[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPEC - n.7011.']
Snt,—Lord Hugh Cecil has invited discussion of the very important question of the "supersession of the discretion of an injudicious parent," and, notwithstanding your hearty support of his objection to the same, I beg leave to urge the contrary.
Any School Medical Officer can produce evidence to show that parents are very frequently " mistakenly perverse," without being criminally negligent and cruel, in refusing to obtain treatment for their children when suffering from defects which not only medical men but the large majority of the enlightened public [regard as urgently in need of medical attention.
Defect of vision is a case in point. Parents who absolutely refuse to allow their children to be treated for this defect are by no means uncommon. Other instances could be multiplied. Mistaken perversity has more to answer for than Lord Hugh is evidently aware of. A remarkable table, published on p. 111 of the Report of the Medical Officer to the Board of Education for 1911, shows that in the cases of 1,174 children out of 3,219 recommended medical treatment for one cause and another indifference on the part of the parents was the explanation why treatment had not been obtained. In view of these figures it would appear that some satisfactory means of dealing with the mistakenly perverse parent is an urgent necessity, and Lord Hugh's suggestion that the work be undertaken by some public official has everything to commend it. Possibly the School Medical Officer, who has all the information at hand, is best qualified for the task.—I am, Sir,
Previous page
