View report page

6
is not a wise policy; and I should like to see the deaf and the blind mix more
freely with their normal fellows.
We spend a large sum in paying fares for our feeble-minded children to
go to Nassau House School: could this money be better applied by furnishing
a couple of extra teachers and thus help to form smaller classes for them at
our elementary schools ?
We spend money in sending a limited number of children to open-air
schools at the seaside. Could not this money be a contribution towards our
own open-air school where more children could be benefitted?
In asking these questions, one assumes that the Education Authority is
undertaking the responsibility of looking after most of the exceptional children
in the district. It is a veiy big responsibility, and it is wise sometimes to
stand still and take stock of our progress.
If sterilisation of the unfit ever becomes compulsory, what voice will the
Local Education Authority have in the matter ?
What would be their mental attitude to a case like the following:—
A large family, four of the children attending special day schools on
account of congenital defect, costing the ratepayers through various committees
£300 a year, and the mother still capable of bearing children ?
Or, another family, four of the children suffering from congenital defects,
being educated from the age of 5 years to that of 16 years, in special day schools
in their earlier years, and in residential special schools in their later years.
An added disadvantage is that these children are handicapped in the
competition for a livelihood with their normal fellows even after their special
training.
This subject is one of the problems of the future.
I have the honour to be,
Your obedient Servant,
H. W. HARDING.