View report page

40
Intelligence quotient.
Primary
amentia.
Mongol.
Cretin.
Microcephalic.
Hydro
cephalic.
Epileptic.
Cereb.
paral. and
Epilepsy.
Cereb.
paral.
Miscellaneous.
Total.
Feebleminded.
000—019 — — — — — — — —
0.2 —0.39 58 1 1 1 1 9 1 2 5 79
0.4 —0.59 935 2 10 4 7 86 12 25 38 1,119
0.6 —0.79 330 1 1 2 1 37 7 8 8 395
0.8 —0.99 17 — — — — 2 — — 1 20
Total 1,340 4 12 7 9 1 4 20 35 52 1,613
Imbeciles.
0.00—0.19 25 5 2 1 1 5 8 9 6 62
0.2 —0.39 449 111 24 25 17 128 35 56 28 873
0.4 —0.59 279 57 15 12 11 80 16 34 20 524
0.6 —0.79 30 7 1 1 — 6 1 4 2 52
0.8 —0.99 - - - - - 1 - 1 — 2
Total 783 180 42 39 29 220 60 104 56 1,513
Idiots.
0.00—0.19 42 5 2 11 4 44 35 28 7 178
0.2 —0.39 29 8 — 5 5 23 18 12 1 101
0.4 —0.59 2 1 — 2 — 4 — 2 — 11
0.6 —0.79 — — — — — — — — —
0.8 —0.99 — — — — — — — — — —
Total 73 14 2 18 9 71 53 42 8 290
The tables reveal the tendency to give a chance of special education, or training, to those defectives
who show such definite physical disabilities as paralysis, or epilepsy, often when their mental status was
slightly below the level on which the line was drawn in the case of those defectives not showing such
defects. The point is of interest since it is commonly stated that the tendency is to under-assess the
abilities in paralytic, or epileptic cases.
Midwives Acts, 1902 and 1918, and Lying-in Homes.
The number of midwives with London addresses whose names appear on the Roll of Midwives
exceeds 5,000. Of this number 734 notified their intention to practise during the whole year or for
shorter periods. This is an increase of 86 on the previous year. In addition, notice was received from
20 midwives that they had acted in their professional capacity on specific occasions within the Administrative
County of London.
The 734 midwives who gave notice of intention to practise cannot be taken as the number of
midwives practising at any given time in the county. In some institutions it is the custom for a midwife
to act as assistant for three months or less after she is qualified, and her place is then filled by another
newly-qualified assistant, who in her turn gives notice of intention to practise. At any given time it is
probable that some 500 midwives, or about 10 per cent, of those on the roll, are in actual practice in
London. The remaining 90 per cent, act for the most part as monthly or general nurses under medical
supervision.
All practising midwives, except those working in hospitals under medical supervision, are subject
to inspection by the Council's officers, to ascertain whether they are complying with the rules of the
Central Midwives Board as to cleanliness, the possession of antiseptics and appliances, the keeping of
registers and case books and the sending of the required notices to the local supervising authority. The
work of inspection is carried out by four women medical inspectors.
In addition to the ordinary routine inspection, special visits are paid to the midwife when any
case of a septic nature or a persistent high temperature occurs in her practice, and in all cases of inflammation
of infants' eyes. The inspectors also advise midwives on any points of difficulty which may arise
in the course of their duties, and in some instances instruct them as to methods of work. On occasion the
midwife is accompanied by the inspector either to a confinement or on a subsequent visit to a patient to
ascertain whether her methods of work are efficient. This is done more particularly when there is reason
to believe that the midwife's work is not up to standard, and also in cases where she has applied to the
Central Midwives Board for approval to supervise the training of pupils for the Board's examination.
The inspectors paid 1,935 visits during the year to midwives or institutions employing midwives.
In 62 cases there were infringements of the rules of the Central Midwives Board. 15 of these
were slight, and a verbal caution was deemed sufficient. 38 cases were of a more serious nature, and
were dealt with by a written caution. Of the remaining 9 cases, 2 midwives were interviewed by the
committee, and personally cautioned, one being advised to give up practice, and 7 cases were reported to
the Central Midwives Board, who investigated them with the following results :—
(а) one midwife, charges not proved.
(b) two midwives, judgment was postponed for further reports at intervals of three and
six months.
(c) four midwives, struck off the roll.
Three midwives were suspended from practice in order to prevent spread of infection, and payment
in compensation was authorised in each case.
Two applications for restoration to the roll were received : one was granted and the other refused.