THE STERILIZATION BILL
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I am too far from Blue Books to check statistics, but I can recognize the figure of £8,148,752 on which Mr. J. R. East bases his computation of the cost of dealing effectively with mental deficiency. This figure actually represents the total expenditure in 1929-30 on upkeep of County and Borough Mental Hospitals for patients suffering from mental disorder and has, therefore, no relation to mental deficiency. The distinction between amentia and dementia is commonly misunderstood, but a careful perusal of Part I of the Mental Deficiency Committee's report will make this clear.
The total expenditure of £8,148,752 quoted represents a cost per head for maintenance of mental patients of about 25s. a week and the cost of maintenance of mentally defective persons in institutions is about the same. On this the correct basis the ultimate cost of maintaining the one hundred thousand defectives requiring institutional accommodation would be £8,500,000 as against Mr. East's estimate of £32,000,000. It is not proposed that the remaining two hundred thousand should be maintained in institutions (community care would be sufficient), so that it is not necessary to discuss the exaggerated figure of £96,000,000 or the arguments following.
In reply to Mr. H. E. Turner, I can only reassert that the Committee's report sums up definitely against sterilization (see the clear enumeration of the arguments on p. 89). His quotation wrested from the previous page—" if it could be proved that sterilization could be safely and profitably applied . . . the question -of its adoption would no doubt deserve careful attention "—is the preamble to an admission that there is no such conclusive evidence available.
The letters of these two correspondents illustrate the danger of becoming captivated by what may be at first sight
Previous page
