London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

London County Council 1956

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London County Council]

This page requires JavaScript

Continued from previous page...

Number of hardcore problem families(a)among those with children under 5 only146
(b)among those with school children also516
(c)Total662
Percentage of potential problem families(a)among those with children under 5 only0.55
(b)among those with school children also1.78
(c)All families surveyed1.04
Percentage of hardcore problem families(a)among those with children under 5 only0.14
(b)among those with school children also0.75
(c)All families surveyed0.39
Percentage of problem families of(a)those with children under 5 only0.69
(b)those with school children also2.53
(c)All families surveyed1.43
Average number of problem families in the care of a full-time health visitor(a)potential problem families4
(b)hardcore problem families2
(c)All problem families6
Maximum number of problem families in the care of a full-time health visitor(a)potential problem families27
(b)hardcore problem families18
(c)All problem families33

The total number of families surveyed, as far as can be estimated, comprise virtually
the total that exists. Percentage rates were also calculated for the various divisions of
the County. These percentages for the two categories of problem family combined
ranged from 0.52 in division 7 (Camberwell and Lewisham) to 2.28 in division 5
(Bethnal Green, City, Poplar and Stepney) compared with the County average of 1.43.
The estimated percentage of problem families based on an investigation of 1,000 families
in Newcastle-upon-Tyne was 2, but, as the authors of the report make clear, ' the
difficulties of measurement and the way the families were selected should be borne in
mind In a large urban county like London, which contains within its boundaries
widely differing types of localities, it might well have been expected that the interdivisional
differences would have been larger, but in fact the percentage incidence of
problem families in the remaining seven divisions ranges from 1.04 to 1.80.
The lowest figure merited further investigation. It appeared that it might have
stemmed from the stable staffing in the division concerned; moreover, for a long
period the senior nursing staff had given positive direction to the work with these
families and home helps had been used to assist in more intensive efforts in the homes.
It will also be seen from the table that, as might be expected, there are fewer hardcore
problem families than potential problem families—662 as opposed to 1,794;
secondly, that in both the potential and hardcore groups there are fewer families among
those with children under five years of age only than families with children under
and over five years of age—in total 715 as opposed to 1,741—this despite the fact that
there were only 69,000 mixed families compared with the 103,000 families with children
under five years of age; (despite fluctuations in numbers these findings are consistent
among all divisions). Among families with a child or children under five years of age
the percentage incidence of potential and hardcore problem families was 0.55 and 0.14
respectively; among families with children both under and over school age the corresponding
percentages were 1.78 for potential and 0.75 for hardcore problem families.
163