View report page

(l) Progress in London in relation to national development since 1948—Tables (ii) to (v)
relate only to the five units maintained by the Council, while the figures given in table (i)
of references for treatment by the problem case conferences, do not include cases referred
direct to hospital clinics by family doctors, parents, etc. It is impossible to give a picture
of the total child guidance activity in London, since no separate hospital statistics are
available for London residents only.
The Ministry of Education reports, however, give the number of clinics provided by
local education authorities, and the number of cases known to have been treated. This
latter figure will include some, but not all, of the cases treated in hospital clinics, as well
as those treated in education premises :
Year Clinics Cases Treated
1949 153 21,149
1950 162 22,379
1951 185 25,123
1952 202 26,859
1953 202 28,458
1954 204 29,889
1955 211 30,994
1956 220 31,067
1957 229 32,010
1958 236 34,594
1959 253 36,281
Since the London school roll is about one-fifteenth of the national school roll, a proportionate
scaling down of the above figures would lead to an expected figure of something
over 2,000 cases treated a year in London for each of the past few years. Over the same
period the conferences have referred some 1,400 new cases a year for treatment, and
when allowance is made for direct referrals to hospital and also the cases carried forward
at the beginning of each year, it is clear that the number of cases treated in London must
be of the same order as the 2,000 which would be expected from the national figures, i.e.
the suggestion is that the statistical data support the view that London is no worse off
than the country as a whole in the facilities available for child guidance.
(m) Report of the Committee on Maladjusted Children ('Underwood')—The report of
the Underwood Committee, which had been appointed in 1950, was published in 1955
although another four years were to elapse before ministerial circulars were issued implementing
certain of the Committee's recommendations. (The membership of the Committee
included the Headmaster of Bredinghurst, one of the Council's boarding schools for the
maladjusted; the Council submitted written evidence, and oral evidence was given by
officers of both the Education and Public Health departments.)
The terms of reference of the Committee were: 'To enquire into and report upon the
medical, educational and social problems relating to maladjusted children with reference
to their treatment within the educational system'. The report dealt comprehensively with
the whole field of child guidance, special education, after-care, training of staff, and future
planning. References will be found, where appropriate in subsequent paragraphs of this
review.
So far as child guidance services are concerned, the report recommended that the
troublesome paragraph 18 of circular 179, should be withdrawn and that :
"The pattern of provision most likely to lead to an effective and well integrated child guidance service
is for the local education authority to provide the clinic and to employ the educational psychologists and
psychiatric social workers, and for the regional hospital board to provide and pay for the psychiatrist"
This is the pattern which had been adopted in London, by agreement between the
Council and the metropolitan regional hospital boards.
146