habeas corpus is generally considered a final resort, intended to include any and every appeal that can be made to apply in cases where persons are supposed to be wrongfully held. In cases relating to neglected children that have been formally adjudicated by regular courts, when proper officers have acted under regular commitments, the Massachusetts Supreme Court holds that habeas corpus proceed- ings apply only when the officers have acted unjustly or unlaw- 138 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN fully. In the Flora Wares case (Mass. Reports, vol. 161, p. 72) the court declares: “If in any case a board, or the officers having custody of the child, unjustifiably refuse to hear the parent, or proceed in any manner unlawfully, ‘the rights of the parent,’ as it is said in Farnham v. Pierce (Mass. Reports, vol. 141, pp. 203, 206), ‘can be protected on habeas corpus by this court.’ It is to be presumed that public boards and officers will discharge faithfully and properly the duties entrusted to them.” f. Board’s Action Not Reviewable. The Division of State Minor Wards of the State Board of Charity assumes care and control of children committed by the courts and trial magistrates, to provide for their welfare until they are twenty-one years of age, unless in the board’s judgment they should be discharged sooner, or returned to their parents. These wards are mainly boarded-out at public expense, but some are placed in free homes for adoption. Although the proceedings are generally under the “Neglect Law,” and are carried through the courts with due regard for the rights of all concerned; and although the Division of State Minor Wards is a state agency for handling the children in a wise and lawful manner, there are numerous efforts by parents and relatives to regain con- trol of the children. The State Board of Charity is officially re- quired to consider the petitions of parents and relatives, and empowered by statute to decide upon all such cases. Nevertheless, in the Flora Wares case (Mass. Reports, vol. 161, p. 72) the Supreme Court was asked to review the action of the board in refusing to return a child toa parent. The court declined to review such official action, and in effect said that such matters were not reviewable by the Supreme Court. In other words, the expert work of a duly authorized and accredited agency should be held at par value by the other departments of the state govern- ment. The court said: “There are strong reasons for holding, in a case where the board having custody of the child has, after full hearing, decided in view of all the circumstances that the child should not be discharged, that such a conclusion should not be reviewable here. It might, and doubtless would, interfere seriously with the success of the boards and officers to whom such children are committed in finding places for them in respectable families, if it were understood that the decisions of the boards or officers 139 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES as to whether or not the children should or should not be dis- charged from custody and restored to their parents were subject to be brought before this court whenever and as often as the parents chose.” These laws and decisions are cited to show three things: (a) The variety of legal conditions that now confront child-placing agencies in their efforts legally to settle their wards with foster parents; (b) the need of a careful study of the laws and the situa- tion as related to the agencies and their work in every state, so that illegal adoptions and suits at law may be avoided; (c) the necessity of definite efforts throughout the Union to establish a wise and proper basis for guardianship of the persons of children and clearly written laws relating to “consent to adoption.” These Illinois, Idaho, and Massachusetts laws and decisions were also chosen to show the variety of conditions especially as the East is compared with the Middle or Far West. Illinois re- quires a person to be guardian of the person of a child. Idaho allows societies and associations to assume guardianship—such an arrangement in fact being allowable in most of the states. Massa- chusetts goes to the extreme of disallowing the review by the Supreme Court of the work of its authorized state child-placing agency unless unjust or unlawful actions are provable. Consent to adoption varies materially in the different commonwealths. A careful study of these and other points brought out in the foregoing paragraphs, and the reading in Appendix C! of the more extended extracts from which they are drawn, will be of special benefit to child welfare workers. The material can be used as precedents in the settlement of mooted points in agency work, or in the formulation of new statutes, in commonwealths where the laws are yet fluid and moldable. Trained Workers Required. Trained and experienced workers in child-placing are indispensable for good work. No other branch of social service requires more skill, tact, knowledge, and the wis- dom that comes from experience. No social work is more impor- tant to the welfare of families and communities, and the delicate relations involved demand people of high quality thoroughly pre- pared for their jobs. As has been truly said, the work “requires 1See page 227. 140 SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN intelligent agents, capable of discrimination, and able to command a good salary.”’! The use of volunteer assistants to paid trained workers in many cases has been found helpful and satisfactory. But their work should be guided, and their conclusions checked up by the trained specialists. The very reverse of this would seem to have been the case in a certain organization, the annual report of which states that a sing’e volunteer added too per cent to the efficiency of the work by “detecting the erroneous conclusions” of the trained worker. The paragraph describing the achievement of this volun- teer is as follows: “The investigator is a volunteer worker, secured during October, 1916, and has added 100 per cent to the efficiency of our work and assures our placements far greater success. The present investigator is a Christian woman of refinement and depth of character, admirably fitted through motherhood to detect the erroneous conclusions of the superintendent, who is dependent mainly upon scientific training.”’ If an amateur can improve the work of the regular staff 100 per cent there would seem to be need for a reorganization of the staff. No one experienced in child welfare work claims that “scientific training” is all that is required to make an efficient worker; there must also be love and sympathy for endangered humanity, special regard for children, and what has been called “sanctified common sense.’ On the other hand, the sympathetic and level-headed worker cannot be efficient without proper training. “In these days,” writes an authority on the subject, “if a man wants to be a veterinary surgeon and practise upon sick dogs, cows, and horses, we expect him to have a certificate showing that he has the necessary qualifications for that responsible work. But, until recently, it has been felt that any one was competent to deal with the interests of neglected children. When there was wanted a superintendent of an orphan asylum or a children’s home, or a head for an industrial school, or an executive to manage a children’s aid society, a superannuated minister, a worn-out schoolmaster, a needy politician out of a job, or any kind-hearted and self-sacrificing woman, would do for the place. It is only 1 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children, Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., Chari- ties Publication Committee, New York, 1910, p. 239. 141 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES within the last few years that this kind of work has been recog- nized as exceedingly technical, and calling for a high degree of ability, careful training, and unimpeachable personal character.’’! Another authority has also aptly stated present day demands along this line: “No public or private department in children’s work is well equipped without a staff of social investigators and medical and mental experts who have the special education and training for their tasks at least equivalent to the equipment that teachers are expected to have for their tasks. Such a staff must in addition be under supervision of an experienced social worker. The time has well gone by when anyone with a love of children is any more trained for social work with children or for children than for teaching or for dealing with children’s ailments or de- ficiencies. Special courses of training in children’s work are in demand and give emphasis to this principle.’” 1 Address by Hastings H. Hart, LL.D., to the Children’s Aid Society of Western Pennsylvania, 1912. (Not published.) 2 A Community Plan in Children’s Work, C. C. Carstens, Proceedings, National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915, p. 95. 142 13}SIS puv sayjoig—uaipylyD 49}s04 oy |, Jay OW Jajsoj oy L ALAIN0S AWOH{ S,NANGTIND valwo14 aWOP 12}SO4 aul] W—,. ePHojy u asayMawwos,, 142a A Child From This Shack Happy in the Country Many children are taken from poverty and distress and placed in country homes as real members of the families. Went To This Fine Free Home Twin Girls and Their Excellent Free Home STATE CHARITIES AID ASSOCIATION OF NEw York 142b CHAPTER IX ADEQUATE SUPERVISION T WO types of supervision are essential to efficient and satis- factory child-placing work—that of children and homes by the child-placing agencies, and that of agencies and their work by a proper state authority. No agency can do its duty by the children for whom it is responsible without adequate inspec- tion and study of those placed-out and of the homes in which ‘they are located. Letters from various persons and reports from interested friends and local boards are valuable, but nothing can take the place of personal visits by trained agents, unannounced and unexpected. No state can do its duty by the people of the commonwealth that fails adequately to supervise the organiza- tions and institutions which it has incorporated, and which, under private management, are caring for a majority of its dependent children. Likewise large and definite improvement and rapid standardizing of child-caring work can be expected only when the state establishes thorough, nonpartisan, and nonsectarian super- vision of child-caring organizations, including both child-placing agencies and institutions for continued care. Supervision by Agencies. What is adequate supervision of placed-out children and their foster homes? A categorical answer is difficult. Prof. G. H. Durand says: “Children, unless legally adopted, continue to be the wards of the societies until they become of age. Exact record is kept in the superintendent’s office of each child placed out, and visits of inspection by agents of the society are made from time to time. Far more care is taken in inspection than formerly, the societies having come to realize more fully the measure of their responsibility as protectors of the rights of the children under their charge.”’! 1 The Study of the Child from the Standpoint of the Home-finding Agency, G. H. Durand, Proceedings National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1907, p. 260. 143 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Basis in Boston and Elsewhere. The Boston Children’s Aid Society is perhaps doing the most thorough supervisory work of any child-placing agency in the United States. In 1915 its general secretary, J. Prentice Murphy, reported as follows: “ The averages indicate that our visitors are seeing the boys in their homes less than four times a year, the girls in their homes less than five times a year.”! As contrasted with this intensive work, there are reputable organizations handling hundreds of children annually, whose actual visitation of each child will not average once a year, with many children unvisited for several years in succession. The Boston Children’s Aid Society employs a visitor for every 45 placed-out children in its care. Even as strong a corps as is this has been unable to accomplish results fully satisfactory to this high-grade organization. On the other hand, there are a number of fairly strong child-placing agencies that employ only one or two visiting agents for from 500 to 1,000 placed-out children; but their efforts are seconded to some extent by dis- trict superintendents, who inspect children and homes as a part of their general work. Some societies, otherwise progressive and efficient, are doing very inferior work in the supervision of their placed-out children and foster homes, and should be stimulated to a better plane of endeavor. The Golden Mean. Adequate supervision does not mean the same thing in different forms of placing-out work, and in dif- ferent parts of the country. The children placed on the boarding- out plan must be visited oftener and the conditions surrounding them scrutinized more keenly than is necessary for those placed in free homes. The Boston Children’s Aid Society wards are mainly boarded-out children. The contrasted agencies place chil- dren mainly in free homes. Somewhere between the extremes is the golden mean that expresses good supervisory work for the average child-placing society. As Mr. Murphy says: “It can not be stated too strongly that numbers of visits alone are no indication of supervision efficiency. Days may be spent in finding a home with the right training adjustments for a child,and . . . . atthe 1A Study of Results of a Child-placing Society, Lawton and Murphy, Pro- ceedings, National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915, p. 172. 144 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION start there can safely be fewer supervision visits than in the case of a child hurriedly placed in a home possessing no special quali- fications.’’! Supervision by Leading Agencies Studied. A number of im- portant facts in regard to the practice of leading child-placing agencies in all parts of the United States was brought out by a questionnaire recently sent out by the Department of Child- helping of the Russell Sage Foundation, and responded to by over 40 of these organizations. The questionnaire included some queries as to methods and relative numbers of workers used in the super- vision of placed-out wards. From this material the following in- teresting points and averages have been compiled: 1. Number of Children to Visitor. Each agency was asked: What is the usual number of children supervised by one visitor on full time? The replies brought out the fact that the range of the present standards is from 40 to 300 children and over per visitor. One society has reduced the number below 4o when the distances to be traveled are great, and one has a standard (prob- ably not always adhered to) of 30 in the case of infants. One society employing a number of visitors averaged 86 chil- dren per visitor; two of the agencies confessed that their super- vision was not systematic; two more declared that the number of children per visitor depended entirely upon distances traveled and other difficulties or conveniences; several stated that supervision was so combined with other duties that exact answers on this point were impossible; nine agencies reported 40 to 65 children per visitor; three, 65 to 100 children; five, 100 to 200 children; and five other agencies reported 200 to 300 children per visitor. It is notable that six of the nine agencies reporting their stan- dard as 40 to 65 children per visitor are Massachusetts organiza- tions whose work is almost wholly confined to the boarding-out type of placement. Of the other three, two are in New York City and one is in St. Louis, Missouri, also chiefly engaged in boarding-out children. 2. Variation for Free, Boarding, and Working Homes. The variation in numbers of children to visitors according to the dif- 1Op. cit., p. 172. 10 145 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES ferent types of placement was not reported definitely, except by one society, which stated that its practice was to assign to each visitor 50 children in boarding homes or 300 children in free homes. In general, however, the cases are not distributed on an economic basis of this kind. Each visitor has a mixture of cases, including children in free homes, boarding homes, and working homes; children well established in good families and those in new and probationary situations, together with children of various ages, from babies to boys and girls in their teens. As is natural, those agencies which for the most part board-out children have fewer children per visitor than those whose main work is their placement in free homes. 3. Average Numbers in Desired Standards. Very few of the agencies were fully satisfied with the standards attained by them. Most felt that lack of financial resources prevented the employ- ment of a proper force of visitors and of adequate visitation. Six- teen of the most important agencies recorded their judgment of the number of children that could be adequately supervised by a visitor, as follows: Seven agencies declared that one visitor could properly supervise 40 children; three set the limit at 50; one at 60; one was satisfied that a visitor could supervise 75 children; and four that a visitor could adequately supervise 100 children. It will be noted that these extended variations in standards that can be considered desirable, show clearly that agencies in this country would greatly increase their corps of visitors if afforded adequate financial support. 4. Frequency of Visitation. There seems to be no hard and. fast rule as to the frequency of visits made to placed-out children. Almost all agencies recognize that this should be determined by individual need and conditions. Children newly placed and on probation require more frequent visitation than those well estab- lished in homes of proved character. Yet there are minimum standards in regard to the number and periodicity of visits obtain- ing in almost all organizations. General rules are made to govern average conditions, but are intended to be flexible and to be set aside in all emergencies. There is, however, wide variation in the minimum standards of frequency established by different agencies. The replies to the questionnaire in regard to this feature of 146 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION supervision are interesting. Several of the agencies ignored the question; in three agencies the replies stated that “the practice varies according to conditions,” but gave no figures; ten of the agencies have their wards visited “at least annually’’; five make the rounds “at least semi-annually”; two “aim to visit each child at least quarterly”; five of the Massachusetts agencies set two months as the proper interval between visits, but visit more or less frequently as the various cases may require; two agencies “aim to visit each ward on an average from two to three times a month.” In the case of agencies which use both free and boarding homes for younger children, it is the general practice to visit the boarding homes more frequently than the free homes. Among boarding- out agencies there is a tendency to put boys and girls under in- creased observation when they reach the age where they can begin self-support, and a change is made from boarding to free or work- ing homes, both because of the danger of exploitation and the problems of adolescence. Babies are also mentioned by some agen- cies as requiring frequent and special supervision. These needs and dangers seem not to have been fully recog- nized by a few of the western agencies, which relax rather than tighten their supervision as boys and girls grow older; and some seem to think that because babies are quite generally taken for affectional reasons and intense desire for a child to love and rear, they should be disturbed by the visits of agents to the foster home as little as possible. One agency holds that too much visiting, after a child is established in a home, “reduces foster parental responsibility.””. In the frequency of visitation, as in all other matters connected with child-placing, there is of course need to exercise common sense. Aids in Supervision. While periodical visits of trained agents are absolutely necessary, there are a number of aids in supervision not to be disregarded. A society’s local boards will be of great assistance in keeping track of general conditions. Pastors of churches and family physicians can render invaluable aid; also superintendents of schools and teachers, from whom can be ob- tained records of school attendance and progress. Medical in- spectors of schools and school nurse visitors, in towns having 147 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES them, are important assistants in supervision.!. By correspond- ence with all such helpers, and especially by direct consultation with them when the agent visits the homes, accurate and compre- hensive reports can be compiled and the welfare of children properly safeguarded. A Few Essentials. A wide reading of literature on this subject has so far shown no clear expression from any expert that will define adequate supervision for all agencies and places. Yet a few essentials may be stated for the guidance of students and inex- perienced workers. 1. Adequate supervision calls for intimate and continuous over- sight, sufficient to secure the welfare and happiness of the children and homes under care, so far as their mutual relations are concerned. 2. The more carefully the original selection of families and the fitting in of the right children are done the less frequent are the necessary visits for after-supervision. 3. It is a dangerous and improper thing to place such confidence in the conditions of any foster home that supervisory visits are omitted entirely, or are made so infrequently as to cease to be really supervisory. 4. It almost goes without saying that in event of any adverse rumor a personal visit by a trained and experienced agent should be made without delay. : 5. Even in societies where the main part of the placements are in free homes and supposedly permanent, not more than 100 placed-out children can be adequately supervised by a single agent. 6. Even for societies that place almost wholly in free and per- manent homes, it should be a minimum requirement that each placed-out minor child be visited at least once a year. 7. Training and experience, and continued service on the same field, are indispensable to the best success in visiting agents. “The continuity of service for visitors of a placing-out society,” writes Mr. J. Prentice Murphy, “for at least five-year periods is an absolute essential.”? This extreme view of the desirability of 1 For important discussions, see Medical Inspection of Schools, Gulick and Ayres, Survey Associates, New York, 1913. *A Study of Results of a Child-placing Society, Lawton and Murphy, Pro- ceedings, National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915, p. 174. 148 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION continuity in supervisional service is not accepted by all social experts; but that there are advantages in continuity of work by good agents no one can doubt. State Supervision. Many of the states now have more or less efficient systems for the supervision of private child-caring agen- cies and institutions. In some of them the supervisory work is limited to the institutions wholly or partly supported by public funds, and supervising agencies possess very limited authority. In most states now exercising supervision the appropriations for the support of the supervisory board or department are far too small to permit an adequate force of visitors and of thoroughly efficient service. To regulate the establishment of new organizations, to stan- dardize methods and conditions, to reform abuses and institute improvements, to take such action as may be demanded for betterment whenever substandard qualities or processes are re- vealed, and to grant annual certificates of approval on a quality basis, are all within the scope of adequate public supervision of private institutions. It should reach all agencies and institutions, and be thorough, systematic, and comprehensive, enforcing legal mandates, teaching modern methods, elevating ideals, arranging for co-operative service, and generally improving the quality of work done for the dependent children of the commonwealth. The state as the general unit of legislation should be the gen- eral unit of supervision. Local supervision, and especially that undertaken by volunteer and uncompensated persons or com- mittees, has always proved sporadic, inadequate, and insufficient. Supervision by a nonsectarian and nonpartisan state board, operat- ing under legislative authority, with ample scope and power, using high-quality, paid, trained agents, is the only way to accom- plish satisfactory results.1 Purposes of State Supervision. The main purpose of state supervision is not alone to insure the economical expenditure of public appropriations. The wise use of a few dollars, or a few thousands of dollars, derived from general taxation, is undoubtedly an excellent and valid reason for supervision, but it is one of 1See Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Depart- ment of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1915, pp. 256-265. 149 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES the least important. The chief object is to secure the welfare of the thousands of immature citizens who are handled by the agen- cies or held in continued care by the institutions, but who are also and always the wards of the great mother state. The duties of the supervisory board include wise counsel on problems of finance and administration, expert advice on the location, types, and best architectural plans for buildings, aid in arranging medical and surgical clinics for the sick or defectives, distribution of scien- tific menus and dietaries for all sorts of children, enforcement of methods of physical care that will promote health and right devel- opment, as well as obedience to the requirements of the laws. There is an immense field of work for state supervision, with proper agents selected on the basis of social and scientific training, and representing both the authority of the commonwealth and the best ideas of modern social service. Declaration of White House Conference. The celebrated White House Conference, called by President Roosevelt in 1909 and participated in by the representatives of child welfare work from all parts of the Union, in its unanimously adopted Conclu- sions presented the following paragraph on State Inspection: “The proper training of destitute children being essential to the well-being of the State, it is a sound public policy that the State through its duly authorized representatives should inspect the work of all agencies which care for dependent children, whether by institutional or by homefinding methods, and whether supported by public or private funds. Such inspection should be made by trained agents, should be thorough, and the results thereof should be reported to the responsible authorities of the institution or agency concerned. The information so secured should be con- fidential—not to be disclosed except by competent authority.’” State Supervisory Boards. There are four principal methods or systems of administration in operation in the various states that now exercise supervision over organized child welfare work. It will be profitable to note them, and also to name the states in each class. 1See Child Welfare Work in California, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1916, pp. 232-235. 1 Proceedings of the White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Chil- dren, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1909, p. 194. 150 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION 1. The State Board of Charities System. This is the oldest form, and is now operated nominally or actually, and more or less effectively, in the District of Columbia and the following 24 states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Caro- lina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Ten- nessee, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming. The boards of charities of these states are variously constituted, possess limited authority in a majority of cases, and for lack of sufficient funds appropriated to enable them to cover the field comprehensively, usually confine their activities in the matter of supervision to the most pressing and visible parts of the work. As will be seen later, five of these states also appear in the second and third systems of supervision, by reason of later and perhaps more progressive legislation. 2. The State Board of Control System. This system is of comparatively recent origin, and is in operation in the following 16 states: Arizona, California, Florida, lowa, Kansas, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin. In these commonwealths the state institutions for charity and correc- tion are under the direct management of the board of control, under different titles in different states. In most the state super- vises county and municipal institutions. Legislative enactment has laid part or all of this work upon the boards of control. California, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Tennessee have both state boards of charities and state boards of control. They suffer from serious problems of administration connected with the double system, some duplication of effort, and some friction be- tween departments. There is difficulty in assigning the work of supervision to either board without infringing upon the rights and duties of the other. The following quotation from the latest report of the California State Board of Charities will illustrate these difficulties by a concrete example: “The State Board of Control shares with the State Board of Charities and Corrections in the supervision of all children’s in- stitutions receiving any state aid. It fixes the terms which the orphanage must meet in order to receive the state subsidy and 151 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES thus exercises a very real control over the institution. This means that two sets of state agents visit the state-aid orphanages. Both give advice; both make criticisms and suggestions. No matter what agreement the two boards enter into for the super- vision of the work, overlapping, duplication and confusion are possible. New legislation is needed which shall centralize all this work.’’! : 3. State Commissioner or Department System. In this system there is either a single salaried commissioner of charities for the state, or a single salaried director of a department of a state board, the chief in either case supported by a staff of trained assistants. The department of charities may include some direct work in the care of dependents, and the secondary division may do some direct work for dependent children, but at least a part of the work is the supervision of charities, especially the child-helping agencies and institutions. Two states, New Jersey and Oklahoma, have a single commis- sioner of charities, charged with the investigation and supervision of all public and private charitable and correctional institutions.? In Ohio the Board of State Charities has a Children’s Welfare Department, with a salaried director and a corps of paid assis- tants, who are not only employed in supervisory work but who have also special duties in receiving children as state wards from juvenile courts and other sources, and providing for them by placement in family homes or by assigning them to proper insti- tutions. The Ohio plan seems to work successfully, and reports already indicate good results from the new system. 4. Director of Public Welfare System. The state of Illinois forms a class of one, in respect to the administration and super- vision of charitable and penal institutions. The legislature of 1917 adopted the director of public welfare system, Illinois being the first state thus to centralize and unify authority and admin- 1 Biennial Report of the State Board of Charities and Corrections of the State of California, State Printing Office, Sacramento, Cal., 1914-16, pp. 13, 14. 2 By a new law, 1918, all of the penal, charitable, and correctional institutions of New Jersey are placed under the authority of the Board of Control; the Com- missioner and Department of Charities and Correction are continued, but are no longer independent. New Jersey therefore combines the Board of Control and Commissioner systems. 152 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION istrative functions. The system went into operation July 1, 1917, and time only can prove whether or not it will be satis- factory. Mr. A. L. Bowen, who is superintendent of charities under the new régime, in The Institution Quarterly gives the fol- lowing statement of this new, and, as he says, “almost revolutionary change,” which places the administrative organization of charitable and penal institutions of a great state in charge of one man: “An almost revolutionary change has been made this year in the administrative machinery of Illinois. The readers of this journal are interested in what has taken place in the charitable and penal institutions and briefly we shall attempt to outline the form of the new organization which will direct and supervise them. “Eight years ago the General Assembly abolished the local boards of trustees and created a central board to have admin- istrative authority over all the institutions in what was known as the charitable group. The State Charities Commission was created at the same time to exercise supervisory and advisory functions in the institutions managed by the Board of Administra- tion. This form of administration has been in operation with great benefit to the institutions and to the public for eight years. The penal institutions, three in number, remained under the con- trol and management of separate boards of trustees. “Centralization was one of the keynotes of the last political campaign in Illinois. Both parties were pledged to a reorganiza- tion of the departments after the lines laid down by the Efficiency and Economy Committee, which had devoted four years to an intensive study of the departments of State Government. One of the first duties undertaken by Governor Lowden after his election was the drafting of a comprehensive bill to meet the pledges which he had made during the campaign. This bill has been accepted by the Legislature almost without a dissenting vote. “Tt was found advisable to confine the reorganization and con- solidation scheme to those departments which were under the jurisdiction of the Governor. There were some 120 boards and commissions carrying on this work, all subject to the control of the Governor. No effort was made to change or amend the laws which these boards and commissions were charged with carrying out, but the idea was to simplify the form of administration. 153 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES “These various functions were therefore grouped into depart- ments, each with a director in charge. These nine directors form a cabinet to the Governor. How this scheme was worked out in detail is not of concern at this time, except as to the Department of Public Welfare. “Into this department have been grouped all that were in- cluded under the Board of Administration, the State Charities Commission, the trustees of the three penal institutions and the Board of Pardons and Parole. All these have been abolished and in their place has been set up a department consisting of the following appointive officials: Director of Public Welfare; Assis- tant Director of Public Welfare; Superintendent of Charities; Superintendent of Prisons; Superintendent of Pardons and Pa- roles; Fiscal Supervisor; Criminologist; Alienist. “The director will be supreme in all matters coming under the jurisdiction of these subordinates. He reports direct to the Gov- ernor. There can be no division of authority or responsibility. The subordinate officials report to the director. He approves or disapproves. “The Superintendent of Charities will have general management of the 21 institutions in the charitable group, the bureau of visi- tation of children, the bureau of instruction of adult blind. “The Superintendent of Prisons will exercise similar jurisdic- tion over the three penal institutions, but in addition will sit as an adviser with the Superintendent of Pardons and Paroles in carrying out the parole law and in hearing petitions for pardons. “The Superintendent of Pardons and Paroles will carry out the parole and pardon laws, which have not been changed except that this one official takes the place of the three members of the Board of Pardons. “The Fiscal Supervisor, as his title indicates, will have charge of the bookkeeping, statistical and accounting systems of all the institutions. “The Criminologist and the Alienist will be advisory officers; the first to the Superintendent of Prisons and the Superintendent of Pardons and Paroles, the second to the Superintendent of Chari- ties and through him to the director. 154 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION “The law does not fix the qualifications or the duties of any of the officials it creates. The director fixes them. “The State Charities Commission is abolished in name only. Hereafter it will be known as the Board of Public Welfare Com- missioners and will carry on the same work of supervision and inspection. “Many overlapping activities disappear in the new organiza- tion. It will save thousands of dollars in salaries and wages, traveling expenses, office supplies and the like, and without doubt will perform the work in a more efficient manner. “This will be the first experiment on so large a scale of the one-man power in the administration of public institutions from which politics have been eliminated and into which it has been sought to place men on the sole basis of merit and experience.”! State Research Bureaus. As aids in the solution of child wel- fare problems and as indirect yet important adjuncts to the super- visory powers and systems of the states, two commonwealths have established research bureaus that promise much for the future. The Ohio bureau was authorized in 1913, and has been in opera- tion long enough to have done some definite work; the Iowa bureau was authorized in 1917, and only the statute establishing it, given later, is available. 1. Ohio. In addition to the Children’s Welfare Department of the Board of State Charities there has been established by law a Bureau of Juvenile Research under the direction of the Board of Administration. Its basis and aims are thus indicated: “The ‘Ohio board of administration’ shall provide and maintain a ‘ bureau of. juvenile research,’ and shall employ competent persons to have charge of such bureau and to conduct investigations. ‘The Ohio board of administration’ may assign the children committed to its guardianship to the ‘bureau of juvenile research,’ for the purpose of mental, physical, and other examination, inquiry or treatment for such period of time as such board may deem necessary. Such board may cause any minor in its custody to be removed thereto for observation and a complete report of every such observation shall be made in writing and shall include a record of observation, 1The New Organization in Illinois, The Institution Quarterly, June 30, 1917, printed by the state of Illinois, Springfield, pp. 7, 8. 155 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES treatment, medical history, and a recommendation for future treatment, custody and maintenance. ‘The Ohio board of ad- ministration’ or its duly authorized representatives shall then assign the child to a suitable state institution or place it in a family under such rules and regulations as may be adopted. (In effect July 1, 1914.)”? A personal letter from Dr. Thomas H. Haines, clinical director of this bureau, in December, 1916, gave the following as its develop- ment to that date: “The Bureau of Juvenile Research, designed to be an institution for the reception and thorough exami- nation of all juvenile delinquents committed to the care of the Board of Administration, . . . is at present housed as an office in the offices of the Board of Administration. Its workers consist of one psychologist, two field workers, a stenographer, and the writer. Its work has consisted largely in making mental examinations of these juvenile wards of the state, as they have been committed to the industrial schools. . . . We purpose to get some definite scientific data by doing thoroughly small districts of the state, in somewhat the same fashion as the British Commission surveyed parts of England and Wales.” 2. Iowa. The legislature of 1917, responding to an urgent demand from many citizens and important social and educational organizations, enacted a law establishing a Child Welfare Research Station in connection with the State University at lowa City. The statute is so brief that it is here quoted in full: “Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Iowa: “Section 1. That the state board of education is hereby authorized to establish and maintain at Iowa City as an integral part of the State University, the lowa Child Welfare Research Station, having as its objects the investigation of the best scien- tific methods of conserving and developing the normal child, the dissemination of the information acquired by such investigation, and the training of students for work in such fields. “Section 2. That the management and control of such station shall be vested in a director appointed by the said board of edu- cation, and an advisory board of seven members to be appointed 1 Laws of Ohio Relating to Benevolent and Correctional Institutions, Boards and Officers and to kindred subjects. The Ohio Bulletin of Charities and Correc- tion, Columbus, Ohio, November, 1913, p. 50. 156 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION by the president of the university from the faculty of the graduate college of said university. “Section 3. That there is hereby appropriated out of the money in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of twenty-five thousand dollars annually hereafter, for the main- tenance of such a station and the furtherance of the objects, to be expended under the direction of said board of education.””! Dr. Carl E. Seashore, professor of psychology in the University of Iowa, author of the law, in a personal letter thus states the situation in August, 1917: “As at present organized the Station will consist of only three divisions, Mental Hygiene, Social Hygiene, _and Nutrition of the Child. There will be a research professor in each of these divisions, with a suitable group of minor appointees. It gives me pleasure to say that Prof. Bird T. Baldwin has accepted the directorship of the Station and the headship of the divi- sion of Mental Hygiene; and we are now considering a well known professor of sociology for the professorship of Social Hygiene.” Codes to Replace Legal Chaos. A large number, probably 15 or 20, of the states of the Union have no state supervision of pub- lic or private charities worthy of the name. This is especially true of charities related to children. The reason is found in the ancient, unsystematic, and often contradictory laws that cumber their statute books. The remedy is the thorough revision and codification of the state laws, as has been done in Ohio and Minnesota, and as is now in process in Michigan and Missouri. When good children’s codes replace present legal chaos, they will include adequate and thorough state supervision of child welfare work of all types, whether of agencies or of institutions. The need of this complete and systematic revision and codifica- tion of laws, and modernization of methods, is not generally recog- nized in the states most needing such action. Attention must be called to definite items and relations. Like the Missourians, the people of the conservative states must be “shown” existing de- ficiencies; and let us hope that with the facts before them the progressive action of Missouri will be widely imitated in this important matter. 1 Chapter 282, Laws of the Thirty-seventh General Assembly, approved April 21, 1917. 157 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES The state of Missouri is probably no more unprogressive in legal matters related to child welfare than any of the 15 or 20 conservative commonwealths referred to above. Yet the child welfare workers of that state recently formulated and listed so formidable an array of defects in the laws and customs of the state that a thorough revision of them was found to be a real necessity. The governor of Missouri appointed a Children’s Code Commission in 1915, which reported in 1916, recommending the repeal of obsolete statutes, the revision of others, and the enacting of much entirely new legislation. It is fair to believe that a similar study of existing laws and conditions in many states would reveal need of action equal to. that found in Missouri. Most of the defects in the Missouri laws are duplicated in a score of commonwealths. If these states could see Missouri’s problems, they would have a fair idea of their own. Therefore, to stimulate such study, to guide it toward important points and matters, and to set before hitherto conservative states the example of one now awakened and progressive, some of the Missouri conditions are here outlined with the remedies proposed by the Children’s Code Commission above mentioned. From the printed report of the commission the following 20 items have been arranged and condensed, so as to bring into small space matters that might be given long and elaborate dis- cussion. While all of the items are contained in the report, quota- tion marks are omitted, as part of the material does not appear there in the same order or in the form here presented. 1. In Missouri marriage licenses are granted immediately upon application, and solely upon the statements of the people apply- ing. Under such a provision, hasty marriages and elopements, frequently between mere children, are encouraged. 2. No age is fixed at which a girl may marry, and under the provision for common law marriages, a girl of twelve years may, without her parents’ consent, live with a man as his wife. 3. The “age of consent”’ for girls is fifteen years (eighteen years on condition of previous chastity). Fifteen years is lower than in most other states. , 4. From three to five per cent of the children born in the state are illegitimate; the known illegitimates numbering over 1,800 a year. 158 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION 5. Children born out of wedlock have no claims whatever on their fathers, not even the right of support. The mother solely is responsible. As many unmarried mothers are poor, or for some reason abandon their progeny, most surviving children of this class become the objects of charity. 6. The laws punishing the abandonment of children fail to cover mothers who desert, or the abandonment of children born out of wedlock, or the extradition of parents charged with abandon- ment. 7. In Missouri “baby farming” for profit is a legal institution. 8. It is at present impossible for a child to establish legally by a suit in court who its father is. 9. Under the present law a parent is not liable for the support of a minor child driven from home. 10. Parents can sign away their children to individuals or asso- ciations without any public record, or a proceeding in court. They may sell or dispose of them the same as if they were a piece of property. 11. Adoption in Missouri is still by deed, without a court proceeding, just as in cases of transfers of real estate. The child is regarded as a chattel. 12. No provision is made for the right of foster parents or their families to inherit from adopted children, an omission that expe- rience shows should be corrected. Under the present law, the property of an adopted child after death passes to blood relatives, unless the child has been adopted from an institution. 13. The private child-caring institutions of Missouri average in care over 5,000 inmates; and there is no state supervision of such private institutions, or of child-placing agencies. 14. One-third of the almshouses of Missouri have children among their inmates, under depressing and evil influences. 15. One-third of the paupers in the county almshouses are feeble-minded, as are three-fifths of the poor who are given relief from county funds. 16. There are about 7,000 feeble-minded persons in the state. The one institution for feeble-minded houses only 588, and there is a “waiting list” of 800, who have little prospect of admission. 17. There are on the average over 500 children under eighteen 159 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES years of age in Missouri jails, associating with tramps and criminals, and seriously stigmatized by such incarceration. 18. Hundreds of children, most of them youngsters of school age, are engaged in selling articles on the public streets of Missouri cities, unprotected and unregulated. 19. The 1910 United States census showed 18,000 children of Missouri under fourteen years of age engaged in gainful occupa- tions; and there are over 34,000 more between the ages of fourteen and fifteen years at work for wages in the state. Regulation of child labor is very incomplete and imperfect. 20. There is at present no law forbidding the employment of expectant mothers or mothers of very young children in gainful occupations; there should be a law to forbid their employment for at least three weeks before and after childbirth, with public aid when necessary. The Commission offers definite plans and bills to be enacted into laws, to cover the deficiencies indicated in these paragraphs, and other matters omitted as less directly related to child welfare. It proposes the organization of state and county welfare depart- ments; a juvenile court in every county; the supervision and regulation of private child-caring institutions by the state board of charities and corrections; a state-wide mothers’ pensions act; the prohibition of the care of children in almshouses; revision and strengthening of the child labor laws; vocational guidance to aid young people to enter occupations fitted to their abilities; and the enlargement and improvement of public provisions for the care of special classes of children—the deaf, blind, crippled, epileptic, and feeble-minded. Preventive measures include the organization and support of agencies for health and recreation; the regulation of commercial amusements; various changes and improvements in the compulsory education laws; and many other important matters.! Essentials of State Supervision. It seems evident from the foregoing that state supervision of private child-caring institu- tions is a real necessity in all progressive commonwealths. As 1 Condensed and arranged from Missouri Code Commission, a pamphlet of 160 pages, prepared by the Missouri Code Commission, a body appointed by the gov- ernor to revise and codify the laws relating to children, for submission to the Forty- ninth General Assembly. Published by the Commission, St. Louis, December, 1916. 160 ADEQUATE SUPERVISION concluding statements in relation to this important matter the following will cover the most important essentials of adequate supervision: 1. There must be proper power and authority vested by legis- lative action in a suitable state board. 2. The board and its working force should be absolutely non- partisan and nonsectarian. 3. Its entire service should be impartially administered. 4. Only trained or experienced agents of high quality should be employed. 5. The state should make liberal appropriations for its support. 6. It should have authority over all sorts of institutions, whether aided by public funds or dependent upon private benevolence. 7. It should have power to compel the rectification of any neglect or abuses of children in institutions and proper super- vision by agencies of children placed-out in families; and it should have the right to transfer any children improperly placed. 8. It should establish minimum standards of child care, both physical and administrative, and require the keeping of syste- matic records of all children, service, and finance.! 9. It should grant certificates of approval annually after care- ful inspection to all approved agencies and institutions. 10. It should wisely and tactfully enforce all laws, but this work should be secondary to efforts to improve the service rendered to the children and to secure their welfare. 11. As the only practical way to solve social welfare problems is by state-wide action, in which is implied occasional resort to legislation and sometimes the necessity of funds produced by taxation, one chief duty of the supervisory board should be so to study the situation that it may create a State Program of Child Welfare covering both present needs and the probable requirements for one or two decades of all classes of dependent, delinquent, and defective children.” 1See Child Welfare Work in California, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916, p. 227. 2 A Tentative Outline of a State Program, by H.H. Hart, LL.D., is given in Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania, W. H. Slingerland, Ph.D., Department of Child- helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1915, pp. 32-34; also a discussion of State Supervision of Children’s Institutions in the same volume, pp. 256-265. i 161 PART THREE SPECIAL CLASSES, ARGUMENTS, AND FORECASTS Many orphanages still cling to the ancient policy of bringing up children to manhood and womanhood, and to ancient methods of building and ad- ministration, but a large number have broken away from their ancient tradi- tions, and have ceased to bring up children. They have either entered actively into the placing of children in family homes, or they have become temporary refuges for half-orphan and other children needing temporary care.—Hastings H. Hart. On the whole, the placing-out system deserves the commendation it has received from the most advanced specialists. If administered “with an adequate supply of eternal vigilance,” it is economical, kindly, and efficient. If badly administered it leads to very obvious abuses. But at its best it is the best system. . . . Attention should be called to the fact that it is less in child-caring than in child-saving work that really helpful results are to be found.—A. G. Warner. CHAPTER X CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS DISCUSSION of questions relating to children of unmar- A ried parents is pertinent to the present manual because many of these children are almost necessarily subjects for placement in families. It is also true that child-placing agencies, because of their extensive connection with this class of children in their home-finding work, have exceptional opportunities for preventive measures and educational propaganda. Therefore it is proper here to give some consideration to children of un- married parents. All foundlings whose parents cannot be discovered should as soon as possible be placed with selected foster parents, unless so diseased as to render hospital service essential. The majority of all other illegitimate children, after wet-nursing for the proper period by their own mothers whenever this can be arranged, should also go quickly into family life rather than into institutional care. This statement is in perfect harmony with modern efforts to induce unmarried mothers to care permanently for their children and to obtain maintenance from wayward fathers, grandparents, or other blood relatives. At best only a portion of the illegiti- mate children can be provided for by their own kin, and for many the possibilities of proper care will be confined to child-caring institutions and homes provided by child-placing agencies. For reasons to be given more fully later, it will be far better for the child, and far more economical as a charitable measure, to find it a home in a good family than to assign it to any child-caring in- stitution however well equipped for service. Numbers of Illegitimates. Lack of vital statistics in many of the states, and careless keeping of records in many others, leave vague and uncertain the actual numbers born out of wedlock in this country. That a great many thousands thus come into the 165 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES world every year is a matter of common knowledge. Dr. Young, health commissioner of the city of Chicago, recently declared that the astounding total of illegitimate children annually born in the hospitals of that city was more than 2,000 and perhaps was not far from 3,000. It is known also that many other thou- sands annually are born in the same city in private homes and in commercial lying-in hospitals and other low-grade maternity homes. Similar and proportionate figures tell a like story in regard to every other large city of America. Some authorities estimate the illegitimate births in this country at five per cent of the whole number, which would be approximately 125,000. No doubt there are over 100,000 children every year born out of wedlock in our own land. Results of Social Ostracism. Upon the mothers of these illegiti- mate children in large measure falls the heavy burden of ostracism and often of entire support of the child. The father too often escapes all public connection with the advent or after-care of the new life. One social duty of today is the evening up of parental duties and responsibilities. Mr. C. C. Carstens says: “legitimate children, usually unwel- come because of the parents’ relationship to each other, inevitably develop under prenatal influences that are, to say the least, un- happy. Before the birth of the child the mother is apt to neglect her health, to work under circumstances that are not for the best interests of the child, to spend the last days or weeks before the crucial time away from mother and home, with strangers in a strange place. Ostracism, reproach and prejudice await the little stranger at birth and make themselves felt long before he is con- scious of their potent influences. “Charitable organizations to whom one would naturally turn for advice and assistance at such times, in certain instances also draw the line at the illegitimate child. . . . As a-result of these conditions, the mother very frequently seeks to relieve herself of the child’s care by turning heaven and earth to get rid of it hon- orably, and if this fails, abandons it or even takes its life.’’! Commercial Lying-in Homes. Very often the only refuge 1The Fate of the Child Born Out of Wedlock, C. C. Carstens, in New Boston, October, 1911, p. 211. 166 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS known to an unmarried girl about to become a mother is the com- mercial lying-in home or the secret maternity hospital. In nearly all cases these are panderers to evil passions and conscienceless abettors of illegal sexual relations. Their stated purpose is to aid these unfortunate girls; their real reason for existence is the heart- less exploiting of the misery of these girls for personal gain, a reck- less and remorseless dealing in helpless human lives. It is a com- mentary on our twentieth century civilization that in only a few of the most progressive states are there any adequate statutory efforts to abolish or even to limit and control these harpies of our American cities. It will be understood that this arraignment is not aimed at the maternity departments of excellent general hospitals, nor at rescue homes, or other altruistic organizations that are wisely directed and are engaged in this sort of service not for financial gain but to relieve suffering. It is aimed at midwives, physicians, and other individuals who go into the secret maternity work and take charge of illegitimate children, even organizing institutions to prosecute such business, simply for the money there is in it. These harpies do a thriving business with bruised motherhood submitting under protest to robbery in both finance and child life. As one observer remarks: “Torn between the longing for her previous respected place in life and the tiny being whose claim is of such short tenure, no wonder she sacrifices the baby. Especially is this true in many hospitals where the mother does not even see her offspring. Said a doctor in one hospital: ‘We never let a mother see her child, for when she does she is not so willing to part from it.’’”’ But in some cases the home or hospital will neither keep nor dispose of the child. Charges are made by the keepers of these wretched places all the way from $25 to $300, according to the funds that seem to be available. Often the small amount the girl has in hand is taken on account and the girl obli- gates herself to pay in instalments as she can earn. Pressure for payment, enforced by threats of exposure, too often drive her into permanent depths of misery. It is not strange that of the illegitimate children born in Chicago, recent research indicates that 1,000 disappear absolutely every year. Nor is it strange that social investigators all over 167 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES the nation are demanding accurate registration of illegitimate births, and adequate provision on an altruistic basis for unwedded mothers and their innocent children. Disposition of Unwanted Children. Most of the homes, both private and public, where they make it their business to care for unwedded mothers, make it also a business to dispose of their progeny. The easy way is by the so-called “adopting out,’’ in which in most cases there is no real adoption. Generally such institutions have no regular system of child-placing in families, but depend on advertising in newspapers, on physicians who know of people who desire children, and on the gossipy talk of friends and patrons. Applications received from these sources are of all grades. A few are from the good homes that would be approved after investigation by the best agencies. Others are common homes generally undesirable although respectable. Others still are from people of vile character, living in localities and under conditions pre- cluding the possibility of properly rearing children if indeed the children could hope to survive babyhood. None of these “homes” caring for unwedded mothers pays any attention to the welfare of the infant after it has been taken away. Traffic in Children. In 1917 the Juvenile ‘Protective Associa- tion of Chicago undertook an investigation of the conditions under which so-called baby farms of the city and vicinity are conducted. Shocking abuses and a great mortality among the infants were discovered, together with a regular commercialized traffic whereby unwanted and illegitimate children were sold at rates varying from $15 to $100. The investigation which covered an inquiry into 72 homes where infants were boarded and in which were found 337 children, was made by Arthur Alden Guild, and the report is published under the title “Baby Farms in Chicago.” So significant is this report and so striking are the facts revealed that a somewhat lengthy quotation is here given: “It was found that there was a regular commercialized business of child placing being carried on in the city of Chicago; that there were many maternity hospitals which made regular charges of from $15 and more for disposing of unwelcome children; and that there were also doctors and other individuals who took advantage of the 168 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS unmarried mother willing to pay any amount of money to dis- pose of her child. One of the Juvenile Protective Association officers visiting several of these homes had with her a pregnant woman for whom she wished to find a place. Some of the people in charge of the places offered to dispose of the child for sums ranging from $15 to $65, and stated that no questions would be asked and that they did not wish to know the mother’s name. In fact, they told the investigator and the prospective mother that they would prefer that she give a fictitious name and address. It was found that these same people if they secured an unusually attractive child would sell it for sums ranging from $15 to $100. One woman in charge of a baby farm sold a baby for $100 during the time of the investigation. It was found that she had required $25 to be paid at once and the remainder on the instalment plan. Her trade slogan was, ‘It’s cheaper and easier to buy a baby for $100 than to have one of your own.’ The Juvenile Protective Association afterwards found the child in Gary, Indiana, and placed it under the protection of the juvenile court there. A doctor on the south side offered to sell a pretty baby to an investigator for $100. Another woman on the north side of the city offered to sell a child to an investigator for $18. Many others offered to give children to the visitors, and said that no questions would be asked. No name, address, or reference was required to secure the custody of a child from these people. Many children placed in this manner were taken by people who could not have secured children through certified child-placing agencies because they were immoral, or wished to procure a child for a fraudulent purpose. . . . “Tt has been shown by this study that in 72 baby farms investi- gated there were 337 children, all of whom came from abnormal family conditions; that 108, or more than 30 per cent, were illegiti- mate children; that eight others were born or conceived out of wedlock; that the parents of a great many of the children were diseased or were criminals; that more than 29 per cent of the children were either mentally or physically defective; that these children, who needed more than ordinary attention, were cared for by women who were ignorant of the proper methods of caring for children; that they were boarded in homes 50 per cent of 169 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES which were unfit for habitation; that many of the children died without medical attention because of the ignorance of the care- takers; that some of them died of neglect and starvation; that only in five homes were records of any description kept; that no medical examination was made on entrance to prevent children who had infectious or contagious diseases from being taken in and placed with other children, many of whom had little resis- tance to disease; that there was no medical inspection made in any of the homes to discover whether any of the children were developing contagious or infectious diseases which would endanger the health of the other children in the homes; that in some homes children who had infectious diseases occupied the same beds with anemic children; that 20 per cent of the illegitimate children found in these homes were abandoned by their mothers; that the mothers of 42 of the 108 illegitimate children were not interested in their welfare; that the parents of many of the legitimate chil- dren were not at all interested in their children; that there was a commercialized traffic in child-placing and home-finding carried on in Chicago; that Illinois has no law which requires a person who accepts the possession or permanent custody of a child to become legally responsible for its care; that Illinois has no law to prevent traffic in children; that children may be adopted in any one of three courts, none of which makes adequate investigations.’’! General Social Program. Several prominent welfare experts have outlined plans for the improvement of present conditions in regard to the illegitimate child. Dr. Hart has proposed a “Life Saving Plan” of which a condensation is given below: 1. The state should assume a special responsibility for the safety of an illegitimate child, in view of the special hazard of life and health to which it is exposed. 2. Legislation should be secured requiring physicians in general and other responsible persons aware of such facts to report every unmarried pregnant woman to the local board of health as soon as her condition becomes known. Exception to this rule should be made of young women residing with parents and relatives able and willing to give adequate care. 1 Baby Farms in Chicago: An Investigation Made for the Juvenile Protective Association, Arthur Alden Guild, 1917, pamphlet, pp. 24-26. 170 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS 3. It should be made lawful for the expectant mother to assume a fictitious name for the purpose of this registration and report (Mrs. Mary Smith,” and so forth) in order not to expose her identity; provided, that the same name shall be used as long as she is a subject of such record, and shall not be changed except to resume her own name. Birth registration, however, should be made only under the true name of the mother. 4. Every board of health in cities of 50,000 population or more should appoint ‘visiting nurses for expectant mothers whose duty it should be to instruct them as to diet and hygiene, to see that they are properly safeguarded and nourished during pregnancy, properly cared for at confinement, and also as to their obligation to nurse their own infants. The relation of the visiting nurse should be that of a personal friend, vitally and cordially interested in the young woman’s welfare. 5. Legislation should be secured making it obligatory upon each mother of an illegitimate child to care personally for her child at least one year, and if physically able to do so to nurse it at the breast for not less than six months. 6. Legislation should be secured whereby every mother of an illegitimate child shall be placed on probation the first year of the life of the child; the probation officer to be the superintendent of the institution in which she is placed, or, if she is not in an institution, the visiting nurse appointed by the board of health. 7. The probation officer should take wise measures to secure the welfare of the infant and mother by promoting marriage with the father of the child if advisable, or by restoring the mother to her own home and relatives, or by securing for her a safe and suitable situation. 8. Provision should be made to assure the ability of the nursing mother to care for her child during its first year of life in some one of the following ways: (a) In a suitable institution controlled by the city board of health; (b) in a suitable private institution; (c) in a suitable family boarding place; (d) in a suitable private home on wages. 9. To insure the success of this plan the officials connected with the work must possess the right spirit. They must be wise, discriminating, sympathetic, courageous, persistent, heartily in 171 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES favor of the method adopted, anxious to develop the spirit of maternal love in the young mothers, and willing to co-operate with other philanthropic agencies to obtain the best results. 10. In the case of foundling infants abandoned by the mother: (a) every effort should be made to find the mother and to hold her to her maternal obligations; (b) if the mother cannot be found, if possible secure wet-nursing for the child; (c) if wet- nursing or an adoptive home is not available, board the child temporarily with a good motherly woman, and place permanently with foster parents as soon as possible; (d) syphilitic children if feeble may often be saved by mother’s mitk mechanically drawn and fed from a bottle; (e) motherless infants can be bottle-fed in institutions, but experience proves this more difficult to prac- tice successfully than in family homes, and usually the mortality is much higher.! Norway’s New Law. The foremost countries in dealing with the problems of illegitimacy are Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. In 1915 Norway adopted what social experts declare to be the “bill of rights of the illegitimate child.” It embodies the prin- ciple that “legitimate and illegitimate children have equal rights before the law”; that “the rights and duties of both parents are the same”; and that “society is entitled to know not only who is the mother but who is the father of every child born.” The principal stipulations of this radical but sensible law are these: 1. The child born out of wedlock has the right to the father’s name. 2. The child is “entitled to be supported by his parents in accordance with the financial circumstances of the one who is economically better placed.’’ 3. The state and not the mother is the mediator between the child and the father, especially in all matters of support and inheritance. 4. Illegitimate children shall inherit from parents equally with those who are born in wedlock. 5. Inquiry into parentage takes place under oath. “The man 1Condensed from Registration of Illegitimate Births, a paper read before the American Public Health Association at Rochester, New York, September 7, 1915. es H. Hart, LL.D., Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. 172 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS who is named by the mother under oath must appear before the investigating authority and either acknowledge that he is the father or prove that he is not. The mother is subject to a fine, imprisonment, and a suit for damages if she makes a false assign- ment of paternity.” 6. Over 4o per cent of the illegitimate children born in Nor- way—5,000 per year—are now receiving support from their fathers. The same law is being urged for Germany, where it is estimated that 200,000 children annually are born out of wedlock. “It is not so difficult from the legal point of view to establish paternity as the defenders of anonymous fatherhood like to say it is.’’! Minnesota’s New Code. This code provides that, on petition of the mother of an illegitimate child, or any one of several specified public officers, the illegitimate father of such illegitimate child may be tried in the district court. “If he is found guilty, or admits the truth of the accusation, he shall be adjudged to be the father of such child and henceforth shall be subject to all the obliga- tions for the care, maintenance, and education of such child, and to all the penalties for failure to perform the same, which are or shall be imposed by law upon the father of a legitimate child of like age and capacity. Judgment shall also be entered against him for all expenses incurred by the county for the lying-in and support of and attendance upon the mother during her sickness, and for the care and support of such child prior to said judgment of paternity, If the defendant fails to pay the amount of such money judgment forthwith, or during such stay of execution as may be granted by the court, he shall be committed to the county jail, there to remain until he pays the same or is discharged according to law.” It is further provided that “This chapter shall be liberally con- strued with a view to effecting its purpose, which is primarily to safeguard the interest of illegitimate children and secure for them the nearest possible approximation to the care, support, and education, that they would be entitled to receive if born of lawful marriage, which purpose is hereby acknowledged and de- clared to be the duty of the state; and also to secure from the 1Condensed from Norway’s Treatment of the Illegitimate Child, Katharine S. Anthony, The New Republic, August 21, 1915, p. 70. 173 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES fathers of such children repayment of public moneys necessarily expended in connection with their birth.! Present Problems. Agitation, crystallization of public senti- ment, and new legislation will be necessary to put into effect most of Dr. Hart’s propositions and an Americanized version of the Norway law. Meanwhile we are facing not theories but actual facts. The child born out of wedlock is here. He will be born next year and also a decade hence. What immediate action in regard to illegitimates shall be taken by the social workers of America, and especially the child-placing agencies? It is a big and complex problem. Thousands cannot, or at least will not, remain with their mothers. We can shut our eyes to their exis- tence and let them die. We can provide institutional care in foundling asylums. We can use well-organized child-placing agen- cies and locate them in selected foster homes. The progressive people of today must determine which of these three methods shall be employed. The Negative Side. Consider the negative side for a moment. We cannot allow the lying-in home and baby farm harpies to continue unchallenged the iniquitous work they have been doing. We cannot persist in forms of ostracism that drive to desperation thousands of erring girls, and that are futile in the prevention of illegitimacy. We cannot permit irresponsible individuals to “adopt out” illegitimate infants, without previous investigation or after-supervision of homes, any more than we can allow such work.to be done for the children legitimized by law and religious ceremony. Foundling Asylums Fail. Foundling asylums and other insti- tutions for the congregate care of bottle-fed infants have been weighed in the balance and found wanting. They offer no aid in preventing illegitimacy. They suffer an enormous mortality among infants served. At best they only defer for a time among the survivors what should have been done at the beginning— placement in foster homes. The only use for such institutions is as emergency refuges until proper private homes can be found. Institutions of this class exist in many American cities, but 1Chapter 210, Laws of Minnesota Relating to Children, 1917, p. 296, para- graphs 3214, 3218, 3225 (d). 174 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS are far less numerous than general orphanages. The largest are the New York Foundling Asylum, which has in care an average of 1,700 children, and the New York Infant Asylum, with about 600 babies in care. A study made by Dr. Hart in 1910 of a large number of American foundling asylums, showed that the average mortality of infants in such care exceeded 55 per cent. Other authorities show mortality statistics in such institutions ranging from 50 to 100 per cent, this last meaning literally that all the infants received die before the end of their first year. St. Vincent’s Home in Philadelphia is a good example of an institution for motherless babies. So difficult was it found in this home to preserve the lives of these little ones that an out-nursing department was organized near the close of the nineteenth century. In the annual report of the institution for 1899 the paragraph on the out-nursing department contained this suggestive statement: “Tt is now nearly four years since the founding of this department, and . . . no less than 166 infants have been or are being taken care of under its auspices. Of these 108 have been saved. When it is considered that these lives would have been certainly lost without their benevolence, the contributors to this fund will have no occasion to regret the charity they have shown. One hundred and eight lives have been saved, at an average cost of $90.70 each. The mortality has been reduced from about 100 per cent to about 34 per cent. . . . It has been demonstrated that by no other method than that adopted, can they be saved from death.””! Nine years later when the out-nursing department had cared for nearly 500 children, the annual report of this institution con- tained the following statement: ‘‘ The experience of the past year in showing the excellent effects of puttingoutinfants . . . to nurse in private families has been no less gratifying. . . . It costs about $105 per annum for each infant for board, and inci- dental expenses in addition bring this amount up to about $120. But when it is considered that 80 per cent of the lives are saved by this expenditure, it is obvious the expense is warranted.’’? There are other reasons than excessive mortality for declaring 1 Report of St. Vincent’s Home, 1899, pp. 19, 20. 2 Op. cit., 1908, p. 18. 175 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES against the use of the foundling asylums for the care of mother- less infants. Even the surviving minority of foundling asylum children have not had the mothering and individual care essential to normal development. The general use of such institutions must be deprecated and their increase or enlargement positively opposed. Combined Care Institutions. A special class of institutions for the combined care of adults and children, usually mothers and babies, is one of the social developments of the last quarter cen- tury. A few such are under public management, others are local or denominational, but chief among them are two great groups of institutions, the Florence Crittenton Homes and the Salvation Army Rescue Homes. As contrasted with commercial lying-in homes, or even the altruistic but unavailing foundling asylums, many of these combined care institutions are doing a needed work in a really efficient way. They receive mainly prospective mothers, largely those unmar- ried and in poverty, for whom they care without charge or for a merely nominal compensation. The mothers are surrounded with sympathetic and elevating influences, and are retained until their babies are several months old. Breast-nursing of the infants is required in all possible cases. When the time for departure comes, homes or employment are obtained for the girls, many of whom are encouraged to take their babies with them. When the young mothers cannot continue to care for their own infants, and no relatives can be found to assume the task, the infants are gen- erally turned over to some standard agency for placement in family homes. In many states such co-operation between com- bined care institutions and child-placing agencies is constant and satisfactory. Foster Homes. The placing-out method is especially applicable to children born out of wedlock. After efforts have been made to promote marriages between parents who should be married; after endeavoring to enlist the aid of responsible relatives in behalf of the infants of their own blood; after the unmarried mothers have been encouraged and required to meet their maternal obligations as far as possible, and at least to nurse their babies through the nursing period, there will still remain thousands of these infants 176 CHILDREN OF UNMARRIED PARENTS for whom someone must provide. The family home is greatly to be preferred to the institution for the care of children of this class. Family home care by out-nursing is applicable to babies await- ing a decision as to care by relatives or permanent adoption in a foster home. The placing of the mother in a family home for domestic service where she can keep her baby with her is suc- cessfully practiced by some of the most efficient agencies. Whenever it shall have been decided after careful and con- scientious consideration that it is right and necessary for the mother to give up her baby, if the child is physically normal and born of a mother who is mentally normal, it should be placed in a private home as a member of the family and, usually, with the expectation of full legal adoption. Extraordinary care is neces- sary in selecting homes for infants because they are usually taken with a view to adoption, and the foster parents reasonably object to frequent visitation or close inspection. It becomes, therefore, a difficult and delicate matter to undertake the removal of such a child after the interest and affections of the foster parents have become enlisted. Thousands of devoted foster parents have made their own by love and adoption children born out of wedlock, who have thus escaped the unhappy fate of many such children not so sheltered. 12 177 CHAPTER XI JUVENILE WAR DEPENDENTS the national organization responsible for the care of families or individuals who become dependent through the effects of the great war. This portion of the work of the American Red Cross has come to be known as Home Service. Its responsibility is met through Home Service Sections which are a part of each Red Cross Chapter. The work is under the direction of the Department of Civilian Relief. Home Service has assumed responsibility for the welfare of the families of men in all branches of the service: the regular army, the national guard, the national army, sailors, marines, men of the aviation corps, engineers, doctors, nurses, orderlies, ambulance drivers, and others attached to hospital units; also for the families living in this country of soldiers or sailors of any of the allied forces, and for the families of civilians who have been wounded or killed as the direct result of war activities. In carrying on this work, provision has been made for co-opera- tion with the various social and religious agencies of all communi- ties. To this end the director general of the Department of Civilian Relief, in the Manual of Home Service, has issued the fol- lowing definite instructions: “It is important to work out with each church, each society, each settlement, and other social agencies, a thoroughly understood and agreeable co-operation. The work of each should be joined to the others with a constant, sympathetic regard for the feelings and welfare of families receiving home service.’’! Policy of the American Red Cross.—The Director General of Civilian Relief, in a letter addressed to “all Directors of Civilian [te American Red Cross has been officially designated as 1 Manual of Home Service, A. R. C. 201, second edition, American Red Cross, Washington, December, 1917, p. 10. 178 JUVENILE WAR DEPENDENTS Relief,’ dated October 26, 1917, has made a declaration of the policy of the Red Cross with reference to the dependent children of soldiers. The letter is as follows: Child Welfare. 1. From individual members of several Chapters the suggestion has come that institutions for the care of children to be taken from soldiers’ families should be established by the Red Cross. It is possible that such suggestions are reaching your offices, and | am sure you will be glad to have at hand that concise and forcible statement of views on this subject which I quote from a recent letter from Hastings H. Hart, of the Department of Child-Helping of the Russell Sage Foundation. Dr. Hart says: “T believe that the children of soldiers should in almost all cases be regarded as members of a family and not as separate individuals. If there is a mother who is fit to bring up her own children she should have the opportunity to do so. It isa great cruelty to express our sympathy for a soldier’s widow and then double her bereavement by taking away her children also. “T believe also that where there are competent and fit rela- tives they should be encouraged and stimulated to care for the children of their kinsman.” 2. In another letter Dr. Hart discusses the subject of child- placing as far as the Red Cross Chapters are concerned. He writes as follows: “My experience leads me to favor the handling of placing- out work through central agencies; preferably state-wide agencies. “As you are doubtless aware, the county agencies which are affiliated with the New York State Charities Aid Association do not usually place out children in free homes, but the general practice is to turn over such children to the State Charities Aid Association, which places and supervises them through their central agencies. “Tn like manner many of the Catholic orphan asylums in the state of New York do not themselves place out children but do their placing through the Catholic Home Bureau which does a state-wide work. “Many states of the Union have state-wide agencies, like the Pennsylvania Children’s Aid Society, the Maryland Chil- dren’s Aid Society, the New Jersey Board of Children’s Guar- dians, the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society, and so forth. “It appears to me as if it might be wise for your office to select one or two responsible agencies in each state and then to recom- 179 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES mend to the local chapters that whatever placing-out work needs to be done in their several states shall be done through these selected agencies. “| think that your agents will need to advise the local chapters very carefully with reference to the matter of the conditions under which a family should be broken up. There is often a strong tendency to break families up needlessly because it seems to be the easiest way of getting rid of a difficult case. “The permanent disposal of a child by placing-out or other- wise is justifiable only in the following cases: 1. When both parents are dead. 2. When the mother is insane or feeble-minded. 3. When the mother is a moron, or of such low mental grade as to be incapable of training her children or of providing for them properly. 4. When the mother is clearly immoral, vicious, or grossly cruel to her children. “In many cases where children are neglected or cruelly treated, conditions can be remedied by faithful supervision through friendly visitors or probation officers. In other cases conditions which prevent children from receiving proper care are temporary, and it is only necessary to provide temporary care by boarding in a family or placing in a suitable institution. “In no case where a family is under the care of the Red Cross should the children’s agencies undertake to act independently of the Red Cross.” 3. Dr. Hart then offers the suggestion: ‘That the Bureau for Exchange of Information’ conducted by the Committee of Co- operation for Child-Helping agencies will be fully at the service of the Division Director of Civilian Relief.” The plan of placing in family homes is peculiarly adapted to the needs of the children of soldiers or sailors who may lose their lives or be disabled by the war: first, because many soldiers and sailors have relatives or friends who stand ready to give a home to their children in case of need; and second, because of the general interest and goodwill of the people toward the defenders of our country and their families. Under these circumstances there will be little difficulty in finding suitable homes for soldiers’ children who are proper subjects for family home care. If, however, there is a good mother, ample provision should be 1 The address of the Bureau is Bureau for Exchange of Information, 105 East 22nd St., New York City. 180 JUVENILE WAR DEPENDENTS made to enable her to maintain herself and her children and to care for them in their own home. The Federal Government will supply permanent allowances in the form of insurance and com- pensation. Some states give additional allowances. The Ameri- can Red Cross will supplement these allowances during the war, whenever it may be necessary. Institutional Care of Children of Soldiers.—It is distinctly the policy of the Red Cross Department of Civilian Relief to minimize institutional care of war dependents; but in special cases and con- ditions, notably those of children who are delinquent, mentally defective, crippled, or so diseased as to need hospital treatment, institutions must be used. We suggest, however, that the plants of suitable existing institutions be utilized to full capacity for such juvenile war dependents before erecting additional establishments. There has been a disposition in some quarters to go into a panic over the probable necessity of new establishments for illegitimate children of soldiers and their orphans; but there is no justification for sucha panic. Reliable reports from all parts of the United States show that there has been little, if any, increase of illegitimate births, and that the percentage of sexual immorality among American soldiers is probably less than that among the same class of young men in civil life. The number of soldiers’ orphans is not likely to be extraordinary, at least for another year, for the reason that the great body of soldiers, except officers, are unmarried men, and it will be the policy of the American Red Cross not to separate children from their mothers except in cases of absolute necessity. The question of soldiers’ orphans’ homes was discussed in Sep- tember, 1917, by Dr. Hart, in “A Suggested Program for the Executive State Council of Defense of West Virginia,’’! as fol- lows: “A sacred obligation rests upon the Council of Defense and the people of West Virginia toward the dependent families of the men who are taking their lives in their hands and crossing the ocean to foreign shores for the common defense. This obligation appeals to every right-minded citizen and there will be no question as to the readiness of the people of the State to meet it. It is of vital im- portance, however, that this duty shall be discharged with such 1 Published by Russell Sage Foundation, 1917. 181 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES wisdom and fidelity as to secure both the interests and happiness of those mothers and children who may need assistance. “It is of fundamental importance that this shall be recognized as afamily problem. The interests of the mother and the child are not separate and ought not to be separated except in those comparatively few cases where the mother is morally or mentally unfit to care for her own child. “After the Civil War the States of Maine, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas estab- lished ‘Soldiers’ Orphans’ Homes’ for the care of dependent children of soldiers. Most of the children admitted to these homes had living mothers. It was believed that the State could do better for the children than could be done by their mothers in view of their poverty or their inefficiency. “In practice the orphans’ home plan did not prove entirely satisfactory. It was very expensive, involving the maintenance of children at a liberal cost for many years. It was an unnatural plan of living. However well-conducted the homes might be the children were nevertheless deprived of the privileges and oppor- tunities of natural family home life. It was a cruel plan. The State said to the widowed mother: ‘Poor woman! You have lost your husband who has sacrificed his life for his country. We are deeply sorry for you and in order to testify our gratitude to him and our sympathy for you we will take your children away and bring them up for you and thus will enable you to get a living for yourself.’ Thus the mother, bereft of her husband, was bereft also of her children. “Theoretically, the placing-out organization of your State is ideal. You have a State agency known as the West Virginia Humane Society, which is supported and administered by the State. . . . You have also a voluntary society known as the West Virginia Children’s Home Society which is administered without any control or supervision by the State. “The West Virginia Humane Society has never established the standards which are now required by every reputable child-placing agency. . . . We understand that the board of trustees is now looking for a competent superintendent and proposes to estab- lish standards similar to those maintained by the State agencies of 182 JUVENILE WAR DEPENDENTS Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio, and Indiana. Under the new law the society will be under the direction of the State Board of Control and there is every reason to anticipate that it will be put upon a modern basis. “The work of the State Humane Society should be so organized as to meet the needs of Roman Catholic and Jewish children by in- suring their placement with people of like religious faith with their parents. If the number of Roman Catholic children is large enough the St. Vincent de Paul Society should be encouraged to organize a placing-out agency of its own similar to the agencies already organized in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois.” Acting on this advice, the Board of Directors of the West Vir- ginia Humane Society immediately secured a competent superin- tendent from a neighboring state and took active steps, with the co-operation of the Executive State Council of Defense, to re- organize the work of the society and to bring it up to the highest possible degree of efficiency, as a war measure. The probable increase in the demands upon the working forces and facilities of child-placing agencies by the addition of many war dependents emphasizes one main purpose of this volume—recogni- tion of the necessity for improvement in the quality of this service in all parts of the United States. In every state established child- placing agencies should be brought up to standard quality, both in facilities for service and in modern methods; they should be strengthened by adequate support so as to enable them to do first- class work, and all juvenile war dependents who cannot be cared for by their own relatives should be placed-out or boarded-out through such agencies in preference to putting them in institutions. 183 CHAPTER XII ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING HE principal subjects for the work of child-placing in fami- lies, as has already been stated, are homeless and neglected children, reasonably normal in mind and body. Many of these are infants, others are small and young, unsullied by personal faults or blameworthy actions. Many more, almost equally free from personal flaws, are larger children officially classed as de- pendents. There is still another class of placeable children, in- cluding many who have reached the years of adolescence, whose conduct has not been blameless or satisfactory, and who may even have broken the law, who are still fit and proper subjects for placing-out in families. In the following paragraph, Dr. G. Stanley Hall aptly indicates the kind of a boy a really normal one may be, and his statement is ample justification for giving mild delinquents a place in a family home and a chance to make good: “The more we know of boyhood the more narrow and often selfish do adult ideals of it appear. Something is amiss with the lad of ten who is very good, studious, industrious, thoughtful, altruistic, quiet, polite, respectful, obedient, gentlemanly, orderly, always in good toilet, docile to reason, who turns away from stories that reek with gore, prefers adult companionship to that of his mates, refuses all low associates, speaks standard English, or is pious and deeply in love with religious services, as the typical maiden teacher or the a la mode parent wishes. Such a boy is either under-vitalized and anemic and precocious by nature, a repressed, overtrained, conventionalized manikin, a hypocrite, as some can become under pressure thus early in life, or else, a genius of some kind with a little of all these.’’! + Adolescence: Its Psychology, and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education, G. Stanley Hall, Ph.D., LL.D., D. Appleton and Co., New York, 1908, Vol. II, p. 453. 184 ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING In presenting several of the chief arguments for child-placing in families it should be understood that its advocates make no attack upon those who favor institutional care. They recognize the need of institutions, feel that they are indispensable for the special and temporary care of many children and the permanent custodial and also strict disciplinary care of certain classes, and are always glad to express their appreciation of good institutional work. They also realize the immense unsupplied need of child welfare work all over the land, and desire to co-operate with all organizations for such social service. But they are very positive in their belief that for normal needy and homeless children place- ment in selected foster homes by an efficient agency is better than continued care in an institution. Also no one doubts that temporary work for large numbers of dependent children is being successfully done by the child-placing agencies. Brief outlines of five reasons for the use of the child-placing plan are here given. 1. Its Normality. It is an accepted fact that children reared in institutions are in abnormal relations to family life and society, as long as they are thus massed. When they finally emerge and enter social relations and business, they have to get away from institutional habits and customs, and learn the ways of life in private homes and in communities. Many are permanently in- stitutionalized, and never are able to acquire initiative, inde- pendence of spirit, and ability to win success. From all of these handicaps the child placed early in a suitable family home is saved. He is all the time in the same family and social relations that will surround him when he is grown up. He has every stimulus to ambition and personal initiative that appeals to the average child. He has no institutional ideas to forget, no institutional habits to overcome, no conditions of ordinary life to learn. Except in the blood relationships of ordinary family life he is like all of his associates within his social circle. Often the love and “mothering” given to the child in a foster home are little less than what most children receive in their own homes. 2. Its Economy. On the average it costs about $200 a year to board and clothe a child in an institution. The average length of stay for those permanently homeless is estimated at five to six years. In round numbers the average cost of rearing a child in 185 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES an institution is about $1,200. This takes no account of the recent increase in the cost of living and no account of the plant required for the work—the grounds, buildings, furnishings, and other equip- ment, to provide which will call for a permanent investment of over $1,000 for each unit of capacity. That is, an institution with a capacity adequately to care for 100 children will require a per- manent investment of over $100,000. So in addition to about $200 a year for expenses, each institutional child must have the use of about $1,000 worth of property. Put against this the child-placing plan, which in proportion to numbers served requires a very small institutional investment, usually all included in office equipment and a small receiving home for temporary care, in which the chief expense is in actual work done by paid agents, who gather up the distressed and unfortunate children, find good family homes willing to receive them, fit them into the homes, and give friendly and efficient after-supervision. Let us base our estimates of its cost on three examples of such work, thus obtaining a fair average of agency expense. First, an agency operating on the Pacific coast in 1915 reported in detail its work for 1913 and 1914. During two years the society received and placed-out in families a total of 649 children at an average cost of $86 per child. Second, an eastern child-placing agency during the year 1915 handled 368 different children, at an average cost of $71 per child. Third, a western society during the year 1916 handled 405 different children, at an average cost of $67 per child. In each of these organizations much case study and reference work in regard to other children under observation was ignored in the estimate, and of the entire current expense of the society 10 per cent was allowed for the’supervision of placed- out children and 90 per cent was charged up to the children actually in direct care during the year. The general average cost for the three organizations is therefore about $75 per child for the first year’s work. To cover all unstated expense and all possible overhead charges, add $25, and we find that a liberal allowance for the first year of agency work will be $100 per child placed. If these children remain under supervision for an average of six years, what will adequate supervision cost? Dr. Hart, when 186 ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING superintendent of the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society, for years supervised hundreds of the wards of the New York Juvenile Asylum, now the Children’s Village, who were placed- out in family homes in Illinois and Iowa. An exact account was kept of all expenses, which were found to average about $18 per child per annum. Under present conditions similar service would probably cost about $25. Six years’ supervision at $25 per year makes the total cost of supervision $150 per child. Adding the $100 for the first year’s work, we have a total average cost per child to the child-placing agency of $250. Compare the economy of this method with the institutional plan, which costs an average of $1,000 to $1,200 per child. It is true that the foster parents must cover the balance of the cost of service, but in general they will be so situated as to receive recompense in later assistance from the child they rear; if not, they do their part gladly as a duty to humanity and for love of the child. This applies only to placement in free homes, where the child is taken as a real member of the family. Under the boarding-out plan, where the expense of care is borne by private agencies or by the public authorities, the annual financial cost of the service approximates the expense of rearing a child in an institution. Owing to the better initiative and increased independence of spirit developed in the child boarded-out in a family home, it is probable, however, that the dependent condition will average a year less than for the child reared in an institution. The actual cash expense per year will be about the same. The foster home has usually received from $2.50 to $3.00 per week for the child’s board, and the agency expenses for supervision will have varied from $25 to $50 in addition, or a total of $175 to $200 per year. The advocates of child-placing declare, however, that even at an equal financial cost the plan is socially cheaper in the end, as the child reared in a family home has no institutional habits to over- come nor ways of ordinary life to learn when he begins to do for himself. 3. Its Availability. Institutions have a definite capacity. Once filled, only as children die or reach the age of dismission can others be accommodated. As a matter of fact only about one-fifth or 187 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES sixth of the capacity of an orphanage or children’s home can be depended upon as a provision for new children in need of its ser- vices from year to year. For instance, a filled institution with a capacity of 100, will dismiss on the average from 15 to 20 children every year, thus being able to take in as many new wards. Its working capacity, in relation to the current needs of the com- munity, is therefore only 15 or 20 children. On the other hand the child-placing agency has almost un- limited capacity. The supply of available homes seldom anywhere falls below the current demand. It is said that at least one home in ten is childless, and it is a special duty of the agency to fit the homeless child into the childless home. But childless people are not the only ones to take children. Many families are small, and multitudes of the best citizens are willing to take one or more children to their hearts and homes. Other middle-aged parents have reared families and have seen them go forth to make homes for themselves. The house is lonely without children, and it is a common thing for such successful parents gladly to open their doors to the children of misfortune. Without question, there is a good family home for every really homeless child. The unlimited availability of the plan should commend it to the whole social service world. 4. Its Universality. Few except those who have studied the subject systematically realize how universal is the acceptance of the child-placing plan as ideally the best way to provide for nor- mal children who are homeless and dependent. Its acceptance as a practical working method lags but little behind belief in it as an ideal. As already shown, child-placing has been practiced from early historic ages until the present time; it had its renais- sance in the new organizations for systematic home-finding dur- ing the latter half of the nineteenth century; it is now an accepted and approved method of service in both Europe and America; and never in all the past were there so many children annually placed in foster homes by public and private persons, officers, agencies, and institutions as in this second decade of the twentieth century. Take our own country as an example. The laws of every state recognize the method in some form, and in nearly all of them pub- 188 ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING lic officers or agencies are provided to do child-placing as a public function. As already has been shown in the discussion of public child-placing organizations,! these arrangements are not declin- ing remnants of former processes, but are up-to-date developments in the leading states of the Union. Even those who are most closely bound to institutional methods confess that home-finding for normal dependents is desirable, and explain their dependence on institutions by their belief that good homes and altruistic foster parents cannot be found in sufficient numbers to meet present day necessities. One quotation, which is broadly suggestive on more than this one matter, is here given as sufficient to verify this statement. Prof. John A. Ryan, of Washington, D. C., an eminent Roman Catholic author who already has been quoted several times in these pages, says: “A question more variously answered is, whether the main- tenance of foundling asylums is wise. Those who take a stand for the negative point to the very high death rate in these places (sometimes more than 90 per cent), to the smaller expense of the family system, and to the obvious fact that the family is the natural home for young children. Most of the Protestant coun- tries and communities prefer the method of placing the foundling inafamily. The positive arguments in its favor are unanswerable, but against them must be set the fact that it is not always pos- sible to find suitable families who are willing to care for foundlings. Experience shows that sufficient homes of the right kind can not now be found for all orphan children who have arrived at an age which renders them more attractive as well as more useful than utterly helpless infants. It would seem, therefore, that institu- tions are necessary which will shelter foundlings for a number of years.””? It is sometimes averred that Roman Catholics are opposed to child-placing, and insist that dependent children be cared for in institutions. This is not generally true. Many prominent Roman Catholics are advocates of this method, and they maintain a 1See pages 51 to 58. 2 Foundling Asylums, Prof. John A. Ryan, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton and Co., 1907, Vol. VI, p. 160. 189 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES number of excellent child-placing agencies. Two quotations will clearly show the attitude of a large body of Catholics toward this work. The late Thomas M. Mulry, of New York, in his report to the National Conference of Charities and Correction in 1899, as Chairman of the Committee on the Care of Destitute and Neglected Children, said: “The finding of family homes for children has been taken up enthusiastically and with excellent success in many localities. In New York State the Catholic Home Bureau has been recently organized and incorporated. Its object is to place dependent Catholic children in homes. On its board of management are gentlemen connected actively with the different Catholic charit- able societies and institutions. The various institutions have shown their interest in the new organization by placing in its possession the names and the conditions of the children who are fit subjects for placing in family homes. The cordial support received from them and from the public generally proves the oppor- tuneness of this movement and the material help it will be in solving the problem of how best to care for dependent children. All workers agree that the home is the natural place to properly develop the child. . . . There are homes in abundance througb- out our cities, our towns, our farming sections, for every orphan child, if the people will but open their hearts and brighten their homes by studying in what way they may best show their love for their less fortunate fellow beings.’’! The article on Orphans and Orphanages in the Catholic En- cyclopedia, by Dr. Charles F. McKenna, contains the following statements in regard to child-placing: “Over against this institutional method of caring for destitute children, resulting in what is called the orphanage, but not neces- sarily opposed to it, are those methods which seek to put the child earlier under the influences of family life. This is done by boarding-out and by placing-out. The former is a system in which the overseer of the poor or similar officer confides the child to some family as a boarder, and pays regularly for its care up to the age of self-support. . . . More permanent good for 1 Care of Destitute and Neglected Children, T. M. Mulry, National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1899, pp. 167-169. Italics are ours. 190 ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING the child is obtained by the second method—placing-out in free homes. This is sometimes called indenturing in the cases of older children, and sometimes adoption. . . . Advantage in plac- ing-out appears to lie in. the full absorption of the child into a vacancy in a household, where affection can be expected to develop, and where the conditions surrounding the child during all of its maturing years will be those entirely normal to any similar family group in the community. Nearlyall of the States which have laws bearing upon this practice have recognized religious rights, and have provided that where practicable such children must be placed in homes of their own religious faith. Placing-out can be prac- ticed only where an ample number of excellent homes can be obtained. By specializing in the work it becomes possible to place even large numbers of orphans and to surround them with a strong and enlightened protection. The good results most often are mutual, the foster parents gaining as much by their charity as the child.’’ It will thus be seen that Jews, Catholics, and Protestants main- tain numerous agencies for placing-out children, and that all use family homes for the final disposition of their institutional wards. Nonsectarian agencies are even more numerous than denomina- tional agencies, and great fraternal orders not only maintain insti- tutions but also practice child-placing. 5. Its Ultimate Necessity. In the words of a leading social worker: “Whatever makeshifts we create and use in the care of dependent children, the family home is the ultimate institu- tion.”” This fact has been repeatedly emphasized in the preceding pages, and stands as one great reason for using the child-placing system. Many institutions that retain boys and girls until they are fourteen or sixteen years of age declare that they do no placing- out work. Yet when they are pinned down to facts they admit that at the departure of their wards they do secure places for them in family homes, or jobs including the protection of homes, so that these immature citizens may start in the outside world under somewhat favorable circumstances. Human beings are 1 Orphans and Orphanages, Charles F. McKenna, Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton and Co., 1907, Vol. XI, p. 324. 191 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES not like puppies to be cast out into the pond, and forced to swim ashore or drown. Children are too precious to risk in that manner. Even institutionally reared boys and girls are taken out a little distance from shore at least once, and given a helping hand, before they are compelled to “paddle their own canoe.” Such official arrangements on dismissing wards are a form of placing- out, although different from the main work of the child-placing agencies. Some institutions do no child-placing in families because they do not have legal custody of their wards. In New York City and other large centers of population multitudes of children are as- signed to institutions, generally denominational, merely as board- ers at the expense of the municipality. Guardianship of the per- sons of these children is retained by the city authorities, who can remove the children at any time and reassign them at pleasure. The institutions under such conditions become mere municipal boarding-houses, with no responsibility beyond the actual period of the children’s care. Only the children otherwise received are available for ultimate placement in family homes. Institutions of this class must be noted as non-child-placing; but taking the nation as a whole they are few and their exceptional work is unimportant. The advocates of child-placing do not demand that all insti- tutional care of even normal children shall cease, nor do they ask that all normal children shall at once be placed in private families. The Massachusetts method is not always and every- where applicable. There are places where institutions are needed for even normal children. But while agreeing that for some nor- mal children and in some localities a period of institutional care may be proper and even desirable, they urge that the return to a family home be prepared for steadily and systematically, and, at the chosen time, so wisely managed by the institution authori- ties that the outgoing ward shall find in his new abode a real welcome, and in his new life be able to command success. Child-caring institutions will continue to be needed for the temporary care of certain classes of dependents, for the longer care of the specially wayward, and for the permanent care of the mentally subnormal and the physically defective. There is also 192 ARGUMENTS FOR CHILD-PLACING need for colonies that will care for children of tuberculous ten- dencies, for convalescents recovering from diseases or operations, and for those who are deaf, blind, crippled, or deformed. But unless the arguments in the foregoing paragraphs are essentially faulty, early placement is eminently desirable for the vast majority of normal homeless children. The child-placer and the institution officer need not feel that they represent two opposite poles of work, but rather that they are laboring in adjacent zones of service, whose boundaries are undefined and whose tasks intermingle. Let each do his best to give “full proof of his ministry.’”’ At present, in most of the states there is work enough for all, especially if some institutions will somewhat modify their functions so as to prevent unneces- sary overlapping and duplication. In many places a redistribu- tion of efforts and finance is desirable, to meet present conditions and to produce the best possible results. So the fair-minded advocate of child-placing now says to the advocate of institutions: “Let us co-operate. The world is full of needy children. Gather some of them into your institution, and do your best for their welfare. We will go ahead with our home-finding, eagerly welcoming all improved methods and facili- ties for doing good work. When we find a child that needs the special intensive care and discipline possible in institutional life, we shall be glad to place him in your care. When you have a child that will be better for early placing-out, or when the age of dismission comes, let us with our facilities for field work get these wards of yours into good families or working homes, and look after their future welfare. This will be cheaper for you than the employment of special placing-out agents, and both the agency and the institution will be benefited by the co-operation.” Summary. Child-placing in families is the normal provision for children who are homeless dependents; it is the most econom- ical method; it has the widest availability; it is almost univers- ally approved; and it is the ultimate necessity faced by all child welfare workers. The organization of high-class child-placing agencies should be encouraged; they should be given moral and financial support; and between them and all other child-caring organizations there should be the most cordial co-operation. 13 193 CHAPTER XIII LOOKING FORWARD HE social philosophy of child-helping is thus aptly stated by Dr. Henry Pratt Fairchild: “Social solidarity and strength depend very largely upon the sentiments of sym- pathy, fellowship, consideration, and co-operation which are fos- tered by unselfish care of those who are unfit to maintain them- selves in the competition of life. Furthermore, because of the intellectual character of social evolution, it often happens that many who would be too weak to face unaided the battle of life will nevertheless, if aided, be able to render inestimable service to their group.’! In former times only the physical care of depen- dent children was emphasized; today, in accord with this trend of social evolution, special attention is also given to their mental and moral development. Four Elements. The future of child-placing in this country depends upon four principal elements: First, the fact that in the future as in the past it will be necessary to provide for homeless and neglected children because we cannot yet abolish the causes of dependency and delinquency; second, a sufficient number of the best type of American homes; third, the service of highly qualified public and private child-placing organizations; fourth, the best modern methods, both in preliminary case work and in actual child-placing and supervision. 1. The Children. Those who have been engaged in the work during the last quarter century know that the strenuous efforts of that period have not reduced the numbers of children annually requiring aid. There are as many candidates today as were ever known to the child-helping organizations. The causes of depen- dency are as active and as potent as in former times. The tides 1 Outline of Applied Sociology, Henry Pratt Fairchild, Ph.D., The Macmillan Company, New York, 1916, p. 180. 194 LOOKING FORWARD of trouble, distress, and destitution are still at the flood, and our civic philosophers have not yet wrought the needed changes in our imperfect social order that will prevent the need of child- placing work for many years to come. Moreover, it is eminently worth while. Dr. Guest, the English author and educator, says: “Children are the wealth of the nation and it is for us to safeguard that wealth, so that in her hour of trial the nation shall not be found bankrupt.’ 2. The Homes. The plan of placing-out dependent and neg- lected children in families has been decried on the ground that the American home is decadent, and that it is impossible to find a sufficient number of well-ordered homes whose heads are altru- istic enough to receive homeless and destitute children and to bestow upon them the affection and training that will develop them into useful members of society. If this pessimistic view were true we might well tremble for the foundations of American society, but experience in many states and in thousands of cases has demonstrated that there are today in America multitudes of men and women maintaining sweet and wholesome family lives, who with cheerfulness share their house and table with the homeless child, even though it be an undesirable one, and with patient self-sacrifice expend effort and money in training it to healthful manhood or womanhood. This fine spirit is not confined to the well-to-do. People of modest income, unable to bear the financial burden of $150 per year, or more, involved in bringing up a child, cheerfully under- take the responsibility and labor for these unfortunate children without remuneration except reimbursement for their bare finan- cial outlay. It is they who furnish the boarding homes, in many of which are to be found children not easily placed in free homes and where is displayed quite as much devotion and self-sacrifice as among people of larger means who receive attractive young children for adoption. 3. The Organizations. No intelligent observer of the trend of the times can doubt for a moment that the future work of child- placing in families will be done increasingly by regular and per- 1 The Nation of the Future, Dr. L. Haden Guest, G. Ball & Sons, London, 1916, p. 115. 195 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES manent organizations. Individual and haphazard child-placing can no longer be tolerated anywhere. Each year will see new restrictions upon unauthorized and unsystematic work of this kind, and additional emphasis upon that done by agencies properly established and organized, and adequately equipped. 4. The Methods. The use of organized agencies implies a con- stantly increasing employment of trained social workers, thor- ough, modern case work, proper medical and psychological exami- nations, wise selection of family homes, careful fitting of children into the new environment, frequent visitation of foster homes, and adequate supervision of agencies and institutions. If these essen- tials are observed in the work done in the various states, a favor- "able future for child-placing may be forecast with certainty. The Public Interested. Social philosophers as well as child welfare workers are advocating child-placing in families. In his book, The Better City, Dr. Dana W. Bartlett, of Los Angeles, makes the following suggestive statement: ‘Owing to the present- day conditions, economical and social, there are many thousand homes without any child life. It is safe to say that there is a home- less child for every childless home; to bring these two together is as much of a problem as to get the landless man on the man- less land. All states are now interested in placing as speedily as possible all the uncared-for children in some good home, provided they can not be returned to their relatives.’’! Mr. Homer Folks, in his book on the Care of Destitute, Neg- lected and Delinquent Children, writes of child-placing societies and other agencies: “As to the division of the field between public agencies and the private charities not receiving public aid, little change is noticeable, except an increasing tendency to regard the public authorities as the appropriate agencies to assume the care of children who are to be permanently separated from their fami- lies, and private charities as more particularly fitted to deal with those cases involving a temporary assistance, or in the care of children for whom some payment is made by a surviving parent. Associated charity, individual effort, and private funds have never done more for destitute children than at present. There 1The Better City, Dr. Dana W. Bartlett, The Neuner Company, Los Angeles, 1907, p. 119. 196 LOOKING FORWARD need be no fear that they will be rendered unnecessary by the development of a state system.” Personal Views of Leading Workers. Since it may be suggested that the views and prospects presented by the author in this chapter, and also the general trend of the discussions through the entire manual, are largely the opinions and convictions of one now outside the circle of active service, and therefore not informed by actual contact with present conditions, nearly a score of the leaders in organized child-placing work throughout the United States were asked for special statements as to the general con- dition, the present needs, and the future possibilities of the child- placing movement. Their responses were so illuminating that they have been arranged here in an edited and condensed form as a symposium. Two principal groups of workers actively engaged in child- placing are represented in the replies received—the officers of child-placing agencies and the officers of institutions, the latter placing-out children either as a part of their regular work or as a complement to it at the close of institutional care. \_-The Agency Point of View. The first group contains twelve executive officers of prominent agencies, whose statements are arranged alphabetically by the names of the states in which they operate. I. Florida. Mr. Marcus C. Fagg, superintendent of the Chil- dren’s Home Society of Florida, who in five years has made this organization “Florida’s greatest charity’? and one of the leading child welfare organizations in the South, optimistically expresses his outlook in these words: “There is no question in my mind as to the future of child- placing. In coming days the method of providing for dependent children by placing them in good family homes will be more largely and effectively used throughout the United States than in the past or even now. It is today generally accepted through- out the country as the most humane and economical method, and is distinctly known as God’s own plan for every homeless child. The people of Florida have been almost unanimous in 1Care of Destitute, Neglected and Delinquent Children, Homer Folks, The Macmillan Company, New York, 1911, pp. 245, 246. 197 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES supporting the child-placing method for the homeless children of the state, and this society stands ready to provide a good family home for every one of the state’s dependents of this class.’ II. Illinois. Mr. Wilfred _S.Reynolds, superintendent of the Illinois Children’s Home and Aid Society, which is recognized as thé leading child-placing agency of the Middle West, presents the following discussion_of present.needs.and future possibilities: “1 hope you will be able in your book to clarify and place in their proper relations the two types of child care; i.e., ‘institu- tional’ and ‘family.’ {Too long have we treated the institution and family-home-placing as rival systems or methods. We should be able to point out in a convincing manner that these two meth- ods should not be rivals but should supplement each other. I am sure there are types of children who need special institutional care, and can not be successfully handled by being placed in families either for permanent living or at temporary board. Com- munities in which programs for child care are being formulated should be sure that they are able to recognize the need and service of both types of care and properly place them in their program. “(1) Referring to present policies in child-placing without indi- cating any new lines of activity in this field, I should like to see emphasized the raising of standards of service. I believe stan- dards should be raised and applied to: “a, Proper investigation and analysis of every new case apply- ing for care so that the proper kind of care may be applied to each individual child. : “b, Provision for thorough medical examination of every child accepted for care and a system of follow-up by re-examinations and treatment from time to time. “c. The placing for adoption, of such children only as deserve permanent home care in foster families. “d. The development of boarding homes for those children who do not demand institutional care and who yet are in tem- porary distress and may be returned to parents, relatives, or friends after the period of trouble is passed. “e. Adequate supervision through visitation of all children in family homes for adoption and at board, definitely stating the number of children that should be placed under a visitor and 198 LOOKING FORWARD always taking into consideration the conditions under which the children may be living. “(2) As to future needs, conditions and possibilities of child- placing work, I am convinced that more than ever before will it be necessary for child-placing organizations to relate themselves more closely to the family, community and general conditions out of which the child comes; in other words, organizations have too readily allowed themselves to accept children for permanent care without considering the community and the family in which the child may have had its beginning and lived its life until taken away by the organization. Child-placing work will need to be modified from the general conception of removing a neglected child from its natural environment and finding for it a family home in some other locality where it may live as a transplanted plant, to more effort along the line of relieving and if possible eradicating causes bringing the child to its distress, conserving if possible the child’s own family or other natural sources of care by means of relief to parents or relatives, enabling them to continue the care of the children; the endowment of motherhood; assistance in a humane and sympathetic manner of unmarried mothers in the care of their infants; the boarding of children in the same com- munity in which they may be found in distress while efforts are being made to re-adjust the child’s natural sources of care. Child- placing organizations should more and more relate themselves in a co-operating way with other organizations, public officials and efforts in the communities in which they are working for the general betterment of family life.” III. lowa. The Iowa Children’s Home Society is an organiza- tion that has placed in free homes 5,250 children. Dr. A. T. Burnell, superintendent since 1910, thus declares his faith in the work in which he is engaged: “This homefinding work benefits the child in distress, the family receiving it into care, and the community at large. If not rescued the child would suffer; if it did not receive the child the family would be less useful and happy; and the community is specially blessed, for one who unaided would probably grow up vagrant or criminal, in the new relations is on the way to good citizen- ship. 199 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES “ Many of our wards are taken from evil and unpromising en- vironment, yet placement in good homes speedily accomplishes wonderful changes in appearance and character, and starts them toward a hopeful future. For the ill-born and poorly nourished waifs and strays of lowa we have the same faith that shines in Madame Sarah Bernhardt’s affirmation: ‘Even the German- French babies, born of hate, under new surroundings may be enwrapped by an atmosphere of love in the growing years, so that the stamp upon the heart will be the later one, and environ- ment be the dominant force in life.’ “Tt is a hopeful sign that more care is being exercised in the reception of children by the agencies. Increased emphasis should be laid upon thorough preliminary investigation, the study of family histories, and efforts to ascertain whether or not there are relatives able and worthy to assume the care of children whose families reach the breaking point. There should likewise be in- creased care in placing-out, and wise and tactful supervision until the child reaches adult years. “However careful we may be in limiting receptions, there will doubtless continue to be a large number of needy children requir- ing our services. In Iowa we feel sure that all placeable dependent children will continue to find good homes opening their doors to them in the future as in the past, and good foster parents ready to offer love and tenderness as well as food, clothes and shelter. This Society expects a future of usefulness equal or superior to its past, and will go forward with one great purpose in its work— to serve to the utmost of its power the depressed children and the benevolent people of the state.”’ IV. Kansas. Mr. D. F. Shirk, superintendent of the Kansas Children’s Home Society, gives the following as some present day essentials for work of good quality: “The modern system of child-placing by organized agencies is one of the natural results of the recent humanitarian public welfare movement. No argument is now needed to convince intelligent people that a good family home is a better place for a dependent child than the best regulated institution. Yet even this accepted ideal is sometimes called impractical, because of the great abuse of personal rights and the criminal carelessness of 200 VYMO] ‘SANIOYW SAC ‘ALFIOOS AWOH S,NAYATIHD YMO] ad1YJO ]e4]Ue.) pue aWOoY SulAladay 200a NOLONIHSVA\ “ATLLVAS ‘ALAIIOG AWOH S,NAYCTIID) NOLONIHSY,\\ JWOP SUIAIa.ayY PUe auapIsay SJUapuazutsadns i LOOKING FORWARD unworthy child-placers, in some communities. Some needs are clearly apparent today. “(1) There is a feeling among our most intelligent citizens that the whole subject of child-placing needs scientific study, the wide dissemination of information, and more careful oversight of the work done. “(2) No application for a child should be approved until the home has been carefully studied. No child should be placed in a home simply on the recommendations of friends, neighbors, and a pastor. These people all mean well, but most persons will stretch a point in favorable testimony to accommodate a friend, without realizing the possible results to follow. “(3) The agents or visitors employed to study homes and do placing-out work should be trained workers. They should have a wise knowledge of domestic relations. “(4) It is very essential to study both the child and the home, in order to fit the two together. The natural bent and disposition of the child should be considered, so that it may be placed where it can receive not only care and comfort but also the highest pos- sible development of its faculties and powers. “(5) After placement a child should be visited soon and fre- quently, in order to give careful study to its personal condition and its home relations. A good degree of happiness is essential to a child’s welfare. Placing children on trial is a commendable method, and final decisions and papers should never be hastily made.” V. Massachusetts. An organization in Boston is setting an example worthy of wide imitation. The headquarters of the New England Home for Little Wanderers has become an ideal diagnostic and clinical sanatorium for problem cases among dependent chil- dren. The home is primarily for the wards of the organization, who when fit and ready are placed in family homes all over New England; but it also includes in its provisions many other unfor- tunate children. Dr. Frederic H. Knight, the superintendent, indicates the scope and character of the work in the second para- graph of the following statement: “It is becoming increasingly evident that practically all normal dependent children can be cared for adequately in selected family 201 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES homes under supervision. So far as the members of normal groups are concerned, there is a marked tendency toward utilizing family: homes for the majority of them. This is true even of the feeble-minded and of those exhibiting distinctly pathological psychoses. “There is, however, a field of great usefulness for properly equipped and adequately financed institutions for the diagnosis of problem cases, and for the treatment of certain types of physical and mental ailments which are not of the hospital type, and which can be dealt with in family homes only at great expense and with rather doubtful outcome. Splendid results are obtained by group- ing under one roof and one management the children’s medical specialists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and social workers, with an equipment affording sufficient working space and other features for the accommodations of a selected group of children, and for the furnishing of an intensive treatment under thoroughly scientific observation. Such at present is the central institutional work of the New England Home for Little Wanderers.” VI. Massachusetts. Mr. C. C. Carstens, general secretary of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Chil- dren, thus describes his conception of essential needs in the proper development of child-placing work: “A brief summary of what I consider necessary for the future welfare of child-placing work in the United States follows: “(1) Child-placing work concerns itself with the welfare of the child who needs a new home either because it has none or because its home is not proving adequate, and the agencies that are plan- ning to find new homes must equip themselves for the placing of dependent, neglected and to some extent delinquent and defective children. “(2) This task is so serious and so far reaching that while private interest and initiative are needed, and should be encour- aged, it can not in any state be left wholly to private agencies because the community’s own welfare is at stake. “(3) Private agencies should fit themselves to undertake the more difficult, unusual and experimental problems in child-placing, but should constantly seek their place in the whole scheme of child-caring in the state, so that every phase of the problem may 202 LOOKING FORWARD be undertaken by the agency or institution best equipped to meet the need. “(4) Institutions and child-caring societies should both be required to select their own particular problems in child-caring work, so that they may learn the specific need and equip them- selves for it. “(5) Both should recognize the importance of getting the child into a family as soon as it is suitable for placing. “(6) A central state bureau should be formed in each state to become responsible for the welfare of child life in that common- wealth. This bureau should be preventive as well as remedial in its efforts, instead of waiting to be an agent for the mitigation of tragedy.” VII. Minnesota. Dr. S. W. Dickinson, superintendent of the Children’s Home Society of Minnesota, one of the oldest and most conservative of the societies of the Middle West, says: “The child-placing of the future must be done by competent organizations approved by state authority. My judgment is that under present conditions a duly authorized child-placing agency is the proper organization to receive and place children in family homes. I have three special reasons for so believing. “(1) A large part of all children who come into the care of child-placing agencies have some physical defect or impediment which must be treated before they can be successfully placed in permanent homes. Agencies adequately equipped with receiving homes can do this. The handicap thus removed, the child has a fair chance to make good. ““(2) As the agencies work under and in connection with the proper state authorities, children are placed with full legal sanc- tion, and the work will be more carefully done than when place- ments are made by individuals or unauthorized associations. Of almost equal importance with the selection of the home is the visitation afterward, with full written reports on both the child and the family. “(3) The public will have more confidence in a work that has indications of permanency, through state recognition, a well- equipped receiving home, and a board of representative men who will stand for only the best things. I have also the impression 203 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES that child-placing is best accomplished by agencies supported by private benevolence rather than by public funds. Inasmuch as there always will be a certain amount of dependency, the appeal for its support, being both humane and Christian, will keep the human heart warm and sympathetic.” VIII. Missouri. Rev. C. C. Stahmann, for nearly twenty years superintendent of the Children’s Home Society of Missouri, pre- sents the following characteristic declaration of his faith in the future of child-placing: “T firmly believe that the future possibilities of child-placing are unbounded. As long as there are homeless children the world will need societies to find them homes. ‘The poor ye have always with you.’ Yes, and we must sorrowfully confess that poor people, and especially poor and needy children, are likely to need help for many years to come. Long after we of this generation have gone to our reward, homefinding for orphan and destitute children will still be the ‘order of the day.’ “My idea of the future needs of our work includes two special features—more care in the reception, examination, and actual placing of all children, and better supervision by the societies and by the public authorities. In Missouri we have no state super- vision, but I hope the time will soon come when every society operating and every family home used will be under state in- spection. The work of child-placing may not always be carried on by private societies, but the work will continue, and if the state takes it over, no doubt the result will be to improve all methods and make homefinding the settled plan of the commonwealth in caring for dependent children.” IX. New York. Mr. Homer Folks, secretary of the State Charities Aid Association, of New York, thus outlines some of the imperative present day demands faced by child welfare workers: “Among some of the important needs of child-placing work are the following, which are all definite and practical: “(1) That it shall be done by agencies having enough of it to do to afford a wide selection of homes for each individual child. Generally speaking, these should be state-wide agencies, and in many instances the agency should be the state itself. Local agencies dealing with a small number of children, institutions 204 LOOKING FORWARD having only a few children to place out, and local officials in smaller cities and counties, are not in a position to do effective home finding. “‘(2) That there shall be developed a set of standards to which all child-placing agencies should conform. The excellent begin- nings made by the State Conference of Charities of the State of New York at its session in 1915 should be followed and developed. “(3) That all placing-out be under State supervision. If the child-placing is not done by the State itself, such supervision should not be a duplication of the primary supervision exercised by the child-placing agency. It should involve a study of the methods, the records, and the staff, and visitation of a selected number of cases, such cases being selected and visiting being done with special pains that the welfare of the child and the relation between the placing agency and the foster parents are not impajred. “(4) That the difference between boarding-out and placing in free homes should be clearly kept in mind; that an adjustment as between boarding-out methods and institutional methods should be carefully developed and that boarding-out should be a definitely accepted factor in child-caring work generally, as it is in Pennsyl- vania, Massachusetts, and now in New York City. Boarding-out will never supersede all institutional care. There is a clear field for institutional care and a clear field for boarding-out and free home placing; but their respective fields are not as yet generally understood.” X. North Dakota. Mr. Frank D. Hall, superintendent of the North Dakota Children’s Home Society since 1902, says: “ Placing- out work is superlatively important. It should be done well if done at all. Experience in this work is invaluable. I know we all make mistakes in placing children, but good ordinary common sense and never-forgotten thought for the child’s welfare aid in reducing errors and in overcoming them. The great essentials are to get evidence as to the real qualities of the family home, and the aptitude of the foster parents to provide properly for the selected child. “As to placing-out from institutions, I think the ideal way is for the state to furnish skilled placing-out agents. Especially should big boys and girls paroled from reformatories be under the 205 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES authority of a state agent. In states where private institutions are few, and no public agents are available, the institutions must do the best they can withthe funds at their disposal. Co-operation between them and child-placing agencies is the right thing, and I look for closer relations in future between the regular agencies and the child-caring institutions.” XI. Ohio. Mr. C. V. Williams, director of the Children’s Wel- fare Department of the Ohio Board of State Charities, had about fifteen years’ experience in child-placing in New Jersey before he accepted his present responsible position. His plea for the placing-out of children long detained in institutions, and for child- placing of high quality, is the more weighty because of the state office he fills: “There is something wrong with a system that permits the long detention of normal homeless children in institutions, when in thousands of good family homes there is a great longing for the love and care of a child. These children who can not be restored to rehabilitated homes ought to be placed-out in carefully selected families. “There are in institutions today, which have come under my observation, large numbers of children who are needlessly detained for periods of years because there has been no organized plan for seeking homes for them. Instead of investing a small sum of money in the employment of trained persons for this service, new buildings are erected to care for the ever increasing popu- lation. “This is not only an inexcusable extravagance, limiting the use- fulness of the institution, but it is cruel to children who have an infinite longing for the individual and parental care that the in- stitution can not give. After having studied this question for more than eighteen years, I am confident that good homes could readily be secured for such of these children as are found, after intensive physical examinations and psychological study, to be reasonably normal. , i. “The placing of children in foster homes by unorganized irre- sponsible agencies, or by individuals who can not be held to strict accountability for their acts, has been disastrous to many children. They are generally unwisely placed and then left without super- 206 LOOKING FORWARD vision. Such child-placing is little less than criminal. It should be prohibited by law, and the law enforced to the letter. “Disaster to children so placed is always accompanied by un- deserved and unwarranted criticism of the placing-out system which uniformly produces good results wherever right methods are employed. It is necessary to recognize the fact that to do credit- able work child-placing agencies must maintain suitable machinery for adequate investigation, both of children and homes, and for the after supervision of placed-out children. When the system is worked according to modern and progressive ideas, little basis for adverse criticism will be found.” XII. Washington. Rev. Marion Johnson, superintendent of the Washington Children’s Home Society, says: “After nineteen years of experience in child-placing work in two leading state societies—Iowa and Washington—I wish to briefly note a few eliminations and requirements needed to make the future of child- placing and of the children who are its subjects, not Utopian but simply useful and happy: “(1) We should learn useful lessons from our past mistakes in the too free receptions and too careless placements made by even the best societies; and we should shut the way against future blunders and indiscriminate placements by conscienceless indi- viduals and unreliable organizations. “(2) We should properly magnify our job. Everybody should get rid of the idea that finding a home and placing a child therein is a small matter, easily and quickly accomplished by anybody. The truth is that in every case the future life and happiness of a human being are involved in the right doing of the task; and the ultimate welfare of society is intimately related to such placing- out work. The job can be rightly done only by trained and ex- perienced people. “(3) Child-placing in future should be done only through regular organizations, approved by state authority, and employ- ing agents trained in child welfare work. Such societies should be equipped to carefully supervise homes and children after place- ment. Good supervision is more important than even the original study of homes before placement. “(4) The future should bring laws prohibiting the indiscrimi- 207 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES nate handing out of little lives to unknown applicants by per- sons and institutions that traffic in children for financial gain. Also we must have laws for child-caring institutions, that must do something with their wards who reach the age limit of care, re- quiring such institutions to find their wards proper family homes and then supervise them until the young folks are fully self-sup- Ne ae and able to look out for their own welfare.” / The Institutional Point of View. The second group contains four representatives of institutions that are regularly and syste- matically engaged in child-placing in families. Those who have considered the work of child-caring institutions antagonistic to child-placing will be astonished and enlightened when they absorb the statements of this group that writes from the institutional point of view. Each of these persons is a leader in child-helping work, and connected with a well-known institution of high stand- ing. Executives and subordinate officers of other child-caring institutions will profit by a careful study of their statements and recommendations. Two of the institutions represented by these writers are in the state of New York and two are in Ohio. I. New York. The Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society, of New York City, has its cottage orphanage at Pleasantville, in Westchester County. This institution ranks among the best in- stitutions for dependent children in the United States. As stated in a previous chapter its capacity is 600 children, and in addition, the society provides for 300 more children in boarding homes, besides guiding and supervising hundreds who have “ graduated”’ from the institution, and who are yet minors although now self- supporting. Dr. Ludwig B. Bernstein is the superintendent, and his message is strong, clear, and positive: “No man engaged in child caring, with children ranging in age from early infancy to 15 or 16 years, can escape the conclusion that the institutional care of children, without the supplementary family home plan of taking care of the younger children, is hope- lessly one-sided and inadequate. Nor will the family home enthu- siast if he has had eyes to see and besides, the requisite experience, covering all ages of children, fail to agree that for older children approaching the puberty stage of development, a cottage home type of institution is full of splendid possibilities for growth and 208 LOOKING FORWARD development, in character, in education, in industrial efficiency, and in a social and civic consciousness. “Indeed, if the child welfare worker has had an opportunity of observing the results of child care with three or four thousand children, on both plans, as the writer of these lines has had, he will come to the very definite conclusion that the family home plan is the better and safer method for young children, whereas the cottage home plan is unquestionably the superior plan of taking care of older children. This creed is already shared by a number of workers and in accordance with it.a number of insti- tutions have adopted as an important branch of their work the placing out of children in private homes at board. “On the other hand, a number of child-placing agencies do not hesitate to avail themselves of existing good institutions in order to place under strong disciplinary and environmental influences their so-called ‘difficult cases.’ “Whichever plan is used, it must be definitely borne in mind that each kind of work requires expert knowledge, expert organiza- tion, and wholesouled, skilful effort. Running an institution in accordance with modern ideas is a highly specialized field, calling for educational initiative and social yision. Nor is placing chil- dren at board in private families a field of work that may be undertaken by any mediocre person. It requires quite as much expert knowledge, quite as much power of organization, and the same type of intellect and social vision as the administration of a good institution. I certainly agree with you that unless social workers of experience can be secured for this important field of child care, it is much better that the institution turn its home placing work over to a special organization equipped with all the requisite staff and the financial support necessary to carry on modern-work along the line of child placing.” I New York. The institution of the New York Orphan Asylum Society, at Hastings-on-Hudson, a few miles north of the city, is an institution well and favorably known in all parts of the nation. Its chief functions are the care, education, and voca- tional training of boys and girls from ten to sixteen years of age. Dr. R. R. Reeder, the superintendent, has condensed much into the following paragraphs: 14 209 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES (“ai things considered, the best method of providing for orphan and-destitute children under ten years of age is to place them in carefully selected private family homes under adequate super- vision. The family home is the only natural environment for child life. “However, unless the placing out work is carefully done, it is open to greater abuse than institutional care. This is because of two fundamental facts: First, the easiest being in the world to exploit is a little child. Under abuse, a cat will scratch, a dog will bite, and a colt will kick; but a little child simply submits. Second, about the most secluded institution in the world is the private home. It is ten times more difficult to find out what takes place behind its closed doors than it is to probe the methods and secrets of institutions. “Tf the child-caring institutions of the country were standard- ized by expert administration, children above ten years of age would as a rule fare better in them than in the average American home.” Il. io. The Children’s Home, of Cincinnati, under the superintendency of Mr. M. V. Crouse, has had a long and useful career in both institutional care and child-placing in families. In spite of its name, and the important part of its work done within the institution, the organization is so associated with placing-out in families that the institution might almost be con- sidered a receiving home for a child-placing agency. At the re- quest of Superintendent Crouse, Mr. S. D. Watts, one of his assis- tants, prepared the following to express the ideas and sentiments of the staff of the home: “The need for a greatly enlarged use of child-placing as a method of providing for dependent children is now felt as never before by child welfare workers in every phase of social service. Not only should there be more children placed in family homes, but also the methods of such work should be modernized and made scientifically efficient. “(1) Even the advisability of ‘breaking up families’ under con- ditions precluding hope of improvement and rehabilitation has been accepted by charity organization officials heretofore opposed to such action. In 1915 Prof. Porter R. Lee, of New York, in 210 LOOKING FORWARD his course on family rehabilitation, stated that there was often justification in taking children from their parents after all efforts to make their own a proper home for them had proved a failure. Others have been converted to the necessity and justice of taking from parents and placing out grossly neglected children, rather than nursing them along in their own families with every pros- pect that they will fix upon themselves evil habits and character. The Cincinnati Children’s Home has seen many wonderful results from the placing out of children from such wrecked families. “(2) Institutions, public and private, are seeing as never in the past the great and pressing need of earlier placements of their own wards. The crime of institutionalizing a child is being pressed home to an ever-increasing number of those connected with child- caring institutions. One of the most ‘old fogy’ children’s homes in this state has recently added to its staff a visitor to seek foster homes and place-out their children. It is an interesting fact that this ‘visitor’ was formerly a ward of the Cincinnati Children’s Home, and was placed in a foster home years ago by this institu- tion. “(3) Every county children’s home in Ohio is now planning to bring its work to the standard set by the Children’s Welfare De- partment of the State Board of Charities. Where single county homes can not maintain trained workers and a really modern department of child-placing, it is proposed that a number of such homes, say those of a congressional district, unite to maintain an agency to do all of the placing-out for the group. “(4) The Cincinnati Children’s Home after fifty-three years of experience recommends to similar institutions as practical and successful its method of providing for dependents: After a period in the institution just long enough to allow for physical, mental, and moral study of the child, and such social or medical treat- ment as the case may require, place-out in a free home, giving permission to adopt after a satisfactory trial period, or if not adopted the child to receive a certain payment or honorarium when of age. In states like Ohio and Indiana free homes can be found which are superior to the average home where children can be placed on board. The boarding-out plan may be advisable in some states, and where only temporary care is given, but the 211 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES free home is far better for the child permanently committed to the custody of an institution. “(s5) Thousands of children are receiving permanent care in institutions when they should be placed out in good private homes. It is a crime to rob these little prisoners of the advantage of home life. A strong effort should be made to gain state and federal legislation forbidding such enforced bondage of our future citizens. There are institutions in this city that will not place-out a child until it is old enough to work. Every institution should be com- pelled by law to speedily place-out children that have been com- mitted permanently to its custody; and in cases of older children, committed for one full year or more, placing-out should be the rule, such children not to be adopted unless fully released by the parents. Permanent institutional care should be allowable only for special cases or classes, such as defectives, or incorrigibly de- linquent children. “(6) There is a crying need for the standardization of child- caring institutions, in all phases of their work; and there is no way to accomplish this save by adequate state supervision. The state should study and supervise every child-caring agency and institution, public and private. The loose methods of many private as well as county children’s homes call for rigid investi- gation, followed by scientific coaching. Supervision should be tactfully accomplished, avoiding officious dictation; and its central object should be to present friendly aid and counsel.” IV. Ohio. The Cleveland Protestant Orphan Asylum, estab- lished in 1852, is one of the best known institutions in the state. For over half a century it has done a great deal of child-placing in families in addition to giving many children exceptionally good institutional care. At the present time it is a sort of clearing house for all sorts of city cases, whether from the courts, from parents, or from general social agencies. All children who can be sent out to family homes are placed-out as quickly as possible. Mr. E. J. Henry, the superintendent, touches some new phases of the child-placing work in the following statement: “We place in family homes an average of one hundred children a year, and consider this our greatest work. Yet there is nothing less spectacular to the ordinary layman than the placement de- 212 LOOKING FORWARD partment of an efficient institution; its most important details are necessarily not made public. “Institutions which can not afford to employ agents with the necessary training to do intelligent placing-out work should not attempt to place children. The haphazard methods of officers untrained in methods of child-placing, and the lack of carefully acquired data of the placements, nullify what may be done with the best of intentions. “Tt is all right to place boys and girls from four to ten years of age in the country, and most of them like it there; but when a boy who is not inclined to be a farmer arrives at the vocational training age there should be a way arranged for him to receive some training along the lines for which he is talented. The work- ing out of this problem means additional facilities and expense, and for that reason we have not gone into it as deeply as I would like. The lack of facilities to fit environment and vocational training and opportunities to the varied natures of our wards, is the weakest and most vulnerable part of our placement work. I sometimes think that most child-placing agencies and institu- tions slight the central, solid, essential, but often not advertis- able, phases of welfare work, in favor of a veneered, exaggerated, record-breaking number of cases handled.” The ideas and statements of these four institution officers aptly illustrate the wide differences among institutional child-placers themselves, as well as the wide variation in details of practice between the East and the Middle West. Yet all show clearly that whether on the Atlantic coast or in the interior, many of the best institutions are actively supplementing institutional care with placement in family homes. Conclusion. In the beginning of this study it was said that child-placing in families had a history, a special terminology, and’ an assured place in modern philanthropy. It is believed that ample evidence has been produced to substantiate the statement. Now with equal confidence the declaration may be made that organ- ized child-placing has before it a promising and unlimited future, as a useful branch of social service. Four elements have been cited as the basis on which a future 213 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES for child-placing can be positively predicated. Four forces rightly operating will cause that future to be efficient and successful. 1. Active Workers. Agency efficiency and success depend pri- marily upon the type and character of the active workers. They must be of good mentality, unimpeachable morals, religious spirit, and altruistic purpose. A premium must be put upon careful training and special experience; and the pay for their work should be equal to that for similar efforts in other fields of social service. 2. Members of Boards. Success in child-placing depends, sec- ondly, upon the interest, acumen, and personal influence of the members of boards of trustees, directors, or managers of agencies and institutions. The job of being a trustee, the official relation of a director, and the duties of a manager, must no longer be merely nominal, as they have too often been allowed to be in the past. Figureheads and woodenheads make poor “boards.” Or- ganizations will measure their future success by the quality of their officials. 3. Interest of Society at Large. The third essential of success is the intelligent interest and practical co-operation of society at large. The community must supply three essentials—a public sentiment in favor of this method of providing for dependent children; the homes in which to locate the little folks; and the money to finance the movement. It is necessary that a propaganda be instituted and continued to educate the people as to the aims, plans, spirit, and character of organized child-placing. It must be fresh and vigorous every year. The propaganda of five years ago is almost as useless as a last year’s bird’s nest. The bulletins and pamphlet publications of child-placing agencies, and the printed annual reports of child-caring institutions, are invaluable aids in winning and holding the masses to support and co-operation. Addresses to church congregations, social conferences with papers and discussions, and many like means must be employed to keep the movement properly before the community. 4. Right Legislation and Supervision. The fourth requisite for success is governmental, including right legislation, wise or- ganization, and effective governmental supervision. State and national laws must wisely control the formation of social organiza- tions, and define and arrange the legal relations of agencies and 214 LOOKING FORWARD institutions to their wards. Commonwealths must adequately supervise all organized work for helpless and immature citizens on behalf of society and the state. One great danger at this point is the possible multiplication of unwise laws, creating con- fusion by lack of harmony, and loss of social interest and progress by the conflicts which overlapping and mutually antagonistic statutes create. Each state should follow the examples set by Ohio, Minnesota, and Missouri, and organize a capable code com- mission to arrange, harmonize, enlarge or diminish, and properly codify all laws relating to children in the dependent, delinquent, and defective classes. Orderly systematic and scientific organiza- tion is necessary for the happy and successful future of this pro- gressive modern movement. 215 PART FOUR APPENDICES, BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND INDEX APPENDIX A TWENTIETH CENTURY TERMINOLOGY S A side light upon the themes discussed in this volume, and in order to A group together the chief technical expressions developed by this branch of social service, it has seemed desirable to include a classified arrangement of special terms employed in relation to child-placing and allied forms of child-caring work. The descriptions of child classes given here are not limited to those recognized by laws and courts, although in harmony with them. The laws include only the neg- lected, the dependent, the delinquent, and sometimes the sick, the crippled, and the mentally defective; in this manual subdivisions and minor classes have been recog- nized as the writer has noted them in the common parlance of child welfare workers. I. GENERAL SUBJECT 1. CHILD WELFARE Work. In its broadest sense this term includes every pos- sible provision for children in the home, the school, the church, all sorts of insti- tutions, and society at large. For our present use the term has a narrower meaning, that covering two special lines of activity: a. Remedial efforts in behalf of children who are destitute, neglected, delin- quent, or abnormal in mind or body, and the care and training of those deprived of natural relationships and support. b. Preventive measures to protect normal children, and to save them from entering the dependent, delinquent, or defective classes. II. AGENCIES AND INSTITUTIONS 1. Acency. An organized instrumentality for some special service. It acts as the responsible representative of the nation, the state, the county, the city, the church, some special group of citizens, or the general community. The word “agency” is technically limited in child welfare work to a public bureau or depart- ment, like the New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians, or a private so- ciety or association, usually incorporated, which is engaged in more or less extensive social service in behalf of individual children or children in families. There are three principal types of agencies directly active in matters of child welfare: a. Child-placing Agency. A public or private organization whose main func- tion is to provide for homeless and dependent children by placing them in family homes. Many agencies of this type manage small institutions in connection with their child-placing work, for the temporary care of their wards, and as clinical laboratories in which to perform minor operations and to give medical and dietetic 219 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES treatment to ailing children; for instance, the receiving homes of the children’s home societies and the new clinical laboratory of the New England Home for Little Wanderers. b. General Agency. One operated for the relief or assistance of both adults and children, usually conserving the family as the unit, and giving aid for varying periods and through various means. It holds a merely transient relation to the persons served, and generally assumes no guardianship or right of control. Of this type are many societies for the prevention of cruelty to children, charity organiza- tion societies, and social settlements. A few of them, like the San Francisco As- sociated Charities, have divisions or departments by which they make direct pro- vision for certain classes of children. c. Special Agency. One that devotes its means and efforts to the welfare of children, but does not take them into care or guardianship. The Children’s Bureau at Washington, D. C., and the Department of Child-helping of the Russell Sage Foundation, are national agencies of this class. A few of the states have special child welfare bureaus with various functions, and research and clinical laboratories. Other types are the child welfare associations engaged in pure milk distribution and visiting nurse work, and societies for the prevention of infant mortality. 2. INsTITUTION. This term has a limited technical meaning in child welfare work. It is used quite universally for those child-caring organizations whose prin- cipal function is to provide in their own buildings board and care for their wards, and which usually possess considerable property and equipment for this service. They may or may not provide within themselves facilities for education and voca- tional training. There are two distinct types of institution recognized by social workers. a. Congregate Institution. This type is characterized generally by large buildings for the care of children en masse, with little approach to family life. Usually the minimum number in a congregate institution is 50; but where the physical equipment, spirit, and methods are adapted to mass care, and the treat- ment of the children is collective rather than individual, these things rather than numbers would call for the congregate classification. Some institutions with only 20 children in care are, on the above basis, as purely congregate as others accom- modating 500. b. Cottage Institution. Originally based on a type of housing, this term has come to mean even more definitely a method of care made possible by the smaller structures employed. The “cottage” type of institutions is indicated by limited groups of children in small buildings, and care and spirit corresponding to ordinary family life. Each cottage may or may not have its own kitchen and dining room. The tendency in the best institutions is to lessen the numbers in each cottage to the minimum. c. Private Agencies and Institutions. Such as are administered by privately created boards of trustees or managers and their employes. d. Public Agencies and Institutions. Institutions supported by public funds, and managed by city, county, or state officials. 220 TWENTIETH CENTURY TERMINOLOGY e. Semi-public Institutions. Institutions that are directed by private boards of managers, but supported wholly or in part by public funds; or those wherein the public makes a contract with private organizations to care for public wards, as in Oklahoma. ‘ f. Receiving Homes. Small institutions for the temporary care of children, managed by the agencies. Besides being stopping places on the way to a family home, they are generally used to hold children awaiting legal action, or pending a search for relatives, or during extended physical or psychological examination, or while medical treatment or operations are in progress. Examples are the detention homes of juvenile courts and the receiving homes of child-placing societies. II]. ORGANIZATION 1. Capacity. Indicates the number of children for whom sleeping accommoda- tions are provided in an institution. 2. ENpowMmENT. Includes any property other than the plant, and refers to lands, buildings, bonds, mortgages, and invested funds of various kinds, whether or not they have been definitely set aside as an endowment by the agency or in- stitution. 3. Executive OrFicers. These may bear any one of many titles. Agencies are generally operated by ‘“‘secretaries’”’ or “superintendents.” Institutions are in charge of a “superintendent,” a ‘‘matron,” a “head worker,” a “manager,” a “brother,” a ‘‘mother superior,” a ‘‘sister superior,” or a ‘sister servant.” 4. Pant. The plant of an agency or institution is the property directly used in the care of children, and includes grounds, buildings, furnishings, and equipment. 5. REGULAR EmpLoye. The term usually means one to whom a salary is paid, or, as in Catholic institutions or homes managed by Protestant Deaconesses, those who work regularly but without stated compensation or for a merely nominal salary. IV. FUNDS 1. PrivaATE Funps. Funds derived from sources other than taxation or other governmental assets, including receipts from special gifts, income from endow- ments, board of inmates, general donations, entertainments, and tag days, or funds obtained by any other miscellaneous money gathering methods. 2. Pustic Funps. This term applies to funds derived from taxation, or from sale or lease of public lands, or receipts from any other governmental sources, whether administered by state, county, or municipal authorities. V. CLASSES OF CHILDREN 1. Derectives. Chiefly children who are mentally deficient, the feeble- minded and the epileptic; but the term includes also those who are normal men- tally, but physically are diseased, crippled, deformed, or incurable. 2. DeLinguents. In the strictly legal sense, children under the age of sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen years, who violate any law, or are incorrigible, or associate knowingly with vicious persons, or are growing up in idleness and crime. In com- mon parlance the term includes children who have committed some act which would 221 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES be counted a crime if committed by an adult, or who are wilful and wayward, and require some degree of custodial care. The term “delinquent”’ generally, but not necessarily, implies that some action has been taken by a juvenile or probate court, or by some criminal court. 3. DEPENDENTs. Children who are homeless and destitute, and depend for support upon private charity or public funds. Generally the term is applied to all classes of children, whether orphaned or with living parents, who require assistance from outside of their immediate families. Among social workers in their everyday communications dependents are informally divided into orphans, deserted chil- dren, needy children, and foundlings. 4. DESERTED AND ABANDONED CHILDREN. A class whose parents one or both have disappeared, leaving them partly or wholly dependent upon public charity. If the parents are unknown, the children are said to have been “abandoned.” 5. Founpiincs. Applied to children, usually mere infants, that have been left secretly by unknown parents where they will be found and rescued. They are generally supposed to have been born out of wedlock. Some count as foundlings infants given by known mothers to foundling asylums. 6. NeEDY CHILDREN. All classes of wholly or partially dependent children whose living parents are diseased, impoverished, insane, incompetent, feeble- minded, immoral, cruel, or criminal, and who do not receive proper care from such parents, and who for a variety of reasons are accorded benevolent support. 7. NEGLECTED CHILDREN. Children with living parents who fail to give them proper parental care or guardianship. The group includes truants and those who beg or receive alms, are employed in saloons or other debasing places, or live in unfit and degrading environment. Strictly speaking, neglect is a condition from which children should be rescued, since they are in danger of falling into one or more of the three general classes—dependent, delinquent, and defective. 8. OrPHANS. Properly used this term applies only to children who have lost both their parents by death. In social practice, however, it often includes half- orphans, foundlings, and other abandoned children, who have “‘lost’’ their parents as completely as by death. The term should be restricted to its proper use. VI. TYPES OF HOMES 1. BoarpING Home. A selected family home which receives a child, assuming his or her temporary support for a stated compensation from a parent, an agency, an institution, or the public authorities. The amount paid for board is usually less than the commercial value of the service, implying a larger or smaller amount of unrequited philanthropic care, which in many cases is cheerfully and generously rendered. 2. Free Home. A home in which a needy, dependent, or delinquent child is placed, the family assuming the burden and expense of his or her board and care without financial compensation. A child may be established in a free home by full legal adoption, by an indenture contract, or by an informal agreement subject to cancellation at the pleasure of either party. 3. Workinc Home. A family home that receives a large boy or girl as an em- 222 TWENTIETH CENTURY TERMINOLOGY ploye, but with special relations as a temporary member of the family, under an arrangement with an agency, an institution, or the public authorities, the child to be under the supervision of the child-placing organization during the period of the agreement. These are sometimes called ‘‘wage homes.” VII. CHILD-PLACING WORK 1. BoARDING-ouT. The placing of children at board in families, at the expense and under the supervision of public or private agencies or institutions. 2. CHILD-PLACING IN FamiLies. This term is rapidly coming into favor to designate the work done by modern child-helping organizations, in placing needy, homeless, or destitute children in selected family homes. It is broader than “homefinding,” a term quite widely used in the Middle and Far West, and includes both “boarding-out’’ and “‘placing-out,” terms generally used throughout the United States. It also includes “placing with kin,’’ which means placing in the independent homes of brothers, sisters, or grandparents, the “relatives of the second degree.’”” When children are left in the homés of their own parents, even under the supervision of probation officers or other officials, such disposition should not be termed “placing.” 3. HomeFINpING. This term, as previously stated, is more commonly used in the central and Pacific coast regions of the country, and applies principally to the placing of children in free homes for adoption, or at least to be reared as members of foster families. 4. PLacinc-out. The placing of dependent children in private families, as distinguished from the caring for them in institutions. 5. PLACEMENT PErRiop. In compiling statistics, no child should be counted “‘placed’”’ in a family, either on board or in a free home, who remains for a shorter period than a week. 6. Pracinc WitH Kin. To place needy or dependent children in the family homes of relatives of the second degree, grandparents, brothers, or sisters. On most of these cases the rules, formalities, restrictions, and supervision of ordinary place- ment are partly or wholly waived or omitted. 7. Repeater. A child who because of his own personal faults or unattractive- ness, or the bad qualities of foster parents or homes, or because of the failure of an agency to wisely fit together the child and the home, must be replaced many times. “Repeater”’ is to child-placing what “ recidivist’’ is to criminology; yet it should be emphasized that “repeating’’ is not necessarily due to the child’s defects or wrong- doing. 223 APPENDIX B BUILDING A DEFINITION OF CHILD-PLACING S WAS stated near the close of the first chapter, a note of inquiry was sent A to about fifty of the leading child welfare workers of the United States, asking suggestions in regard to a general definition of child-placing in families. The New York statutory definition of ‘placing-out’’ was quoted as a basis, and nearly all the answers were made with reference to that definition as the only legal one extant covering this line of work. For convenience, and to remind readers of its exact terms, the New York de- finition is again given: ‘The term ‘place-out’ . . means the placing of a destitute child in a family, other than that of a relative within the second degree, for the purpose of providing a home for such child.’” See Forty-eighth Annual Report of the State Board of Charities of the State of New York, Vol. III, p. 220. Many of the replies to the inquiry were both pertinent and specially instructive. Some of the writers declared themselves in substantial agreement with the New York definition; others were dissatisfied with it. A number suggested variations and additions. It seems desirable, therefore, briefly to analyze and discuss the most significant statements, as very aptly illustrating the point of view of differ- ent sections, and for the benefit of interested students of child-placing. Mr. C. C. Carstens, secretary of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, objects to the New York definition on the ground that not all children placed-out are destitute. He says: “Many children need to be placed in good homes because the homes in which they have been living, though able to provide physical comforts, have not provided needed moral training and surround- ings. The definition therefore must be broader than the one in the law of the State of New York.” Dr. Frederic H. Knight, superintendent of the New England Home for Little Wanderers, considers the New York definition faulty because ‘there are conditions other than destitution which require the removal of a child from its own home,” and because “‘the placing of a child in any family other than that of its own father and mother is ‘placing-out.’”” Dr. Knight also gives the following as his concep- tion of good child-placing: ‘‘The four elements in good placing-out work are: (a) A careful investigation of the case; (b) a study of the child; (c) the placing of the child in a carefully selected home, fitted to that particular child’s needs; (d) ade- quate supervision.” Mr. Parker B. Field, general secretary of the Children’s Mission to Children, Boston, Massachusetts, prefers to phrase the definition in these words: ‘‘The term “place-out’ means the placing of a child in a family not its own, there to be cared for and treated as it should be in its natural home.” Mr. Carrington Howard, general secretary of the Boston Children’s Friend Society, makes it read as follows: “To ‘place-out’ is to place a child in a foster family for the purpose of providing a home for such child, or of furnishing special treatment or training impossible in the 224 BUILDING A DEFINITION OF CHILD-PLACING child’s own home.’”” Miss Helen A. Woods, general secretary of the Children’s Friend Society, Worcester, Massachusetts, says: ‘‘To a private society the term “place-out’ means the placing of a child in a family not its own, when its own is not suitable for its moral, physical, or mental growth.” Mr. Douglas P. Falconer, executive secretary of the Children’s Aid and Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children of Erie County, Buffalo, New York, would amend the New York definition by dropping only the word “‘destitute.” Rev. W. J. Maybee, superintendent of the Children’s Home Society of Virginia, would amend it by striking out all reference to relatives, and gives an example of the placement of a child with its own mother, the society retaining ‘‘the authority given by the court, and supervision over the child until it is twenty-one years of age.” Mr. D. F. Shirk, superintendent of the Kansas Children’s Home Society, offers this definition: ‘“ Placing-out or homefinding means the placing of a destitute child in a private family, for the purpose of providing a home for such child, as distin- guished from providing care for it in an institution.” Mr. Marcus C. Fagg, super- intendent of the Children’s Home Society of Florida, doubtless defining from the legal conditions of his own state, says: “‘Placing-out means the placing of a child that is abused, abandoned, neglected, homeless, destitute, or dependent, and that has been committed to a child-placing organization by a proper court, in a private family, for the purpose of providing a carefully selected home for such child.” Mr. George R. Bedinger, general secretary of the Children’s Aid Society, De- troit, Michigan, would eliminate “destitute” and all reference to relatives from the New York definition, and add words requiring case study and supervision, so that it would read: “The term place-out means the placing of a child in a family home, after investigation and under supervision, for the purpose of providing a temporary or permanent home for such child.”” Mr. J. Lawrence Solly, agent of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia, suggests: ‘‘I should say that *placing-out’ and ‘homefinding’ indicate the method of providing for children who are dependent upon the community for care, by placement in family homes, as distinct from assignment to institutions.” The staff of the Cincinnati Children’s Home, through Mr. S. D. Watts, makes a sharp distinction between “‘boarding-out” and “placing-out,”’ the first implying to them simply care until a child can be taken by relatives or otherwise provided for, while the second implies a more definite and permanent relation. The Cin- cinnati definition is: “The term ‘place-out’ means the placing of a neglected or dependent child, which is under the legal custody of a placing-out agency, in a care- fully selected family, other than that of a relative within the second degree, for the purpose of providing an adequately supervised free permanent home for such child.” Mr. Edwin D. SolenBerger, general secretary of the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania, gives no exact definition, but suggests that the New York form must be supplemented by additional statements, so as to define the different types of placement, of which the three principal ones are: placing in free homes, with or without adoption; placing on wages in the so-called working homes; and “‘the in- creasingly important work of boarding-out children, both babies with wet-nurses 15 225 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES and older children, in selected families. Some are not entirely destitute, and rela- tives frequently contribute to the child’s support, either voluntarily or under court order.” Miss Katherine P. Hewins, general secretary of the Church Home Society, Boston, presents as her definition the following: “To ‘place-out’ means to place a child in a family home, other than with relatives within the second degree, for a longer or shorter period, with or without the payment of board, supervision over the child and the home to be maintained by a responsible agency.”” Miss Helen Grasse, Executive Secretary of the Brooklyn Juvenile Probation Association, sug- gests that ‘‘place-out”’ be used in relation to children placed on board or as workers, and that “homefinding’”’ be used where free homes are obtained. Others ask that the definition include, as modern essentials of child-placing, careful and systematic selection of families, and adequate supervision of homes and children after place- ment. _ Mr. Homer Folks, secretary of the State Charities Aid Association of New York, says: “The definition of ‘placing-out’ in the laws of the State of New York was a lawyer’s definition. On the whole I think it is fairly satisfactory. For general purposes I would strike out the word ‘destitute.’’’ Mr. Folks also comments on the fact that the provision, “other thana relative within the second degree,” clearly indicates that the placing of a child with a near relative is not placing-out. In all of the foregoing comments and definitions one very important feature of child-placing has not been directly mentioned. Placing children with close rela- tives, technically, ‘‘placing with kin,” is the necessary complement of “ placing- out,” which is placing with those more distantly related or unrelated. As Mr. Folks noted: ‘‘The placing of a child with a near relative is not placing-out.”” In “placing with kin” the formal rules, restrictions, and supervision required in placing with strangers, are often waived or omitted. This type of child-placing should be recognized and included in any modern definition. The generally accepted idea of the “first and second degrees” of relationship, is that they include parents, grandparents, brothers, and sisters. Leaving a child in the home of its own father and mother, relatives of the ‘‘first degree,’ ought never be classed as placing. When children are placed with grandparents, brothers, or sisters, who maintain their own homes, they are placed with relatives of the “‘second degree,” that is, ‘‘placed with kin.’’ Uncles, aunts, and cousins, being third and fourth degree relatives, are beyond the limits of the immediate family, and in the technique of child-placing are treated as unrelated. To harmonize all of these ideas and incorporate them into a single satisfactory definition is a difficult task. In the main the divergent statements of this discus- sion agree in principle, however different in words, although a few would eliminate parts of the New York definition that others deem essential. It is believed, how- ever, that all would agree that modern child-placing demands approved organiza- tions, provision for many classes of dependent children, careful selection of family homes, and real after-supervision. The author’s definition of child-placing, with corollaries to cover many modern essentials, is given at the close of the first chapter of the book. 226 APPENDIX C EXTRACTS FROM LAWS AND SUPREME COURT DECISIONS HE following extracts from state laws and Supreme Court decisions are given for two principal reasons: First, because they are valuable to child welfare workers as examples and precedents in cases brought before the courts of other states; second, because they impart special ideas and provide suit- able phraseology for those who are writing bills for new statutes. Owing to their length only the most essential parts of the laws and decisions are quoted here. Attention is again called to the remarkable variations between the laws and customs of the East, the Middle West, and the Far West. The three states represented in these quotations fairly and favorably stand for the common- wealths of the regions in which they are located. 1. Massachusetts. The general basis of court proceedings in cases involving the dependency or delinquency of children in Massachusetts is found in the Statute of 1903. This is an Act to Provide for the Care of Neglected Children, and is commonly known as the Neglect Law. It cannot be quoted in full, hence only an outline of its provisions will be attempted, and these will be followed by extracts from court decisions that relate to actions and children held under this statute. (a) The Statute. The Neglect Law provides that upon “complaint made by any person that any child under sixteen years of age within its or his [a trial jus- tice’s] jurisdiction, by reason of orphanage or of the neglect, crime, or drunkenness, or other vice of its parents, is growing up without education or without salutary control, or in circumstances exposing him to lead an idle and dissolute life, or is de- pendent upon public charity,” summons may issue to the state board of charity and to the parents or other parties having the child in charge, to appear before court and answer. If the complaint is found true, “said court or trial justice may commit the child to the custody of the state board of charity until he attains the age of twenty-one years, or for a less time; and said board may discharge said child from its custody whenever the object of its commitment has been accomplished.” There are the usual provisions for an appeal “to the superior court sitting for civil business for the county within which the hearing is held.” The title of the statute now is: Revised Laws, Chapter 83, Act of 1903, 334. (b) Extract from Decision in Flora Wares Case. “The object of the various statutes is to promote the welfare of the child, and there are strong reasons for holding, in a case where the board having custody of the child has, after full hearing, decided in view of all the circumstances that the child should not be discharged, that 227 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES such a conclusion should not be reviewable here. It might, and doubtless would, interfere seriously with the success of the boards and officers to whom such chil- dren are committed in finding places for them in respectable families, if it were understood that the decisions of the boards or officers as to whether the children should or should not be discharged from custody and restored to their parents were subject to be brought before this court whenever and as often as the parents chose. The right of the parent is to be protected, but the welfare of the child is the para- mount consideration. “And as between the parent on the one side and the child on the other, it may be safely left to the boards and officers to whose custody courts and magistrates are authorized to commit children situated as described in the statutes to decide, after hearing the parties, whether in view of all the circumstances the object of the com- mitment has been accomplished, and the child should be discharged and restored to its parent. Mendon v. County Commissioners, 5 Allen, 13. “Tf in any case a board, or the officers having custody of the child, unjustifiably refuse to hear the parent, or proceed in any manner unlawfully, ‘the rights of the parent,’ as it is said in Farnham v. Pierce, 141 Mass. 203, 206, ‘can be protected on habeas corpus by this court.’ It is to be presumed that public boards and officers will discharge faithfully and properly all the duties entrusted to them.” Mass. Reports, Volume 161, page 72. (c) Extracts from Decision in Purinton-Jamrock Case. Three extracts are given from this decision, each of which bears upon action likely to be called for in any child-placing agency. The first is upon a case in which the consent of the mother in the adoption of her child is not required: ‘Upon a petition for the adop- tion of an illegitimate child in custody of the State board of charity, under Revised Laws 154, Section 3, which provides . . . that the consent of the mother of the child to the adoption shall not be required if she has suffered such child to be sup- ported for more than two years continuously, prior to the petition, as a pauper by the Commonwealth,” the court sustained the law. Mass. Reports, Volume 195, page 188. The second extract from this decision declares that under certain circumstances difference in religious faith is not a bar to adoption: ““On a petition for the adoption of an illegitimate child nine years of age, in the custody of the State board of charity, if it appears that the petitioners are a husband and wife of good character and edu- cation about forty years of age and childless, that they live in a small town ina comfortable home in a good and healthful neighborhood and reasonably may ex- pect to be able to give the child a suitable support and education, that for over four years the child has been in the family of the petitioners, who are found to be suit- able persons to have custody of her and charge of her education, that a strong affec- tion has grown up between them, and that the interests of the child will be pro- moted greatly by the adoption, and if it appears that the child was taken from her mother by reason of the mother’s misconduct and that the mother acquiesced in a judgment giving the custody of the child to the State board of charity and for several years suffered the child to be supported as a pauper by the Commonwealth, the fact that the mother is of a religious belief different from that of the petitioners, who 228 EXTRACTS FROM LAWS AND SUPREME COURT DECISIONS intend to educate the child in their own religious belief, does not make the grant- ing of the petition unlawful or improper.” Mass. Reports, Volume 195, page 188. The third extract from this decision relates to the limitation of parental rights: ‘*Parents have no absolute right of property in their minor children of which they cannot be deprived without their consent. The right of property which parents have in their minor children is subject to their correlative duty to care for and pro- tect their children, and the law secures their right only so long as they discharge their obligation.’”” Mass. Reports, Volume 195, pp. 188, 180. 2. Illinois. From the statutes of Illinois three very interesting sections are quoted. The first is from the Juvenile Court Law, and gives the grounds for the commitment of dependent or neglected children: “If the court shall find any male child under the age of seventeen years or any female child under the age of eighteen years to be dependent or neglected within the meaning of this act,. . . and if the parent, parents, guardian or custodian consent thereto, or if the court shall further find that the parent, parents, guardian or custodian of such child are unfit, CtGy arcs the court may make an order appointing as guardian of the person of such child some reputable citizen . . . the court may enter an order com- mitting such child to some suitable State institution.” Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois, 1916, Chapter 23, Section 175. The second quotation is in reference to the requirement that persons, not so- cieties or institutions, must be appointed guardians of the persons of dependent children: “In every case where such child is committed to an institution or as- sociation, the court shall appoint the president, secretary or superintendent of such institution or association, guardian over the person of such child and shall order such guardian to place such child in such institution or with such associa- tion, whereof he is such officer, and to hold such child, care for, train and educate it subject to the rules and laws that may be in force from time to time governing such institution or association.”’ Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois, 1916, Chapter 23, Section 176, page 246. The third quotation from the laws of this state related to the abandonment of infant children, and the automatic control and authority vested in the institution receiving them into care: “(1) Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly, That hereafter when any child in this State, under the age of one year, shall be wilfully abandoned by its parents, and shall be taken and cared for by any charitable institution of this State, incorporated or otherwise, such parents so aban- doning said child shall thenceforth lose all their right, control and authority over said child, and said right, control and authority shall thereupon become vested in said institution. “(2) It shall be deemed a wilful abandonment, for the purposes of this act, if any such child be left by its parents at any such charitable institution. “*(3) In case of illegitimate children, or where the father of any legitimate child 1 Although this statute still stands upon the statute books of Illinois, its validity is questionable both because it appears to be inconsistent with the statute above quoted and because it cancels the right of the parents without giving them their “day in court.” 229 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES shall have wilfully deserted his family for the space of one year, an abandonment by the mother of any such child shall be deemed an abandonment by its parents, ac- cording to the provisions of this act.” Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois, 1916, Chapter 58, Sections 1-3, page 1398. ‘ 3. Idaho. This state is chosen as an example of law and custom in child wel- fare work in the Far West, because of a remarkable Supreme Court decision filed March 31, 1917. The principal matter in controversy in this decision is the right of the Children’s Home Finding and Aid Society of Idaho to give consent to the adoption of certain of its wards received by the organization on court order, and placed-out in families, although several other important things relating to society administration are incidentally settled. It appears that the society had been giving its official consent to the adoption of any of its wards that had been received on court order, when in the statute there is at least a technical limitation. Mr. Blaine, legal counsel for the society, com- menting on the decision, says: ‘“‘Our Supreme Court in the case above cited held, in my opinion, that the Society, while it has the authority to receive and care for, and to become guardian of, neglected children under Section 2 of the Abused Child Act of 1909, has not the authority to give its consent to the adoption thereof, and children thus committed to the Home can not be adopted without first obtaining the consent of their parents, unless the adoption proceedings clearly show that the case comes within the provisions of Section 2703 of the Revised Codes.’”’ It is our purpose to quote the applicable paragraph in the law mentioned, then several extracts from the decision, to illustrate not only the central matter at issue, but also a number of others that are of great interest to social workers everywhere. As the decision is not yet in print, the extracts are made from a typewritten copy furnished by the above-mentioned society. 1. The Statute. The part of the statute directly applying to the matter at issue reads as follows: ‘A legitimate child cannot be adopted without the consent of its parents, if living, . . . except that consent is not necessary from a father or mother deprived of civil rights, or adjudged guilty of adultery or cruelty and for either cause divorced, or adjudged to be an habitual drunkard, or who has been judicially deprived of the custody of the child on account of cruelty or neglect. If it can be shown satisfactorily to the judge that the parent or parents have abandoned it, or ceased to provide for its support, then it may be adopted by the written consent of its legal guardian.’”’ (Part of Section 2, Abused Child Act of 1909.) 2. The Decision. The case is an appeal of Jain and Tipton v. Priest, before the Supreme Court of the state of Idaho, and the decision was filed March 31, 1917. As the decision contains eighteen typewritten pages on legal size paper, only seven extracts covering the principal matters of interest will be quoted in this connection. (a) Habeas Corpus. ‘“‘The judgment of a district court in a habeas corpus pro- ceeding, involving the custody of a child, is appealable.” (b) Parental Surrenders Valid. ‘‘Under the provisions of the act of 1909, the society has authority to receive, control and dispose of children under eighteen, when the father, mother or person legally entitled to act as their guardian shall surrender them in writing to the society, or when the person legally authorized to 230 EXTRACTS FROM LAWS AND SUPREME COURT DECISIONS make such surrender is not known and a notice is published ina newspaper. When achild shall have been . . . accepted by such society, then (but not otherwise) the rights of its natural parents . . . (if any) shall cease, and such corpora- tion shall become entitled to the custody of such child, and shall have authority to care for and educate such child or place it temporarily or permanently in a suit- able home in such manner as shall best secure its welfare.” (c) Consent to Adoption of Surrendered Children. ‘Such corporation shall have the authority when such child has been surrendered to it in accordance with any of the preceding provisions, and it is still in its control, to consent to its adoption under the laws of Idaho. These provisions are all in Section 1 of the act.” (d) Commitment Guardianship. ‘‘When a benevolent or charitable corpora- tion is made the guardian of a child by order of the probate court under the pro- visions of an act of the Tenth Session, approved March 6th, 1909, Session Laws 1909, page 38, the probate court has the same control over such corporation as guardian as over any other guardian. Such guardianship may be terminated by said court in the same manner in which any other guardianship may be terminated. While such corporation may voluntarily resign the guardianship or apply to the court to surrender the children to the parents, the ultimate decision as to whether the guardianship shall be terminated or the children surrendered to the parents is with the probate court in each case.” (e) Society Can Not Consent for Committed Children. “Such benevolent or charitable corporation, as guardian of minor children, has no authority to consent to their adoption when the children are not surrendered to it by the parents, but are committed to it as guardian by the probate court in a proceeding by which they are taken from the parents without their consent. Under section 2703 of the Re- vised Codes, a probate judge is not authorized to make an order of adoption of chil- dren without the consent of their parents, on the ground that such parents have been judicially deprived of their children on account of neglect, unless it appears in the record before such judge that such is a fact.” (f) Unconditional Judgment Must Be in Record. ‘‘A probate judge is not au- thorized to make an order of adoption of children without the consent of the parents, on the ground that the parents have been judicially deprived of the custody of their children on account of neglect, unless it appears in the record before him that the parents have been permanently and absolutely deprived of such custody by a final and unconditional judgment of a court. An order of a probate court tempo- rarily depriving the parents of the custody of their children, but granting them an opportunity to reclaim the children upon a proper showing of reform, is not such a judgment as dispenses with the necessity for the consent of the parents in an adop- tion proceeding.” (g) Details of Decision on Commitment Cases. “In cases arising under Sec- tion 2, where a child is taken from the parents without their consent on the ground that they are not proper persons to have custody of it, the law does not give the society power to consent to the adoption of the child, nor does it provide that the rights of the natural parents shall cease. In such cases the society simply becomes the guardian of the child, subject to the control of the probate court as heretofore 231 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES explained. In the present case, the children were not surrendered by their parents, but were removed from their custody by the court without their consent; the case therefore comes, not within Section 1 but within Section 2. The society consented to the adoption of the children; the parents did not consent, and in fact were not notified. The adoption proceedings cannot be upheld by virtue of any of the pro- visions of the law of 1909. “The appellants fall back upon the provisions of Section 2703, Revised Codes, in relation to adoption. It provides that a legitimate child cannot be adopted without the consent of its parents, except that consent is not necessary from a father or mother who has been judicially deprived of the custody of the child on account of cruelty or neglect. It is claimed that these parents had been judicially deprived of the custody of their children by order of the probate court for Shoshone County on account of neglect, and that therefore they were not entitled to notice of the proceedings. It appears from the proceedings in the probate court for Latah County that the action of the court was based upon the consent of the society to the adoption, and not upon any allegation or proof that the parents had been judicially deprived of the custody of their children on account of neglect. In order to authorize the probate court to make an order of adoption without the consent of the parents, it must appear in the record before that court that the case comes within some of the exceptions mentioned in the statute. This we think is a juris- dictional requirement, and must be complied with in order to make the order valid. No such showing was made before the probate court in this case, and therefore the order, made without the parents’ consent, was invalid. (Parsons v. Parsons, 101 Wisconsin 76, 70 Am. St. 894, 77 N.W. 147.)” Note. The attorney for the society still holds that the above does not preclude the organization’s becoming a guardian under Section 2 of the Abused Child Act of 1909, and as such giving consent to adoption of a child, subject of course to the necessity of making it a matter of record before the court which is hearing the pe- tition for adoption that the “parents have been permanently and absolutely de- prived of d custody by a final and unconditional judgment of a court,” as stated in this decision. In other words, that the section of the decision last quoted implies that if proper records are brought before the probate court hearing a petition for adoption, the society as guardian may give its written consent without notifying the parents or their consent being obtained. 232 APPENDIX D THE TENNESSEE CHILD WELFARE LAW delinquent, and defective children, and the processes and organizations necessary to provide for them and secure their welfare. In some cases, illustrated by the conditions revealed by the Missouri Code Commission, there is more than a mere lack of laws; there is legal approval of acts and relations con- trary to modern ideas and the statutes of the progressive states. The full remedy, from a statutory standpoint, is a complete revision and codi- fication of all laws relating to these classes. This, however, is a task requiring ad- vanced public sentiment, legislative action, a public appropriation, about two years’ intensive study by a competent commission, and finally the adoption of the new code by the General Assembly. At least three years, and in most cases five years, will be needed to accomplish this greatly desired general revision of all laws relating to children. In most states it will be found best to take a step at a time, and with a general child welfare law prepare the way for the more extended revisions and the chil- dren’s code. The enactment of such a statute will awaken public sentiment, enlist the interested help of legislators, begin reforms in child welfare work, and require such small additional public appropriations as to rouse very little antagonism from those who oppose outlays for new and untried propositions. The author of this manual, acting on the ideas of the preceding paragraph, has been instrumental in securing the adoption of general and reasonably advanced child welfare laws in three states—Iowa, Wyoming, and Tennessee. He believes that efforts should be made to secure the enactment of similar statutes in many commonwealths now suffering from obsolete, inadequate, and in some cases con- tradictory laws. In October, 1916, at the request of the State Board of Control and the Board of State Charities of Tennessee, the writer drafted a bill for a general child welfare law for that state. It was studied for form and language by an ex-judge of the state Supreme Court. When the General Assembly met it was placed before the members of the legislature, and was ultimately passed ‘‘without a dissenting vote in either of the houses.” It was signed by Governor Tom C. Rye on April 21, 1917, and thus became a law of the state. This statute was made to fit the local conditions, and as far as possible to avoid conflict with existing laws, in the state of Tennessee. It, however, contains prin- ciples, definitions, requirements, methods, and processes, that ought to be recog- nized and incorporated in similar statutes fitted to the needs of other common- 233 Mei states have no adequate child welfare laws defining dependent, CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES wealths. For this reason it is quoted in full below, not as an ideal or perfect statute, but as a suggestive pattern on which those writing bills for other states may base their efforts. CHAPTER NO. 120—HOUSE BILL NO. 1276 Pustic ACT OF 1917 (By Mr. Shropshire) AN ACT for the care and protection of children; defining child dependency and delinquency; providing for Court commitments and guardianship of the person of delinquent and dependent children; authorizing private agencies and insti- tutions for the care of dependent and delinquent children; arranging consent to their adoption; regulating placing out in families; and, providing State supervision, records and reports for such child welfare work. SecTION 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, That dependency within the meaning of this Act shall be defined as follows: Sus-Sec. 1. Persons of either sex under sixteen years of age, who have not parental care or guardianship; or are destitute, homeless, or abandoned; or who habitually beg or receive alms; or who depend for support on public funds are hereby classed as dependents, and shall be subject to all the legal relations and pro- visions of the State for the care and benefit of dependent children. SusB-Sec. 2. Persons of either sex under sixteen years of age, whose parents or guardians neglect or wilfully fail to provide for them; or allow them to have vicious associates, or visit vicious places; or fail to exercise proper parental discipline and control over them—are hereby classed as neglected children. Subsequent to suit- able efforts to compel the parents or guardians to rectify said neglect, and in event of the failure of said efforts, neglected children shall be classed as dependents, and shall be subject to all the legal relations and provisions of the laws of the State for the care and benefit of dependent children. Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That delinquency within the meaning of this Act shall be defined as follows: Persons of either sex under the age of sixteen years who violate any law of the State or any city or town ordinance, or who are incorrigible, or who are persistent truants from school, or who associate with criminals or reputed criminals or vicious or immoral persons, or who are growing up in idleness or crime, or who frequently visit, or are found in any disorderly house, bawdy house, or house of ill fame or any house or place where fornication is enacted, or in any saloon, bar- room or drinking shop or place, or any place where spirituous liquors or wine or intoxicating liquors or malt liquors are sold at retail, exchanged, or given away, or who patronize, frequent, visit, or are found in any gaming house or in any place where any gaming device is or shall be operated, or who wander about the streets in the night time without being on any lawful business or occupation, or who ha- bitually wander about any railroad yards, or tracks or climb on any moving train or enter any car or engine without authority, or who habitually use vile, obscene, vulgar, profane, or indecent language, or are guilty of immoral conduct in any public place or about any schoolhouse, are hereby classed as delinquents and shall be sub- 234 THE TENNESSEE CHILD WELFARE LAW ject to the legal relations and provisions for the care and control of delinquent chil- dren. Provided, however, that so far as possible all children subject to action as delinquents shall be regarded in the light of dependent or neglected children and subject to similar methods of treatment and that none shall be definitely classed as delinquents until their cases have been reviewed and an appropriate order entered therefor by a court of competent jurisdiction. SEc. 3. Commitments and Responsibility: Be it further enacted, That ~ Sus-SeEc 1. Courts of competent jurisdiction upon proceedings as now provided by law, shall commit children of these classes to appropriate State or county institutions or to suitable private child-caring agencies, societies or institutions that are duly licensed as hereinafter provided. Sus-Sec. 2. Such commitments of dependent or delinquent children shall in- clude and bear with them guardianship of the persons of said children; and the State or county officials charged with the control and management of the public institutions to which the commitments are made; or the responsible trustees, managers, or officers of the private organizations to which the children are thus assigned, shall be accountable for the personal welfare, guidance, and supervision of such wards during their minority, or until they are otherwise disposed of by a court of competent jurisdiction. Sus-Sec. 3. All children committed to the Tennessee State Reformatory for Boys, the Tennessee Vocational Schools for Girls, the Tennessee Industrial School, or any other State institution under the authority and management of the Ten- nessee Board of Control, shall be the wards of said Board, and shall be received into State guardianship, properly cared for, definitely classified, and reassigned or dis- missed, at the option and under the direction of said Board and its accredited agents. Sus-Sec. 4. No children shall be committed to any private child-caring agency, society or institution, unless the same shall be duly incorporated under the laws of the State, as provided by law, and unless such corporation shall be duly licensed for that purpose as hereinafter provided. Sus-Sec. 5. The Secretary of State upon the filing with him of a certificate from the Board of State Charities, certifying to any corporation organized as a child-caring agency, society or institution, as suitable and properly managed as said institution, shall issue to such corporation a license permitting it to do business for such purpose, which license to do business for the period of one year following the date of the issuance of such license, and which license may be at any time revoked by the Secretary of State upon recommendation of the State Board of Charities. Any violation of this section by such corporation or the conduct of such business by such corporation without being licensed, as aforesaid, shall be a misdemeanor. The Board of State Charities shall charge no fee for the examination of any agency, society or institution, and the fee for the license hereinabove provided for to the Secretary of State shall be one dollar. Sus-Sec. 6. The approval of the Board of State Charities shall be based upon reasonable and satisfactory assurance on the following points: (1) The present need for the proposed agency or institution. (2) The good character and intentions of the applicants. 235 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES (3) That the organizations shall be adequately financed to be effective. (4) That capable trained or experienced workers will be employed. (5) That the methods to be used and disposition to be made of the children served will be wise, altruistic, judicious, and in accord with the welfare of society. (6) That there is a probability of permanence in the proposed child welfare organization or institution. Sus-Sec. 7. No private child-caring agency, society, or institution, shall receive a certificate of incorporation or institutional charter from the Secretary of State, nor shall any proposed or heretofore unincorporated agency, society, or institution engaged in organized child-helping work receive one unless there shall first be filed with the Secretary of State the commendatory certificate in relation thereto of the Board of State Charities. Any violation of this section shall be a misdemeanor punishable according to law. The Board of State Charities shall charge no fees for the examination of a proposed agency, society, or institution, or one heretofore unincorporated, and the fee for the certificate of recommendation shall be limited to one dollar. Sus-Sec. 8. All child-caring agencies, societies, or institutions legally incor- porated or chartered in this State previous to the passage of this Act, shall be sub- ject to all of its requirements, except such as relate to forms of organization, and the obtaining of articles of incorporation of charters; and all amendments to previ- ously approved articles of incorporation or previously granted charters, shall take the same course and meet the same requirements as are provided in regard to new and original articles of incorporation or institutional charters. Sus-Sec. 9. All private agencies, societies, or institutions incorporated or char- tered under this Act, or previously incorporated or chartered and approved under this Act, and engaged in child-caring work, including the taking of children into guardianship, and the placing out of children in family homes, and the temporary or long continued institutional care of children, shall obtain annually from the Board of State Charities a certificate of approval authorizing their work, subject to the following regulations: (1) The Board of State Charities shall use the six points of excellence enumerated in paragraph three (3) of this section, as the basis of judgment in the granting or withholding of such certificates. (2) In order that this requirement shall cause no financial hardship to any worthy institution, the fee to be paid for such certificates, to the Board of State Charities shall be limited to one dollar. (3) Any organization engaging in child-caring work without such certificate of approval shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and punished by a fine not less than ten dollars nor exceeding one hundred dollars for each child placed out or made an inmate of an institution, said fine to be assessed by any court of competent juris- diction upon representation of evidence of such action. Sus-Sec. 10. The provisions of this Act shall apply to private institutions for the combined care of adults and children, where the work for children includes more or less continued care, and the character of the institution is charitable and altruistic and not for financial gain or profit. 236 THE TENNESSEE CHILD WELFARE LAW Sec. 4. Lying-in or Maternity Homes: Be it further enacted, That Sus-Sec. 1. As used in this Act, a lying-in or maternity home shall be held to mean a house or other place maintained and conducted for the care and treatment of women during pregnancy, and subsequent to the birth of children, and usually advertised for such work and the disposition of un-wanted children. Any place in which such work is done, and in which within six months, two or more women are treated during pregnancy, or after delivery, except women related to the owner or proprietor of such place by blood or marriage, shall be accounted a lying-in home. Sus-Sec. 2. The Secretary of State upon the recommendation and certificate of the Board of State Charities shall have power to grant licenses to persons or organizations to maintain lying-in homes or maternity hospitals, provided, such institutions are deemed necessary, the physical and medical facilities offered are adequate, and the personal character of the applicants warrant expectation of creditable and efficient service. No license for an institution of this kind shall be given for a longer period than one year, and the fee for its issuance shall be limited to one dollar. Sus-SeEc. 3. Institutions of this class shall not place out children in private homes for adoption or to be reared as members of families, unless on application to, and examination by the Board of State Charities, any such licensed institution shall be considered capable of doing satisfactory child-placing work, and shall re- ceive a certificate of approval as a child-placing agency. Sus-Sec. 4. Any violation of the provisions of this Act, or the establishment of such institution, or the continuance of any persons in such business, without a license from the Secretary of State, shall be a misdemeanor. Sus-Sec. 5. The provisions of this section shall not be interpreted as referring to general or special hospitals, in which maternity work is but a fraction of the ser- vice rendered, and the care of children only brief and incidental. Sec. 5. Guardianship and consent to adoption: Be it further enacted, That Sus-Sec. 1. Incorporated private child-caring agencies, societies or institutions, duly licensed under the provisions of this Act, shall be the guardians of the persons of all dependent or delinquent children committed to their care by courts of com- petent jurisdiction. They may retain such children in institutional care, or may place them in private homes, either temporarily or as members of families; and where such action is deemed proper and desirable, and does not conflict with any retained legal rights of natural parents, may consent in loco parentis to their legal adoption. Sus-Sec. 2. Such agencies, societies, or institutions may receive needy or de- pendent children from their parents or legal guardians for special, temporary, or continued care; and the parents or guardians may sign releases or agreements giving to such organizations guardianship and control of the persons of such chil- dren during the period of such care, which may be extended until the children arrive at legal age; provided, however, that such releases or agreements are understood not to surrender the vital rights and title of such parents or guardians, and that any entire severance of family ties shall be accomplished only by the action or the recorded approval of a court of competent jurisdiction. 237 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Sus-Sec. 3. In the adoption of a ward of a private agency, society, or institution, to give formal and legal consent to such adoption, it shall be required that such organization shall file with the proper official of the county in which the parties desiring to adopt the child reside, a copy of the order of a Judge formally assigning the child to its guardianship, a written statement of endorsement of the adopting parties after sufficient and satisfactory investigation, and formal consent to the proposed adoption; or in cases where the agency, society, or institution has received the child on a written release or agreement signed by the natural parents or legal guardian, the duly recorded consent of a Judge of a court of competent jurisdiction shall precede the completion of articles of adoption for any such child or children. Sus-Sec. 4. Parents or legal guardians of children, whom they have by releases or agreements assigned to the guardianship of child-caring agencies, societies, or institutions, may waive their right to personal appearance in court in matters of adoption, and file their appearance and consent by a duly signed and attested cer- tificate, which shall be a valid basis for judicial consent in such cases; and when such parental or guardian’s certificate cannot be obtained, the Judge must base his decision upon the best evidence available. When foundlings or other abandoned children whose parentage is unknown, and who have not been assigned by court order to a child-caring organization, are presented for adoption, the Judge having proper jurisdiction in the county of the residence of the parties desiring to adopt, may record his consent in loco parentis. The Judge consenting to and consum- mating the adoption of any foundling, abandoned, or illegitimate child, at his dis- cretion, may require that all papers relating to the personal history of such child or family history if any is of record, be sealed and filed in the county archives, to be unsealed only by judicial order. Sec. 6. Child placing in families: Be it further enacted, That Sus-Sec. 1. Child-caring agencies, societies, or institutions, in placing out wards or other dependent or delinquent children in private families, shall safeguard their welfare by the thorough investigation of each applicant and his home and its en- vironment; shall carefully select the child to suit the new relationship and location; and shall personally and adequately supervise each home and child until the latter receives legal adoption or attains legal age. Sus-Sec. 2. All children placed out in private families shall be, as far as it is practicable, located with those of the same religious faith as that held by the chil- dren themselves, or their parents. Sus-SeEc. 3. The Board of State Charities may, at its option, require any child- caring agency, society or institution, to divulge the locations and relationships of any or all of its placed-out children; and these may be visited by the Board’s members or agents to ascertain the condition of such children, or the quality of the placing-out work done; provided, however, that the location and relationships of such placed-out children shall be confidentially held by the Board and its agents and only revealed when the welfare of the children requires such action, on order of a court of competent jurisdiction. SuB-SEc. 4. Private individuals, including midwives, physicians, nurses, and hospital officials, and the officers of all unauthorized institutions, are forbidden to 238 THE TENNESSEE CHILD WELFARE LAW engage in placing-out work; and violations of this restriction shall be punishable by a fine of not less than ten dollars, nor exceeding one hundred dollars for each offense. Sus-Sec. 5. No agency or institution of another State shall place a child in a family home in this State without first having furnished to the Board of State Charities such guarantee as the Board may require, against disease, deformity, feeble-mindedness, or delinquency, and against the child becoming a public charge within five (5) years of the date of such placement. Violations of this restriction shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars for each offense. Sec. 7. Inspection and Supervision: Be it further enacted, That Sus-Sec. 1. It shall be the duty of the Board of State Charities, by its members or agents, to inspect and supervise all of the child-caring agencies, societies, and institutions, public and private, within the State. The Board is hereby given right of entrance, privilege of inspection and access to accounts, and records of work, for the purpose of ascertaining the kind and quality of work done, and to obtain a proper basis for its decisions and recommendations. Any violation of the rights given in this paragraph shall be a misdemeanor, punishable according to law. Sus-Sec. 2. Inspection and visitation of such organizations and institutions by the Board of State Charities shall be made at regular intervals, and without previous notice to the agency, society or institution visited. The Board and its agents shall advise agency and institution officers and workers in regard to approved methods of child care, best types of housing and institutional equipment, and adequate records of agency and institutional work. The principal purpose of such visitation shall not be to present official demands for adherences to the provisions of the law, but to offer friendly counsel on child welfare problems and advise concerning progressive methods and the improvement of the service rendered. Sus-Sec. 3. If any flagrant abuses, derelictions, or deficiencies are made known to the members of the Board or its agents during their inspection of any child-caring agency or institution, or at any time reported to the Board by at least two reputable citizens, the Board shall at once carefully investigate the reports or rumors, and take such action as the matters require. Sus-Sec. 4. If any serious abuses, derelictions, or deficiencies are found in any State child-caring institution, they shall be reported at once in writing to the Ten- nessee Board of Control; if found in any other public child-caring institution, they shall be reported in like manner to the proper authority or governing board; and if said abuses, derelictions, or deficiencies are not corrected within a reasonable time, the same shall be reported in writing to the next session of the Legislature. Sus-Sec. 5. If any such abuses, derelictions, or deficiencies are found in any private child-caring institution or agency, such shall be brought at once to the at- tention of its trustees, or board of management; and if not corrected in a reasonable time, the Secretary of State shall suspend or revoke the license of such agency or institution upon recommendation of the State Board of Charities. Sec. 8. Annual and Biennial Reports: Be it further enacted, That 239 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Sus-Sec. 1. Each public and child-caring agency, or institution within the State shall make an annual report of its work to the Board of State Charities, in such forms as the said Board shall prescribe. These reports shall include detailed statistics of all children served, financial statements of the expenses of their care, the number and kind of workers employed, the value and condition of the plant owned or used, the amount of endowment or invested funds, and any other essential matters that may be indicated by the requirements of the Board. Sus-Sec. 2. The Board of State Charities shall prepare and supply to the vari- ous agencies and institutions the necessary printed blanks to record the desired information. All institutions, public or private, included within the provisions of this Act, shall conform their records to the statutory fiscal year of the State, which closes December 19th and each year shall forward their required reports for the current year, to the office of the Board of State Charities not later than Decem- ber 31st. Sus-Sec. 3. The Board of State Charities shall, from the reports of their in- spectors and visitors and from the annual reports of the various agencies and in- stitutions, prepare a comprehensive biennial report of child welfare work within the State, accompanied by special comments and recommendations, and such biennial reports shall be published at State expense for the information of the Legis- lature, and for distribution among the people. Sec. 9. How Applied and When Effective: Be it further enacted, That all laws and parts or provisions of laws heretofore enacted, that conflict with the provisions of this Act, are hereby repealed. This Act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage, the public welfare demanding it. Approved April 6, 1917. 240 16 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Missing Page Missing Page SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Note: This bibliography was selected with great care, in order to have every title mean an article, a pamphlet, or a volume with a special message to the intelli- gent student or social worker. Although limited to 49 publications, whoever mas- ters what they include will be thoroughly posted on most lines of child welfare work. Barr, Martin W. The Feeble-minded: A Sociological Problem. Reprint from the Alienist and Neurologist, August, 1913. Bartlett, Dana W. The Better City. 248 pp. Los Angeles, Cal., The Neuner Company Press, 1907. Price $1.00. Bogen, Boris D. Jewish Philanthropy: An Exposition of Principles and Meth- ods of Jewish Social Service in the United States. 391 pp. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1917. Price $2.00. Breckinridge and Abbott. Delinquent Child and the Home. 355 pp. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1912. Price $2.00. Carstens, C.C. A Community Plan in Children’s Work. Report. Proceed- ings National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915. pp. 92-1006. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York, Robert Appleton and Company, 1907. Cornell, Walter S. The Feeble-minded World. Pamphlet. 16 pp. Philadelphia, Department of Public Health and Charities, 1911. : Davenport-Hill, Florence. Children of the State. 370 pp. London, Mac- millan and Company, 1889. Durand,G.H. The Study of the Child from the Standpoint of the Home-finding Agency. Proceedings National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1907. Encyclopedia Britannica. Eleventh Edition. Cambridge, England, 1910. Fairchild, Henry Pratt. Outline of Applied Sociology. 353 pp. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1916. Price $1.75. Folks, Homer. Care of Destitute, Neglected and Delinquent Children. 251 pp. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1911. Price $1.00. Gulick and Ayres. Medical Inspection of Schools. 224 pp. New York, Survey Associates, 1913. Price $1.50. Hall, G. Stanley. Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education. Two vol- umes. New York, D. Appleton and Co., 1908. Price $7.50. Hart, Hastings H. Admission and Discharge of Children. Pamphlet. 11 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. Cottage and Congregate Institutions. 136 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1910. Price $1.00. (Now being revised.) Job of Being a Trustee. Pamphlet. 15 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. 244 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Juvenile Court Laws in the United States Summarized. 150 pp. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1910. Price $1.50. Meeting the Problem of Mental Defectiveness. Pamphlet. 1opp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1914. Price 5 cents. Preventive Treatment of Neglected Children. 419 pp. New York, Charities Publication Committee, 1910. Price $2.50. (Now being revised.) Registration of Illegitimate Births. Pamphlet. 19 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. Suggested Program for the Executive State Council of Defense of West Vir- ginia. Pamphlet. 24 pp. New York, Department of ,Child-helping, Rus- sell Sage Foundation, 1917. Price 5 cents. Henderson, Charles R. Introduction to the Study of the Dependent, Defec- tive and Delinquent Classes and of Their Social Treatment. 397 pp. New York, Heath and Company, 1901. Price $1.50. Hibbs, Henry H. Infant Mortality; Its Relation to Social and Industrial Con- ditions. 127 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 30 cents. Hollander, Bernard. Abnormal Children. 224 pp. New York, E. P. Dutton and Company, 1916. Price $1.25. Holy Bible. Especially the Books of Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and The Psalms. Jaffa, Adele S. A Standard Dietary for an Orphanage. Pamphlet. 28 pp. Sacramento, Cal., State Printing Office, 1914. Jewish Encyclopedia. New York, Funk and Wagnalls, 1907. Lawton and Murphy. A Study of Results of a Child-placing Society. Paper. Proceedings National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1915. pp. 164-174. Mangold, George B. Problems of Child Welfare. 522 pp. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1914. Price $1.50. Moore, Howard. The Care of Illegitimate Childrenin Chicago. Pamphlet. 37 pp. Chicago, Juvenile Protective Association, 1912. Parsons, Elsie Clews. The Family. 389 pp. New York, G. Putnam’s Sons, 1906. Price $3.00. Ralph, Georgia G. Elements of Record Keeping for Child-helping Organiza- tions. 195 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foun- dation, 1915. Price $1.50. Reeves, Edith. Care and Education of Crippled Children in the United States. 252 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1915. Price $2.00. Reynolds, Wilfred S. Standards of Placing-out in Free Family Homes. Pro- ceedings National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1914. pp. 183-189. Richardson, C. Spencer. Development of the Individual Child in Institu- tions for Dependents. Pamphlet. 16pp. New York, Department of Child- helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. Education of Dependent Children in Institutions. Pamphlet. 26 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. 245 CHILD-PLACING IN FAMILIES Physical Care of Dependent Children in Institutions. Pamphlet. 23 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price 5 cents. Richmond, Mary E. Social Diagnosis. 511 pp. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1917. Price $2.00. Rowe, Henry K. Society: Its Origin and Development. 378 pp. New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1916. Price $1.25. Slingerland, W. H. Child Welfare Work in California. 247 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1916. Price $1.50. Child Welfare Symposium. 138 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping. Russell Sage Foundation, 1915. Price 25 cents. Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania. 352 pp. New York, Department of Child-helping, Russell Sage Foundation, 1915. Price $2.00. Solenberger, E. D. Standards of Efficiency in Boarding-out Children. Pro- ceedings National Conference of Charities arfd Correction, 1914. pp. 178-183. Tredgold, A. F. Mental Deficiency (Amentia). 491 pp. New York, William Wood and Company, Second Edition, 1914. Price $4.25. Ulhorn, Gerhard. Christian Charity in the Ancient Church. 424 pp. New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1883. Price $2.50. U. S. Bureau of the Census. Summary of State Laws Relating to the De- pendent Classes, 1913. 346 pp. Washington, D. C., Government Printing Office, 1914. Warner, Amos W. American Charities. 510 pp. New York, Thomas Y. Crowell, 1908. Price $1.50. White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children. Proceedings. 231 pp. Washington, D. C., Government Printing Office, 1909. & 246 INDEX INDEX (Italics denote publications) ABANDONMENT: French decree, 32; de- sertion defined, 32, 63; legal surren- der, 89-91; Illinois law, 134-135, 229; Idaho, 135-137, 230; Massachusetts, 137) 227 Abnormal Children: by Bernard Hol- lander, 69, 103, 245 ABusEp Cuitp Act: of Idaho, 136, 230, 232 ADMINISTRATION, BOARDS OF: efficient managers, 43, 46; executive, 46; em- ployes, 46-48; federation plan, 49-50; state supervisory, 150-155; boards of charities, 151; boards of control, 151; charities commissioner, 152; public welfare director, 152-155; Ohio Chil- dren’s Welfare Department, 152, 155; Bureau of Juvenile Research, 155-156; Iowa Child Welfare Research Station, 156-157; recommendations for, 214; Board of Children’s Guardians, D. C., 225 Admission and Discharge of Children: by Hastings H. Hart, 86, 92, 244 Adolescence: Its Psychology, and Its Re- lations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education: by G. Stanley Hall, 184, 244 ApopTion: Selection of children, 123- 128; standards for, 130-131; consent to, 133-140; 231; laws and decisions, 134-140, 228, 231, 232; in Missouri, 159; “adopting out,”’ 168; traffic in children, 168-170 AGENcIEs: American, 35-37; extent of work, 39; public agencies, 39, 51-53, 55» 139; Private, 39, 48-51; require- ments, 43-45, 79; Operating essen- tials, 46-48; National Home and Welfare Association typical, 48-49; denominational, 51; juvenile courts, 53-55, 83; state boards of children’s guardians, 57-58; child-placing insti- tutions, 58-59; special tasks of, 60, 80-95, 219; types of children pro- vided for, 61; reception, processes of, 79-95; selecting family homes, 112- 122; selection of children, 123-142; agency officers, 128-130; supervision by, 143-149; state-wide, 179, 182, 183; expense of supervision, 185-187; nonsectarian, 191; recommendations and standards for, 197-208; defini- tion, 219; types of, 219-221; general, 220; special, 220 AD SocretrEes oF AMERICA: See Ameri- can Organizations AmenTiIA: Dr. A. F. Tredgold defines grades of, 73 American Charities: by Amos W. War- ner, 246 AMERICAN ORGANIZATIONS, 35-37; first in U. S., 35; boarding-out inaugu- rated, 36; prominent agencies, 36; national federation, 36-37, 48; Na- tional Home and Welfare Association typical, 48; private agencies, 48-51; public, 51-53, 55; Children’s Home Bureau, 55-56; institutional methods, 58-59; Red Cross Home Service, 178- 181; future of child-placing, 194-196 AMERICAN Rep Cross: Home Service, 178-181; policy of, 179-181; soldiers’ orphans’ homes, 181-183 ANCIENT ReEcorps: Babylonian laws, 26; tribal conditions, 26; Jewish laws and chronicles, 27, 31; scriptural references, 27; Athenian laws and customs, 28 ANTHONY, KATHARINE S., 34, 173 APPEARANCE AND CONSENT: adoption in Illinois, 135; Idaho, 135; Massa- chusetts, 137 APPRENTICE SysTEM: English govern- ment sanctioned, 31 ASSIGNMENT: agencies for, 83-84; sources of, in Pennsylvania, 84 249 INDEX Austria: illegitimates, 33; foundling asylums, 34 BaBYLoniA: Code of Hammurabi, 26 Baby Farms in Chicago: by A. A. Guild, 168-170 Batpwin, Brrp T., 157 BaRNaARDO, THOMAS P., 35 BaRNARDO’s HoMEs: purpose, and place- ments, 35; statistics, 35 Barr, Martin W., 74, 244 BARTLETT, DANA W., 196, 244 BaTHING FACILITIES: essentials for, 106 BEDINGER, GEORGE R., 18, 225 BEECHER, HENRY WARD, 24 BERNSTEIN, CHARLES, 76 BERNSTEIN, Lupwic B., 18, 38, 208 Better City, The: by D. W. Bartlett, 196, 244 BIBLIOGRAPHY: scope of, 18, 244-246 Brnet-Smon TEstT: courses in psychol- ogy, 70, 73; diagnosis for reception, 87 BLAINE, SAMUEL, 136 BoarD1nc-out: Napoleonic decree, 32, 33;. Classes of beneficiaries, 32; appli- cation to temporary cases, 39, 80, 126; methods of, 41; Catholic Humane So- ciety, 51; Massachusetts Division of State Minor Wards, 52, 139; state and district boards, 52-53, 150; N. Y. Children’s Home Bureau, 55-56; se- lection of family homes, 112-122, 126; state agency methods, 126; views of leading workers, 131-132, 197-213; boarding homes, 222, 223 BocEN, Boris D., 37, 38, 244 Boston CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY: founding of, 36; nonsectarian agency, 50; boarding homes, 131; supervisory work, 144 Boston CHILDREN’S FRIEND SOcIETY, 224 Bowen, A. L., 153 Boys’ AND GIRLS’ OREGON, 104 Arp SocreTY oF Brace, CHArtes L., 21, 35 Brace MemortaL Farm FoR Boys: annual report, 35 BROOKLYN JUVENILE PROBATION ASSO- CIATION, 226 Brooks, PHILLIPS, 24 BuiLpincs: receiving homes, 96-101; location, 96; site, 96-97; capacity of single, 97; essentials of construction, 97-98; cottage groups, 98-101; rec- ommendations by Hastings H. Hart, 98-100; cost, 98; play equipment, 109 BuREAU FOR EXCHANGE oF INFORMA- TION: civilian relief service, 180 BUREAU OF JUVENILE RESEARCH: in Ohio, 155-156; laws relating to, 156; T. H. Haines on, 156 BurneELt, A. T., 18, 199 CALIFORNIA STATE BoaRD OF CHARI- TIES AND CORRECTIONS: dietary, 104; women agents, 130; State Board of Control, 151 Care and Education of Crippled Children in the United States: by Edith Reeves, 68, 245 Care of Destitute and Neglected Children: by T. M. Mulry, 190 Care of Destitute, Neglected and Delin- quent Children: by Homer Folks, 196, 244 Care of Illegitimate Children in Chicago: by Howard Moore, 245 CarsTENs, C. C., 18, 52, 57, 142, 166, 202, 224, 244 CasE Work: inadequacy of methods, 21-22; agency requirements, 44; qualifications necessary, 47; recep- tion of children, 80-81, 84-87; study of family, 86-87; study of child, 87- 88; record forms, 88 CaTHoLIC CHILDREN’s Am ASSOCIA- TION: institutional placing-out by, 51 CatHotic Home Bureau oF NEw York: institutional placing by, 51, 179; finding of family homes, 190 250 INDEX CatHotic HumANE Society: boarding- out by, 51 Census, U.S. Bureau oF: summary of laws, 61, 62, 246 CENTRALIZATION: See Administration, Boards of Charity and Charities: by Charles S. Loch, 30 CHILD-PLACING FOR Prorit: English apprentice system, 31; reception by favor, 91; commercial lying-in homes, 167; baby farms in Chicago, 168- 170 CHILDREN, CLASSIFICATION OF: purpose, 60; agency types, 61; neglected chil- dren, 61-62, 222; dependent, 62-63, 222; deserted, 63, 222; foundlings, 63-64, 222; needy, 64-65, 222; or- phans, 65, 222; delinquents, 65-66, 221; defectives, 67-69, 73-76, 221; diseased, 68; crippled or deformed, 68; psychological diagnosis, 69-73; mental defectives classified, 73-75, 221; subnormals, 73, 76; abandoned, 222 Children of the State: by Florence Dav- enport-Hill, 244 CHILDREN’s AGENCY OF SAN FRAN- CISCO: nonsectarian, 50 CHILDREN’s AID SociETyY oF CITY OF New York: founding, and purpose of, 35; statistics, 35; federation mem- bership, 37 CuILpREN’s Arp Society oF Detroit, 225 CHILDREN’s Arp Society OF PENNSYL- VANIA: founding of, 36; nonsectarian, 50; mission of, 82; family homes, methods of selecting, 116-117; state agency, 179, 225 CHILDREN’s BUREAU, national agency, 220 CHILDREN’s CoDE COMMISSION: Mis- souri plan outlined, 158-160; pam- phlet by Missouri Code Commission, 160 CHILDREN’S FRIEND Society, oF Wor- CESTER, MAss., 225 CaitpREN’s Home Bureau oF ‘NEw York: statistics, 55; J. A. Kings- bury on organization of, 55-56; board- ing homes, practice of, 131-132 CHILDREN’s HomME FINDING AND AID Society oF IpaHo: abused child law, 136-137 CHILDREN’s Home Society oF FLoripa, 197, 225 CHILDREN’s Home Society oF MINNE- SOTA: superintendent quoted, 203- 204 CHILDREN’s Home Society oF Mis- SOURI: superintendent quoted, 204 CHILDREN’s Home Society oF VIR- GINIA, 225 CHILDREN’S MIssION TO CHILDREN, OF Boston, 224 CHILDREN’S WELFARE DEPARTMENT OF OHIO, 39, 206, 211 CHILD WELFARE RESEARCH STATION: statute for, 156-157; divisions, 157 Child Welfare Symposium: by W. H. Slingerland, 246 Child Welfare Work in California: by W. H. Slingerland, 85, 150, 161, 246 Child Welfare Work in Pennsylvania: by W.H.Slingerland, 76, 84, 86, 149, 161, 246 Christian Charity in the Ancient Church: by G. Ulhorn, 29, 246 CaurcH: early Christian methods, 29- 30; services in receiving homes, 111 CuurcH Home Society oF Boston, 226 CINCINNATI CHILDREN’s Home: non- sectarlan agency, 50; recommenda- tions by, 210-212, 225 Civitan RELIEF: Red Cross Depart- ment of, 178-181 CLEANLINESS: standards, 108 CLEVELAND HuMANE SOCIETY: sectarlan agency, 50 CLEVELAND PROTESTANT ORPHAN Asy- LUM: superintendent quoted, 212-213 CLOTHING: uniforms eliminated, 108 non- 251 INDEX Coves: Babylonian laws, 26; revision of state, 157-160; in Missouri, 157— 160; plan of Children’s Code Com- mission, 158-160; in Minnesota, 173 Community Homes: early form of, 29; public agencies, 51-52; welfare plan, 56-58 Community Plan in Children’s Work: by C. C. Carstens, 52, 57-58, 142, 244 CONGREGATE INSTITUTIONS: and capacity, 220 ConsENT TO ADOPTION: guardianship, legislation for, 133-140; in Illinois, 134-135; Idaho, 135-137; Massa- chusetts, 137-140 Co-oPERATION: welfare workers who aided, 18; reception and reassign- ments, 92-94; promotes efficiency, 93, 178, 193, 194, 214; Committee of Co- operation for Child-Helping, 180 methods CoRNELL, WALTER S., 67, 74, 244 Cottage and Congregate Institutions: by Hastings H. Hart, 98, 244 CoTTacEs: group planning, 98-101; Evanston Receiving Home, plans and illustration, 96a, 96b; two-cottage plan, 98-100; three-cottage plan, Ioo-101; cottage institution, 220 County BOARDS OF CHILDREN’S GUAR- DIANS: agencies, 53 Court Dectsions: extracts from state laws, 134-140, 227-232 CrrppLes: what term implies, 68; care of, 68 Crouse, M. V., 210 DaNIELs, JOHN: on pcelicy of Children’s Home Bureau of N. Y., 131-132 DAVENPORT-HILL, FLORENCE, 244 DEFECTIVE CHILDREN: classes of, 67- 69; definition, 67; percentage in pub- lic schools, 67; Dr. W. S. Cornell quoted, 67; application of term, 67; physical defectives, classes of, 68; di- seased children, 68; crippled, 68; deformed, 68; mental defectives, 69- 76; psychological classification, 69-76 DEFINITIONS: special terms, 18, 40-42, 219-223; child-placing defined, 40, 224-226; lying-in homes in Tennes- see, 237. See also Children, Classifi- cation of DEFORMED CHILDREN: what term im- plies, 68; care of, 68 Delinquent Child and the Home: by Breckinridge and Abbott, 66, 244 DELINQUENT CHILDREN: definitions, 65- 66; agency work, 66; family homes for, 184; public welfare system for, 152-155 DENOMINATIONAL AGENCIES: types of, 51; Jewish, 51 DEPARTMENT OF CHILD-HELPING OF Russet SacE FounpaArTon, national agency, 98, 179, 220 DEPARIMENT OF PUBLIC CHARITIES OF City or New York: foster homes used by, 20; Children’s Home Bu- reau, 55-56, 131-132 DEPENDENT CHILDREN: legal definition in Indiana, 62; what term implies, 62, 63; classes of, 63-65; deserted or abandoned, 63; foundlings, 63-64; needy children, 64-65; orphans, 65; partial dependents, 126; family home versus institutions, 185-193; New England Home for Little Wanderers, 201-202. See also White House Con- ference Dependent, Defective, and Delinquent Classes, and of Their Social Treat- ment, Introduction to the Study of the: by C. R. Henderson, 64, 245 DESERTED CHILDREN: definition, 63; relation to abandoned, 63 Development of the Individual Child in Institutions for Dependents: by C. Spencer Richardson, 111, 245 Dickinson, S. W., 18, 203 Dietary: standards for, 104-105; din- ing rooms, 105; milk, 105 DrrEcTtorR OF PUBLIC WELFARE: sys- tem in Illinois, 152-155; A. L. Bowen quoted, 153-155 DISEASED CHILDREN: placement, 68; examination before placing, 86-87 District BOARD OF GUARDIANS: tem- porary care by, 52 252 INDEX Division oF STATE Minor Warps: Massachusetts State Board of Chari- ties, 36, 52, 139 DormiToriEs: size of, 106; New York law, 107 DULLARDS: mentality of, 75 Douranp, G. H., 143, 244 EARLY CHRISTIAN ERA: laws and prac- tices, 28-30; church methods, 29-30; institutional age, 29, 30; publications On, 29, 39, 246 EpucaTIon: in receiving homes, 110; public schools, 110; trained agents, 140-142; volunteer assistants, 141; Dr. Hart quoted, 141-142; legislative research, 155-157 Education of Dependent Children in In- stitutions: by C. Spencer Richardson, IIO, 245 Elements of Record Keeping for Child- helping Organizations: by Georgia G. Ralph, 45, 88, 245 EMPLOYES: requirements, 46-47, IoI- Io2; superintendents, state and dis- trict, 49; matron, 101, 102; number, 102; medical staff, 102-103; agency officers, 128-130; titles of officers, 221. See also Organizations, Require- ments for ENDOWED CuarITIEs: establishment of, 30; definition, 221 - ENGEL, DrR., 34 ENGLAND: apprentice system, 31; Jew- ish orphanage established, 31; Bar- nardo’s Homes, 35 ESSENTIALS OF CHILD-PLACING: a fore- cast of developments, 194-196; agency workers’ views, 197-208; recommen- dations by institutions, 208-213; re- quisites for success, 214-215. See also Standards Evanston RECEIVING Home: building, and floor plans, 96a, 96b Face, Marcus C., 18, 36, 197, 225 FAIRCHILD, HENRY PRATT, 194, 244 Fatconer, Dovuctas P., 225 FaLconer, Martua P., 18, 119 Famities: social elements of, 25-26; surrenders by, 84, 80, 91, 133-137; case study of, 86-87; placements in, 112-122; visiting by relatives, 131-133 Famity Homes, selection of, 112-122; investigation essential, 112-114, 122, 130; boarding homes, 114, 126; wet- nurses, 115, 116; agency applications, 115; representative methods of place- ment in, 116-118; indirect selection, 119; replacements, 119-121; argu- ments for placing in, 184-193; place- ment costs, 186-187; John A. Ryan quoted, 189; T. M. Mulry quoted, 190; C. F. McKenna quoted, 190- 191; types of, 222. See also Free Homes Family, The: by Elsie Clews Parsons, 245 “FATE OF THE CHILD Born OvuT oF es THE,” by C. C. Carstens, I FEDERATIONS: National Children’s Home Society, 36; change of name, 37; National Home and Welfare As- sociation, 37, 48-50 FEEBLE-MINDEDNESS: increase, 69; psy- chological and psychiatric examina- tion, 69-73; Dr. W. E. Fernald quoted, 71-72; proper diagnosis for, 72-73; amentia, 73; Dr. W. S. Cor- nell defines, 74; classification, 74-75; placements, 76; State Custodial Asy- lum, 76; psychological study, 103; in Missouri, 159 Feeble-minded: A Sociological Problem, by M. W. Barr, 244 Feeble-minded World, The: by W. S. Cornell, M.D., 74, 244 FERNALD, Dr. W. E., quoted on border- line defectives, 71-72 FIELD, PARKER B., 224 FisHer, Harry, 135 FLESHER, J. W., 18 FLORENCE CRITTENTON HoMEs: bined care institutions, 176 com- Forks, Homer, 18, 196, 204, 226, 244 Foster Homes: endorsement of, 19-22; White House Conference Conclusions, 19-20; selection of, 22; receiving 253 INDEX homes, functions of, 96-111; methods of selection, 112-142; selecting chil- dren for, 123-144; Dr. Hart quoted, 141-142; supervision, adequacy of, 143-161, 185; for illegitimates, 176- 177; types of, 222-223 Foundling Asylums: by John A. Ryan, 3 31; 33) 34, 189 Foundlings: by J. H. Greenstone, 27 Founviincs: defined, 32; Napoleonic decree, 32, 33; French boarding-out, 32-33; number in asylums in France, 32; abandoned, 33; Germany, 34; definition, 63-64, 222; classification, 64; asylums for, 174-176; institu- tional expenses, 185-187; family homes advocated for, 188-191 France: orphans and orphanages, 30- 31; boarding-out system, 32 FRrankE1, LEE K., 38 FREE Homes: placement, agencies for, 41, 50-51, 127; responsibility of selec- tion, 112-114; standards, 130-131; agency guardianship, 132~133; super- vision, 146, 147, 187; definition, 222 Funps: appropriations, 45; private and public defined, 221 Gavisk, Francis H., 78 Germany: Jewish orphanage estab- lished, 31; illegitimates, 33-34; plac- ing-out, 34 GrnsBERG, RABBI, 31 Gopparp, Henry H., 74 Goop WILL Farm: nonsectarian agency, 50 GRASSE, HELEN, 226 GREECE AND Rome: laws and customs, 28 GREENSTONE, J. H., 27 oe See Children, Classification 0 GUARDIANSHIP: surrenders, 89-90; laws and decisions, 133-140; consent to adoption, 133-138; Illinois law, 134- 135; personal, 134; by default, 134- 135; Idaho law, 135-137; commitment, 136; [Abused Child Law, 136-137; Massachusetts, 137-140; Neglect Law, 137, 139, 227; court decisions, 227-232 Guest, L. HADEN, 195 Guitp, ARTHUR ALDEN, 170 Haines, Tuomas H., 156 HALF-ORPHANS, 65 Hatt, Frank D., 18, 205 HAtt, G. STANLEY, 184, 244 Hart, Hastines H., 19, 38, 39, 50, 66, 82, 84, 86, 92, 98, 112, 113, I17, 119, 120, 124, 141, 142, 161, 170, 172, 179, 180, 181, 186, 244 HEBREW ORPHAN ASyLUM, of New York, child-placing by, 51; number of children, 51 HEBREW SHELTERING GUARDIAN So- ciety: child-placing by, 51; {super- intendent quoted, 208-209; capacity, 208 HENDERSON, CHARLES R., 64, 245 Henry, E. J., 18, 212 Henry WATSON CHILDREN’S AD So- ciety: founded in Baltimore, 36 HEwins, KATHERINE P., 226 Hrsss, Henry H., JR., 107, 245 Histoire des Enfants Abandonnés et Délaisses: by Leon Lallemand, 32 Historica OUTLINES: family preserva- tion, 25; Babylonian laws, 26; an- cient law and custom, 26-28; prime- val conditions, 26-29; Jewish laws and chronicles, 27-31; Greece and Rome, 28; early Christian era, 28-30; church institutions, 29-30; modern methods, 30-39; English apprentice system, 31; nineteenth century renais- sance, 32, 37; French boarding-out, 32-33; Teutonic empires, 33-34; Dr. Barnardo’s Homes, 35; American organizations, 35-39; Jewish work in America, 37-38; modern agencies, ex- tent of work, 38-39 HOLLANDER, BERNARD, 69, 103, 245 254 INDEX Home-Finpinc: conclusions of White House Conference, 19-20; foster homes, 19-22; Jewish customs, an- cient and modern, 27, 37-38; bases of reception, 79-95; task of selection, 112-122; for normal dependents, opinions on, 189-191; definition, 223 Homes: See Boarding-out; Foster Homes; Free Homes; Receiving Homes; Work- ing Homes Home Service: Red Cross relief, 178- 183 Howarp, CARRINGTON, 224 Hurd’s Revised Statutes of Illinois, 134, 135, 229, 230 Ip1o-ImBEcILES: mental capacity, 74 Iprots: mental capacity, 74 InLecitmacy: Germany and Austria, 33-34, 173; report by Engel, 34; John A. Ryan quoted, 34; Norway’s treat- ment, by Katharine S. Anthony, 34, 172-173; surrenders, legislation for, 89-90; in Missouri, 158; placements, 165; numbers of children, 165-166; C. C. Carstens quoted, 166; commer- cial lying-in homes, 167; ‘adopting out,” 168; baby farms report, 168- 170; Juvenile Protective Association investigation, 168-170; plan outlined by Dr. Hart, 170-172; Norway’s law, 172-173; Minnesota’s code, 173; foundling asylums, 174-176; prob- lems considered, 174; combined care institutions, 176; foster homes, 176- 177 ILttNois CHILDREN’S HomE anp AID Socrety: founding of, 36, 37; Evan- ston Receiving Home and plans, 96a, 96b; family homes, methods of se- lecting, 117-118; guardianship law, 134; state agency, 179, 187; policies of, 198 IMBECILES: mental capacity, 74 INDENTURES: English apprentice sys- tem, 31 INDIRECT SELECTION: Martha P. Fal- coner quoted, 119 Infant Mortality: Its Relation to Social and Industrial Conditions, by Henry H. Hibbs, Jr., 107, 245 InFants: boarding-out in France, 32, 33; Classes of beneficiaries, 32; wet- nurses for, 33, 115, 116, 117; agency care, 81, 107; surrender of, and ille- gitimacy, 89-90; receiving-home nur- series, 107; sex of placing-out agents, 129; foundling asylums, 174-176; St. Vincent’s Home, 175. See also Illegitimacy; Wet-nursing InstTiTuTIONS: early history, - 29-30; modern methods, 37-39; organiza- tion requirements, 43-46; Cincinnati Children’s Home, 50, 210, 225; He- brew Sheltering Guardian Society, 51, 208; essentials for child-placing, 58- 59; reception and case study, 81, 84— 88; receiving homes, 96-111; legis- lative boards, 148-161; foundling asy- lums, 174-176; normality of life in, 185; cost of rearing child in, 185-187; capacity, 187-188; John A. Ryan quoted, 189; child-placing by, 191- 193, 197, 208-213, 224-226; New York Orphan Asylum, 209-210; Cleveland Protestant Orphan Asylum, 212-213; definition, 220; types of, 220-221 Introduction to Study of the Dependent, Defective and Delinquent Classes, and of Their Social Treatment: by C. R. Henderson, 245 INVESTIGATORS, 141-142 Iowa Boarb oF CONTROL: agencies, 53 Iowa CHILDREN’S Home Society: ca- pacity, 97; bulletin of, and applica- tions, 115; scope of work, 199 Jarra, ADELE S., M.D., 104, 245 Jewish Homer Finpinc Society oF Cxrcaco: scope of work, 38, 51; wid- ows and children helped, 38 Jewish Philanthropy: An Exposition of Principles and Methods of Jewish So- cial Service in the United States: by B. D. Bogen, 37, 38, 244 Jews: ancient laws and precepts, 27; originators of welfare work, 27, 37; first asylums established, 31, 37; plac- ing-out, 37, 38; B. D. Bogen quoted, 37, 38; work in America, 37, 38; exponents of placing-out, 38; child- placing agencies, 51 255 INDEX Job of Being a Trustee, The: by Hastings H. Hart, 92, 244 Jounson, REv. Marion, 18, 207 JUVENILE A1D Society, OF PHILADEL- PHIA: Jewish child-placing agency, 51 Juvenile Court Laws in the United States Summarized: edited by Hastings H. Hart, 66, 245 JuvENILE Courts: placing-out powers, 53-55; child-placing experiment, 53; social workers’ opinion on, 54; proba- tion officers’ service, 53, 54-55; as reception sources, 83, 84, 88-91 JUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION: baby farms investigated by, 168-170 Kansas CHILDREN’S Home Society, 200, 225 Kansas STATE ORPHANS’ HoME: re- ceiving home, 53 KIncsBury, JOHN A., 55, 56 Kwicut, FREDERIC H., 18, 73, 201, 224 LALLEMAND, LEON, 32 Laws oF MINNESOTA RELATING TO CHILDREN, 174 LEE, PorTER R., 210 LEGISLATION: ancient laws, 26; Jewish, 27; Athenian, 28; early Christian, 28-29; organization outline, 43-45, 49; state boards, 52-53, 57, 151-155, 233; juvenile courts, 53-55, 83-84, 88-91; J. A. Kingsbury quoted, 55- 56; Indiana law and dependents, 61, 62; reception of children, 79-91; W. H. Slingerland on work in Pennsyl- vania, 84, 86; in California, 85; guar- dianship and adoption, 134-140; Ili- nois, 134-135, 152-155, 229-230; Idaho, 135-137; 230-232; Massa- chusetts, 137-140, 227-229; Neglect Law, 137, 139, 227; state supervision, 149-161, 214-215; Board of Charities System, 151; Board of Control Sys- tem, 151; Commissioner System, 152; Public Welfare System, 152-155; Ohio research bureau, 155-156; Iowa Child Welfare Research Station, 156- 157; Missouri Children’s Code Com- mission, 157-160; proposed measures for illegitimates, 170-172; Norway’s law for illegitimacy, 172-173; Min- nesota code, 173; decisions and ex- tracts, 227-232; Tennessee law, 233- 240 Lire Savinc PLAN, proposed by Hast- ings H. Hart, 170-172 Locu, CHARLES STEWART, 30 Low, Minnig, 38 LUTHERAN KINDERFREUND SOCIETIES: placements in free homes, 51 Lyinc-In Homes, COMMERCIAL: super- vision, 45,174; and illegitimacy, 166- 168; in Chicago, 168-170; Tennessee law, 237 Mack, JULIAN W., 24 MAanco1p, GeorcE B., 245 Manual of Home Service, 178 MASSACHUSETTS SCHOOL FOR THE FEEBLE-MINDED, 71 MASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR PREVEN- TION OF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN: founding of, 36; essentials of child- placing, 202-203, 224 MASSACHUSETTS STATE BOARD OF Cuarity: boarding-out method, 36; statistics, 1915, 36; Division of State Minor Wards, 52, 139 MavyseEE, Rev._W. J., 18, 225 McKenna, CHartes F., 28, 31, 190, 191 MeEpIcaL Care: for defectives in public schools, 67; groups needing, 68-69; diagnosis, 69; psychology, 69-73, 87; examination before placement, 86, 87; agency staffs, 102-103; infants, 107; board of health suggestions, 171; New England Home for Little Wanderers, 201-202 Medical Inspection of Schools: by Gu- lick and Ayres, 67, 148, 244 Meeting the Problem of Mental Defec- tiveness: by H. H. Hart, 245 Mentat Derectives: feeble-minded- ness, 69-76; percentage of delin- quents who are, 69; diagnosis essen- 256 INDEX tial, 69; placements, 69; psychologi- cal classification, 69-73; Binet-Simon tests, 70, 73, 87; psychiatry for, 71, 72; Dr. W. E. Fernald quoted, 71, 72; Dr. A. F. Tredgold defines amen- tia, 73; Dr. W. S. Cornell on feeble- mindedness, 74; classification by W. H. Slingerland, 74-76; Dr. W. S. Cornell defines, 74; idiots, 74; idio- imbeciles, 74; imbeciles, 74; morons, 74-75; dullards, 75, 76; feeble- minded, 74, 75; placing-out, 76 Mental Deficiency (Amentia): by A. F. Tredgold, M.D., 69, 73, 246 Mitp DELINQUENTS, 66 MILx: pasteurization and care, 105 Missourr CopE CoMMISSION: phlet by, 160 MopEern PERIOD IN CHILD WELFARE, 30-39; Jewish methods, 31, 37-38; French boarding-out, 32-33; Teu- tonic, 33-34; Dr. Barnardo’s Homes, 35; American organizations, 35-39; extent of work, 38-39 Montana CHILpRen’s Home: placing- out work, 53 pam- Moore, Howarp, 245 Morons: mentality of, 74-75 Mutry, Tuomas M., 19, 20, 190 Morpxy, J. PRENTICE, 18, 144, 148 Napotreonic DercreE: boarding-out system, 32, 33; administration of plan, 33 NatTrionaL CHILDREN’s Home Society, 36 NatTionaAL COMMITTEE FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, 72 NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CHARITIES AND CORRECTION: report on foster homes, 19, 20; W. S. Reynolds on placing-out standards, 130-131; re- port on family homes for placements, 190 NatTIonaAL Homre AND WELFARE Asso- ciation: federated agencies, 36, 37, 48-49 NATIONAL INCORPORATED ASSOCIATION. See Barnardo’s Homes 2 Nation of the Future, The: by L. H. Guest, 195 NEEDY CHILDREN: dependents classi- fied, 64-65; types of service, 64-65; disposition of, 65; NEGLECTED CHILDREN: definitions, 617 62; Indiana laws, 62; agency place- ment of, 62; legislation, and court decisions on, 134-140 NeEciect Law: Massachusetts Statute of 1903, 137; 139, 227 NEw ENGLAND Home For LITTLE WAN- DERERS: nonsectarian agency, 50; scope of work, 201-202, 224 New Jersey State Boarp oF CHIL- DREN’S GUARDIANS: public agency, 39, 52, 219; temporary home, 52 New York Founpiinc HospPitat: wet- nurses, 115; capacity, 175 New Yorxk Infant Asytum: children in care, 175 New York OrpHan Asytum SOcIETY: functions of, 209 New York SocrETY FOR PREVENTION oF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN: founding of, 36 New York STATE BoArD OF CHARITIES: report of, 40, 224 NONSECTARIAN AGENCIES: typical in- stitutions, 50; placements, 50, 191 NortH Dakota CHILpREN’s Home So- CIETY, 205 Norwavy’s “BILt oF RicHTS,” 172-173; America’s problem, 174 Norway’s Treatment of the Illegitimate Child: by Katharine S. Anthony, 34, 173 Nurseries. See Infants Outo Boarp oF STaTE CuaritiEs: Chil- dren’s Welfare Department, 39; di- rector quoted, 206-207; set standard, 2I1 ORGANIZATIONS, REQUIREMENTS FOR: 43-59; legislation needed, 43; re- quirements outlined, 43-45; operat- ing essentials, 46-48; improved methods, 48; typical organization, 48; 257 INDEX outline of plan, 49-50; state agencies, private, 48, 50-51; public agencies, 51-53, 553 juvenile courts and plac- ing-out work, 53-55; Children’s Home Bureau of New York, 55-56; state boards of children’s guardians, 56-58; placing by institutions, 58- 59; definitions, 221 Orphan: by Max Seligsohn, 28 Orphans and Orphanages: by C. F. 58-59, 80-82, 92; reassignments, 92— 94, I19-121; in family homes, 112- 122, 223; Dr. Hart on responsibility of, 112-113, 120, 124; selection of proper homes, 123-142; in boarding homes, 126, 222; in free homes, 127, 222; in working homes, 127-128, 2223 sex of agents, 129-130; supervision, 143-161, 186-187; arguments for, 184-193; by agencies, 197-208; in- stitutional, 208-213 McKenna, 28, 31, 190, 191 Preventive Treatment of Neglected Chil- OrpHans: Jews originated child-plac- ing, 27-28; early Christian era, 28- dren: by Hastings H. Hart, 38, 39, 50, 113, 117, 119, 124, 141, 245 30; modern period, 30-38; defini- | Ppryvare AGENCIES: Illinois Children’s tions, 32, 222; use of term, 65; half- orphans, 65; placing-out, 65; family homes preferable, 185-193; authori- ties quoted, 189-191. See also In- stitutions Outline of Applied Sociology: by H. P. Fairchild, 194, 244 Parsons, ELSIE CLEWS, 245 PartTIAL DEPENDENTS: in boarding homes, 126 PERMANENT PLACEMENTS, 19, 34, 30, 80, 113, 114, 132, 185, 192 PaysicaL Care: dietary, 104-105; milk, 105; bathing, 106; sleeping facilities, 106-107; infants, 107; clothing, 108; cleanliness, 108; do- mestic duties, 109; play and equip- ment, 109 Physical Care of Dependent Children in Institutions: by C. Spencer Richard- son, 102, 104, 105, 107, 246 PuysicaL DEFECTIVES: application of term, 67; Dr. W. S. Cornell quoted, 67; classes of, 68; diseased children, 68; crippled or deformed, 68 PLAciNc-ouT: plan, endorsement of, 19; T. M. Mulry, quoted on, 19, 20; re- sponsibility of agents, 21-22, 80; ap- plication of term, 21; public, 35, 51- 59, 196-215; Jewish methods, 37-38; legal definitions, 40, 223, 224-226; working definitions, 40, 223; methods of, 41, 222; standards for, 41, 43-45, Home and Aid Society, 36, 98, 117, 198; Massachusetts Society for Pre- vention of Cruelty to Children, 36, 202-203; Massachusetts State Board of Charities, 36, 52; New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians, 39, “52; Ohio Board of State Charities, 39, 206-207; National Home and Welfare Association, an illustration, 48-49; nonsectarian agencies, 50; New England Home for Little Wan- derers, 50, 201-202; denominational, 51; officers and boards of administra- tion, 51-59; C. C. Carstens quoted, 52; District Board of Guardians, 52; State Public Schools, 52; Division of State Minor Wards, 52, 139; state boards of charities, 53; soldiers’ or- phans’ homes, 53, 180; county boards, 533; juvenile courts, 53-55, 83, 84; New York Children’s Home Bureau, 55-56, 131; state boards of children’s guardians, 56-58; institutional plac- ing-out, 58-59; Iowa Children’s Home Society, 97, 115, 199-200; Bos- ton Children’s Aid Society, 131; es- sentials for successful placing, 196- 215; Florida Children’s Home So- ciety, 197; Kansas Children’s Home Society, 200-201; Minnesota Chil- dren’s Home Society, 203; Missouri Children’s Home Society, 204; North Dakota Children’s Home Society,205; Washington Children’s Home So- ciety, 207-208; definitions, 219, 220, 221 PROBATION OFFICERS: in juvenile courts, 53, 54, 55 130-131; faulty methods, 48, 85, 93; | Problems of Child Welfare: by George private agencies, 50-51; institutional, 258 B. Mangold, 245 INDEX Proceedings: White House Conference, 246 Psycaiatry: relation to psychology, 71-73, 87; Dr. W. E. Fernald quoted, 72; Dr. Frederic Knight quoted, 73 PsycHoLocy: application to mental de- fectives, 69-73, 87; definition, 70; university courses in, 70; relation to psychiatry, 71; Dr. W. E. Fermald quoted, 71-72; case work, 71, 72; Dr. F. Knight quoted, 73; in place- ments, 87 PuBLic WELFARE SySTEM: administra- tion in Illinois, 152-155; centraliza- tion plan, 153-155; State Charities Commission, 153, 155; directors ap- pointed, 154 QUESTIONNAIRE: child-placing defined, 40, 224-226; agency standards, 145- 146 RAcIAL SELECTION, 125 RapH, Georcia G., 45, 88, 245 REASSIGNMENTS: agency co-operation, 92-94; legislation needed, 94; due to, 119-121; methods to reduce, 121; repeaters, 223 Receivinc Homes: functions, 96-111; site and location, 96-97; buildings, type of, 97-101; cottage plans, 98— to1; Evanston Home and plans, g6a, 96b; employes, 101-102; medical staff, 102-103; psychologist, 103; wards, physical care of, 103-108; work duties, 109; play, equipment for, 109; education, 110; religion, 111; definition and examples, 221 RECEPTION, processes of, 79-95; serious importance, 81-82; application forms 82; sources, 83-84; from parents, 83; case study essential, 84-85, 36-88; medical examination to precede, 86, 87; study of relatives and child, 86- 88; record forms, 88; legal basis for, 88-89, 91; on surrenders, 89-90; by default, 91; by favor, 91; court proc- ess, 91; by officer or committee, 92; reassignment, 92-94; sympathetic, 82, 94-95 Recorps: forms and filing systems, 88; publication by Georgia G. Ralph, 88; preservation essential, g1-92 RECREATION: play directors, 109; equipment, 109 Rep Cross. See War Dependents REEDER, R. R., 18, 209 REEVES, EpiTH, 68, 245 Registration of Illegitimate Births: by H. H. Hart, 245 RELATIVES: visits from, 131-132 RELIGION: receiving-home privileges, z11; church membership, 117, 122; not to bar adoption, 138. See also Historical Outlines RESEARCH: state bureaus, 155-157; Ohio, 155-156; Iowa, 156; C. E. Seashore quoted, 157 REYNOLDS, WILFRED S., 18, 130-131, 198, 245 RICHARDSON, C. SPENCER, 18, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 108, TIO, III, 245 Ricumonp, Mary E., 47, 245 ROSENWALD, JULIUS, 38 Rowe, Henry K., 246 RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION, 45, 47, 50, 66, 68, 84, 88, 92, 98, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107, II0, III, 145, 161, 172, 170, 181, 244, 245, 246 Ryan, Joun A., 28, 30, 33, 34, 189 Rye, Tuomas C., 233 SALvATION Army REscUE Homes: com- bined care institutions, 176 SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES: ancient law and precept, 27, 82; Talmud, excerpt from, 27; Bible, books of, 245 SEASHORE, CARL E., 157 SELIGSOHN, Max, 28 Sex oF AGENTS: placements by men, 129, 130; Mrs. M. P. Falconer quoted, 130 Sark, D. F., 18, 200, 225 SLINGERLAND, W. H.: on classification of defectives, 74-76, 84, 85, 86, 149, 150, 161, 246 259 INDEX Social Diagnosis: by Mary E. Rich- mond, 47, 246 SoctaL WorkERS: author’s aids, 18; need for study, 25; reception of chil- dren, 79, 83-95; training essential, 140-142 Society: Its Origin and Development: by Henry K. Rowe, 246 SorprErs’ ORPHANS’ Homes: states having, 53, 180-183; suggested pro- gram for West Virginia, 181-183 SOLENBERGER, EDWIN D., 18, 116, 225, 246 Sotty, J. LAWRENCE, 225 STAHMANN, REv. C. C., 18, 204 Standard Dietary for an Orphanage, A: by Adele S. Jaffa, M.D., 104, 245 Standardized Fields of Inquiry for Clini- cal Studies of Borderline Defectives: by W. E. Fernald, M.D., 72 STANDARDS: no established, 21; essen- tials outlined, 41; agency require- ments, 43-45; administrative, 46-48; federation plan, 49-50; typical agen- cies, 50-51; state board of children’s guardians, 57; institutional, 58-59; for receiving homes, 96-111; physical, 104-108; child-placing requirements, 130-131; supervision of wards, 145- 148; recommendations by agencies and institutions, 197-215 Standards of Efficiency in Boarding-out Children: by E. D. Solenberger, 246 Standards of Placing-out in Free Family Homes: by W. S. Reynolds, 131, 245 St. VINCENT’S Home OF PHILADELPHIA: wet-nurses, 115; report of out-nursing department, 175 STATE Boarps or CHaritiES: New York Annual Report, 40, 224; agencies, 51— 53; Division of State Minor Wards, 52, 139; State Public Schools, 52; boards of children’s guardians, 52- 53; California, 104; state supervi- sion, 151; Ohio Children’s Welfare Department, 152; California Bien- nial Report, 152; New Jersey, 152; New York State Charities Aid Asso- ciation, 179; Tennessee, 233-240 STATE BoarDs OF CHILDREN’S GUAR- DIANS: established in New Jersey, 52; in Indiana, 53; community plan of C. C. Carstens, 57-58; consent to adoption, 133-140 STATE Boarps oF ConTROL: legislative supervision, 151-152; centralization needed, 151-155; ‘Tennessee welfare law, 233-240 State CHaritTrEs Arp AssocIATION, of New York, 179, 204, 226 StaTE COMMISSIONER SYSTEM: super- ‘vision by, 152; Illinois State Charities Commission, 153, 154, 155 STaTE CONFERENCE OF CHARITIES OF NEw York, 205 State CustopraL AsyLum: work plan for feeble-minded, 76 State Home For CHILDREN: rary home, in Colorado, 52 SraTE Pusuic ScHoots: for temporary care, 52 Study of Child from Standpoint of the Home-finding Agency: by G. H. Du- rand, 143, 244 Study of Results of a Child-placing So- ciety, A: by Lawton and Murphy, 144, 148, 245 Suggested Program for the Executive State Council of Defense of West Vir- ginia: by H. H. Hart, 181, 245 Summary of State Laws Relating to the Dependent Classes: government pub- lication, 61, 62, 246 SUPERVISION: by agencies, 44, 45, 143- 148; Boston Children’s Aid Society, 144; J. P. Murphy quoted, 144; ques- tionnaire of Russell Sage Foundation, 145-147; local aids to, 147-148; es- sentials, 148, 160-161; state control, 149-161, 233; Conclusions of White House Conference, 150, 246; boards of administration, 150-155; research bureaus, 155-157; Ohio, 155-156; Towa, 156-157; code commissions, 157-160; Missouri code, 158-160, 233; social program, 170-173; cost of, 185- 187 SURRENDERS: state legislation, 89-90; “appearance and consent,’ 89-90. See also Guardianship tempo- 260 INDEX TEMPORARY CARE, 20, 39, 52, 80, 113, 114, 126, 185, 192, 221. See also Receiving Homes TENNESSEE CHILD WELFARE: statute quoted, 233-240; Board of Control, 233, 235, 239; Board of State Chari- ties, 233, 235-240 TENTATIVE OUTLINE OF A STATE PRo- GRAM: by H. H. Hart, 161 TERMINOLOGY, 219-223. See also Defi- nitions THurRSTON, HENRY W., 78 TREDGOLD, Dr. A. F., 69, 73, 246 ULHoRN, GERHARD, 29, 246 VAN ARSDALE, REV. M. V. B., 37 War DEPENDENTs: soldiers’ orphans’ homes, 53; Home Service of American Red Cross, 178-183; civilian relief, policy of, 178-180; Bureau for Ex- 261 change of Information, 180; institu- tional care, 181-183; suggested pro- gram for West Virginia, 181-183, 245 Warner, Amos W., 246 WASHINGTON CHILDREN’S Home So- CIETY, 207 Watts, S. D., 18, 210, 225 WEsT VirciIniA HuMANE SOCIETY: re- organization of, 182-183; Children’s Home Society, 182 WEt-Norsinc: foundlings in France, 33; Italian women need supervision, 115; selecting homes for, 116; sug- gestions for illegitimates, 172 Waite House CONFERENCE: conclu- sions on home-finding, 19-20; repre- sentatives at, 19; state inspection, 150; Proceedings, 246 WittiaMs, C. V., 18, 206 Woops, HELEN A., 18, 225 Worxtnc Homes: selection of children for, 41, 127-128; supervision, 146, 147; definition, 222-223 The date shows when this volume was taken, HOME USE RULES All books subject to recall All borrowers must regis- ter in the library to borrow books for home use. All books must be re- turned at end of college year for inspection and repairs. Limited books must be ! returned within the four’ week limit and not renewed. Students must return all books before leaving town. Officers should arrange for the return of books wanted during their absence from / town. Volumes of periodicals and of pamphlets are held in the library as much as possible. For special pur- poses they are given out for a limited time. Borrowers should not tise their library privileges for the benefit of other persons. Books of special value and gift books, when the giver wishes it, are not allowed to circulate. ' Readers are asked to re- port all cases of books marked or mutilated. Do not deface books by marks and writing.