# J: : # f __ E ,1. j m ,_, p: : r ” A CHILD GUIDANCE CLINIC A8 A SOCIAL RESOURCE IN A SMALL METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY Study made at the Lansing Children's Center, Inc. by arcane "Mn Gent A PROJET REPORT Submitted to the Department of Social Service, Inchigan state College. in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of ULSTER 01' ARTS Year; December 19 ’47 ."v" ‘f -, - ' .m’.' V.‘ __ . .- o ‘ V _ ‘_ -7 . -4- - A “RMM I meme“ 91““ University J Jinnah: -‘v- OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: P1ace in book return to remove charge from c1rcu1et10n records TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface I. II. III. Iv. INTRODUCTION Statement of the problem Beginnings of Child Guidance Work THE LANSING CHILDREN'S CENTER, INC. History'lndnphilosnnhy Staff Types of services METHODS OF'PROCEDURE Reference material Gathering data Analysis and Comparison FINDINGS OF THE STUDY Comparison of total referrals with treatment referrals‘ Comparison of treatment referrals from 19a} and 19h6 Detailed analysis of l9h6 treatment cases CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discrepancies in data used Need for additional staff Broaden educational program Appendix Bibliography lice Sheet Sohedule used in 19h} study' Schedule used in.L946 study Charts 5-12 12-15 The Three Hundred Ruleis OI‘ Ceremony could not control men's natures. The Three Thousand Rules of Punishment were not sufficient to put a stop to their treacherous villainies. But he who knows how to cleanse the current of a stream begins by clearing out its source. And he who would straighten the end of a process. must commence with making its beginning correct. ---Taoist Inscription .mhis study was undertaken as part of the graduate Social Service Curriculum at Htchigan state College. The writer is particularly inter- ested in doing work with children and completed three hundred hours of supervised field work at the Lansing Children's Center in June of lQhT. Immediately following this. work on the study was begun and was completed in December of 19h7. Thanks are due to both the professional and secretarial staffs of the Center. who were very cooperative in helping to carry on this study. Marcella J. Gest I. This research study is an exploratory attempt to discover what the role of a child guidance clinic is in the community; what type of service is most frequently sought; what problems it endeavors to treat and its success in dealing with these problems; and thus to provide a background of knowledge on which to build an educational program for the community. Through comparison.o£ two studies on treatment cases made three years apart at the Lansing Children's Center, trends and differences will be presented. Data related to the above will be utilized in a final discussion on how the present child guidance services of Lansing are meeting the need of this community and its surrounding areas. The child guidance field is a relatively new one. In 1896. 'itmer established the first psychological clinic at the university of Pennsylvania which was concerned with.practical investigation of the problems of school children. Bealy's behavior clinic started in 1909, is more often pointed to as the beginning of child guidance work. This clinic was connected with the Cook County Juvenile Court in Chicago, which is now known as the Illinois Institute for Juvenile Research. ' Between 1925 and 1929 five experimental child guidance clinics were established by the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, with funds (run the Commonwealth rune. Since the child guidance movement was begun. it hast been Operated under essentially psychiatric auspices. There has been con- stant growth up to the present time and clinics are now located all over the country. The child guidance clinic was the first agency to study the child as a whole. The teamwork of the various professional members of itsistaff carry out a fourfold plan—--examining the physical condition of the child, his intelligence. the home and its influences, and the emotional attitude of the child toward himself, his problems and his friends. - 7 - . _ a v N , , e N w v . . I . 3 . | . 0 ' s - . O , ‘ - - . - a u - . ,N , . . s . a , _ , . , . . . , _ . u - ~ . , . “‘I N ' A , - ~ . I a . ‘ _ V . A -N ' ‘ C U - . - _ < . _ ‘ , . N - e Na N . ‘ . ‘ N N - . s - -' _ ‘ ~ ' , . s - . a , - . , . ‘ O , . ’ s ‘ , v ‘ s v N ~ N ' , . . . . , 7 . x N . N N v , p , . . , - u . s e The Lansing Children's Center. Inc. vas originated in the spring or 1938 by the Child Guidance Committee of the Ingham County Council of Social Welfare. A.survey had been conducted by the National PrObation.Association in connection with the prevention of delinquency, previous to the establish- ment of the Center. The philosOphy under which such a clinic as this Operates, is that it is.possible for the child having difficulty to make a satisfactory readjust- ment to his envdemmment..thnngh the understanding of the nature of the difficulty. Hence,the function of the Lansing Children's Center is the diagnosis and treatment of behavior and personality disorders of children. Tb carry on a preventive and educational program is also part of their function. The Lansing Children's Center is part of the State Ibpartment of Mental Health's program to offer child guidance services in the community and sur- rounding areas. It is financed in part by the State Civil Service Commission which provides the salaries of the psychiatrist-director, the psychologist, and one psychiatric social worker. Local sources support the actual Operation of the clinic and salaries for additional professional workers. Funds are obtained from the Greater Lansing Community Chest. the Board of Education.etc. There is a local advisory board. made up of prominent citizens. which acts as a liason'body between the community and the Center. Thebstaff is comprisedrof'members fromNseveral professions. The psych- iatrist,and most generally the director of the clinic. is a doctor of medicine ahd has had special training in adult and child psychiatry. At present. the Center is without a full time psychiatrist. Dr. C.V. Merrison left at the end of the summer to organize a child guidance clinic in Portland, Oregon. Dr. Samuel Hartwell has been at the Center part-time until a qualified person 18 found for the position. The two psychiatric social workers have training and experience in social casework treatment with emphasis on children's problems. There are also two student social workers on a part-time basis. The psychologist has special ‘ training and experience in psychological testing of children to determine their intelligence. special abilities and disabilities. As of this week. the clinic now has a part-time physician to do physical examinations. There are three main types of service Offered by the clinic. These are Diagnostic: The child is studied to determine his feelings in regard to his unique situation and is usually tested to discover his mental capacity. The parents are interviewed in regard to the home life and relationships and information from other persons in the community having had contact with the situation is.gathered. From all this, the Center makes recommendations either to the parents. the referral agency,or both. Treatment:‘ After a diagnostic study. children who are thought to be able to respond to individual treatment are seen regularly. Depending on the individ- uals problem and his particular feelings about the situation, the length’og treatment varies. Parents are also seen periodically to help them to undera stand the child's behavior and their part in the treatment plans. Other com- munity agencies may help in working out plans for the child. Consultation; The Center staff may be called upon in an advisory capacity by other agencies when they are dealing with problems involving children. This is usually done by conferences but may be just a written report from the Center's records on the case. The clinic's services are free to everyone. Hewever, gifts to the Center financial or otherwise, are accepted. Anyone can make a referral with the parents permission and older children may seek help on their own initiative. The staff confers when planning treatment.for each child referred to the Center. Some background information for undertaking a study to this nature was obtained from Healy and Brenner's-study of Juvenile delinquents and one made at the Michigan Children's Institute in Ann Arbor by Hewitt and Jenkins. The latter brought gorth a group of behavioral items which are sufficiently alike in their meaningful implications to be considered as symptoms of the same fundamental pattern of maladjustive reactions. This did not pertain directly to the study done at the Lansing Children's Center in its objective. but the general methods used were helpful. Other refer- ences will be referred to when the points they discussed have some bearing on the data for this study. The actual source of all material for this paper were obtained from the Center's records and reports. The names of all children referred to the clinic between Januaryl and July 1. 19u6 were taken from the regular and emergency waiting lists. HOnthly reports for the State Department of Mental Hygiene provided the source of referral and the counties served. Descriptive information about the 19%} cases was derived from data sheets filled out on each case accepted for treatment.* The one hundred and fifty cases referred to the Center in January 1 to July 1 of l9u6 were abstracted to discovereths necessary points for comparison. The face sheet information‘. was helpful in obtaining factual data but often the‘ number of interviews held and the length and results of treatment were rather difficult to determine. The agency's methods of recording are not set up for research purposes but rather to help in the treatment process. to assist the new worker being transferred to the case and for supervisory purposes. This was discussed in Johnson and Reid's article, "Ebpe for 3 out of R“. Case load records were also looked into to discover the actual case load of the clinic for each month of the period from danuary to July of 19h6. ’ 889 appendix .After gathering the data and classifying it by means of schedules and charts*. comparisons were made between the entire number of children referred to the clinic from January 1 to July 1. l9h6 and those accepted on a treat— ment basis. Objects of the comparison were to find out what type of service is requested meet frequently of the clinic and to see if there is a difference'_ in the age range of the boys and girls carried on a treatment basis as against those given consultation or diagnostic help. Emphasis was placed primarily on another comparison. The children re- ferred between January and July of l9u6 and accepted for treatment were then compared with the treatment cases derived form a previous study made at the Center in January to July of 19h}. Comparison was made on the following points: total number of cases, number of boys and number of girls. age range and the average age, reason for referral. referral sources. counties served. length and results of treatment. Detailed information.on the 19N6 treatment cases will also be cited as pens tains to the delay in offering service. the number and kind of interviewh held, the number of psychologiCal tests and other services perfOrmed.by the clinic. 'Qata on total referrals January 1 to July 1. 19h6 A total of 148 referrals were taken between these dates. Two more were actually referred. but these did ndIreceive service of any kind. The reason for this being. they were on the waitinslist for over a year and when service was finally offered to them, they no longer desired help. 0! these 1N8 children referred. 107 were boys and #1 were girls. Ages ranged from lyr.3n9. to lSyr. 2mo., the average age was about ten. As twill be shown later this was approximately the same as the average age for all treatment referrals. ' see appendix u Distribution in the counties served and referral sources can best be shown by listing. Counties served Source of referrals Ingham 107 Social Agencies 6“ Eaton 1n Schools uh Jackson 7 ,Courts BJ Shiawassee 7 = Private Physicians 18 Clinton 8 f a,_1"riends.self.parents 9.’ Livingston u 'Others ' 5‘ Hillsdale 3 ’ total lu8 total -lE§’ From these figures. it may be seen that the most numerous referrals come from Social Agencies whether it is for consultation on one of their own cases or perhaps because they are more aware of the services offered by theHCenter and do not hesitate in calling upon it for help. The school referrals are mainly through the visiting teachers. It is encouraging to see so many school referrals because this is the first real group contact the child makes. and if he is not able to adjust here. it is a gooqblace to begin in helping the child to make a normal adjustment . An emphasis haszbeen.placed on education of the school personnel along child guidance work.too and this might be fruits of the efforts put forth. The court referrals are not too plentiful and this may be because the court personnel feels it is able to handle many of the problems they are con- fronted with. Qn the other hand. the clinic deals mainly with pro-delinquent children on a preventive basis rather than readjusting the delinquent. Private physicians often refer when their is doubt about the child's mental ability as promotes his infantile behavior or when the basis of the child's illness is emotional ratherrthan physical. Referrals which come from.the child himself or his parents usually re— quest treatment. Here. they already have some awareness of the problem and are desirous of help themselves. (‘3 ' J r‘ V V‘ ”Others“ include nurseries and ministers in this particular study. In percentage terms. types of services given appeared to be divided as -— hog treatment. “0% diagnostic. and 20¢ consultation. Treatment cases are usu- ally given diagnostic service first. and in consultation service. diagnostic measures may also be included. Hence there is a great deal of overlapping when cases are to be put into one of these categories. Treatment Referrals January to July 1933 January to July 19h6 The first study at the Lansing Children's Center took place in the summer of 19%} and included 1) referrals prior to July 1. 191:! back to the time or the Opening of the clinic. 2) those cases accepted for treatment. and 3) by treat- ment is meant cases where there has been at least one interview beyond the intake interview. From this entire study. the investigator chose to use only the cases from January to July lqu3 in order to have the length of time equi- valent to that considered in the l9h6 study. The data gathered in the 19H} study has never been used in its entirety. so perhaps the reliability of the summarizing material in this paper will be somewhat subjective. In comparing the 19U3 treatment cases with those referred in 19h6. the following discoveries were made. The total number of treatment referrals in 19h6 was larger. 59 as compared to #5 in 19%}. thever. the boys and girls distributed themselves in the same percentages-«25% girls and YafiWboys. (The age range was slightly wider in the 19h6 cases because of younger children being referred. The average age of referral was about ten in 19h6 and was slightly older. ten years and nine months in 19b}. The majority of referrals were from Ingham county in both studies. This is probably due to the fact the center is more accessible to the people in Ingham.county and it also has a larger papulation. The Eaton County Health Department has made a fairly large nunber of referrals) The two noticeable differences in the source of referrals were in the social agencies and schools. Both of these have increased since 1914}. It is possible there is greater c00peration among the social agencies of Lansing in referring and consulation. The expansion of the visiting teacher program plus a trend toward individuation in the schools might account for the increase in feferrals from that source."l The same classification of reasons for referral was used for the 1916 cases as had been used in the 1914} study. The eight categories listed .were habit disorders. neurotic disorders. personality and behavior disorders. delinquency. neurotic delinquent. psychoses. and educational ability. The eighth category “others” was omitted in. the 19% classification. Over W of the reasons for referrals in both studies were for personality and behavior problems. which is really a very broad term. Educational difficulties showed a'marked increase in the 19% study. although there often were combinations of problems presented in the referral. The most frequent combination was personality and behavior disorders and educational disability. There was a slight increase in habit and neurotic disorder. the same number of delinquents and a slight decrease in neuro— tic delinquents and psychoses in the 19u6 study.‘ Treatment range was over a longer period of time in several cases of the 19% study. The length varied from two weeks to seventeen months. Average length of treatment likewise was slightly longer “five months as compared to ana‘werage of four months plus in 1933. The 19% treatment range was from laas than a month to thirteen months. Results of treatment were classified a little differently . 1215: Results of treatment lQhS Results of treatment Improved 29 __ Impro ved 26 finimpro ved 10 Un imp ro ved 11 Unknown 0 Unknown 10 Satisfactory 6 Still active 12 to tal T5— to “11 59 Bee appendix . . 7 i . ' s , e v , A, . a o i I t O ' I , e ‘ V " . A , , ; , , i . . g - e t .7 _ . - , , .- r .- . , .A. , . v i . . s . ' ' . . .p . . ' , ‘ \ . ~ \ ' ‘ l ' t p . . . , . . . , . _ , .- , ~ ' ‘ L - . - ‘ ‘ ' ‘ ‘ " ’ ~ . ' ' t r ‘ ‘ ‘ ' w -‘ ‘ a I , i v u - h - . , . Q , O I . , ‘ ' .r . ‘ . i , , - .7 , Q . .' . \ . , ~ - 4‘ ‘ - ~ ' a t Q ~ . u 0 . . , ' . v _ . , A . ' _< ‘ ‘ , . . , . _. , , , w ‘ 4 ‘ > ‘ 7‘ ' ‘. ‘ I _ .— . . - . ’ '. I a o s ‘ - , . { T , - ' ‘ ' i . i o , . - v ' e a ‘ > . ' '.‘ - w i _ i . _. 7 . ‘ ; . .p . , 9. Although there is a very small decrease in the number of improved cases. there is descrepancy because twelve of the cases are still active. Of these a twelve. at least half have improved somewhat but they are not to terminate contacts. The results of treatment of a case are unknown when the family moves out of town or when after several interviews they simply feel as though they no longer want to come in. even when the problem has not been cleared up. let alone the causes behind it alleviated. These individuals are too threatened by such contacts. Upon more detailed analysis of the 19h6 treatment casesr it was found that the delay in offering service varies from a day. on emergenzjsituations. to over a year and three months. The average delay is about three months. There are Just too many referrals for the staff to dispose of efficiently and keep up to date on. A re-evaluation is made from time to time of the waiting list. If the referral has been on the waiting list for a year, a pre—intake is offered in hopes that this will prevent the person from getting too discouraged and to offer some help within that interview. If in the meantime the situation becomes critical. special considerations may be made and the case taken on for regular treatment if at all possible. Psychological testing was done in one-third of the cases carried onta treatment basis. pikewise contacts with other agencies were evidenced in approximately one-third of the cases. Rhamples of agencies contactedare schools. nichigan Children's Aid Society. Michigan Children's Institute. the court. Children's Division. Lincoln Community Center ( colored children) and the State Health Department. These contacts are often in the form of conferences. The Center may send reports to other agencies. obtained from their record of the case and vicamversa. ' see appendix . - . ,. ' - .. - _ _. l . 1 . . l . . ‘ ~ s < s ‘ | , ‘- v. . -. e ' ‘ . . ' a s , . ’ . , . C . 10. The psychiatrist saw about forty of the treatment cases. either the patient. parents, or both. as usually aids planning by the diagnostic impression he obtainflkrom one to four interviews with the patient or the parents. Although it is not the usual practice. the psychiatrist may accept a few cases and see than regularly when the situation involves some extremely disturbed persons. This procedure is generally over a short period of time. Social worker interviews with patients average approximately four to a case. These interviews held with children under 12 or 1“ years old. are referred to as “play interviews“. Along with complete accefiEnce of the child by the worker. the child is encouraged to talk and act as he really feels while he plays. Play is merely the medium through which a relationship is established with the patient by the worker and therapy 13 carried on. It is often the case that the referred child is not seen by the clinic at all. Work is done entirely with the parents. as they are the most important factors in the child's home environment. Then.again. a child may be seen almost weekly for over a year‘s tfime. It depends on who is most likely to benefit from contacts with the clinic. One social worker has play interviews with the patient while another social worker interviews the parents. if both are seen at the clinic. This is to avoid feelings of competition between child and parents for the wor- ker's feelings toward them. It also seems to decrease the child's and parents' fears of their statements told in confidence being betrayed. It is also convenient to see both patient and parents in one trip to the clinfl; The average number of interviews held with parents and other persons about the patient is higher then the number spent with the patient himself. about six per case. 11. This appears to support the fact more work is done with the parents than with the child himself in.a child guidance clinic. This trend may stem frun the concept that the basigycausation of emotional instability of children brought to the attention of a clinic. seems to 11s in the disturbances of interpersonal relationships within the family group. Hence. it is necessary to develop increasing insight into what constitutes a normal emotional devel— opment. and increasing skill in helping the child asshmilate traumatic aspen. iences and achieve substitute satisfactions. Even though there was only a three year interval between this study from the l9h6 treatment referrals and that undertaken in 19h} at the Lansing Children's Center. an increase in the total treatment cases is shown. The number is not overwhelming--fourteen to be exact--but is significant. over such a short period of time. Then too. the Center has only been in Operation less than ten years. Surmising from.the delay in the acceptance of cases for treatment. the present staff is not large enough to meet the requests for service. It is a deplorable fact that in some instances referrals‘ane on the waiting lists for over a year. In 19h}. there wasn't a waiting list at all. Having to wait so long for help . the problems may increase in number and intensity and read- Juetment will take longer and be more difficult. This could be avoided if referrals were accepted for treatment soon after their original referral date. Parents who have children with problems may not refer them at all. knowing what a long wait it in store fer them. The case load of the clinic per monthvfrom January to July of l9h6 was January‘ 372 Iobruary 395 March ”06 April U19 “my 397 June .352 t"”31 2373 or approximately MOO per month 12. It is true that some of these cases are ready to be closed and may only need a closing summary attached. But all in all. the case load is still too heavy: to consider taking on more cases. It is logical that when a member of the staff is overburdened he is not able to give as effective help as is expected of him. So it may be concluded that on the basis of this study. the staff of the Lansing Children's Center would be more able to meet the demand for ser- vices if it were increased by additional members. It is of the utmost importance to have professionally trained workers to carry on child guidance work. An interest in children is fundamental but not nearly bnough to do work in'a specialised field such as this is. Standards and requirements for positions on a clinical staff should become more rigid. rather than digress. Eaphazard assistance by persons unqualified for child guidance positions would do more harm than good. even if more cases were taken care of. Child guidance is often a long-time process. One cannot expect feelings. attitudes. problems and difficulties which have been evidenced and more so over a number of years. to disappear overnight or after a couple ogkrips to the clinic. Logically it would take as long if not longer to wipe out the difficulty as the time taken to build it up. Behavior problems can be compared to physical ailments in the sense that the longer they are allowed to go on withoum treatment. the more serious they become and a longer period is spent in treating them. It is a subjective process to analyze the results of treatment. Pro- fessionally trained workers must exercise the same responsibility as a physician when called upon. Other workers may check on the evaluation of a case sometimes. Hecknan and Stone discussed this in their article on ”Forging New Tools”. I‘l- e a . '7 13. Four hundred and thirty children were studied at the Ryther Children's Center in Seattle. Washington ( l93S-l9u5 ) by Johnson and Reid. Their write-up of that study was in the article “Hape for 3 out of 1t" in the October Survey Iidmonthly. They found 7h.1% success in the cases studied. This was some higher than the improved cases in the Lansing Children's Center study. Johnson and Reid defined success as“ being able to get along in school and at home and accept the codes and mores of the community”. In all success cases,the basic pathology and maladjustment will not completely be alleviated but the patient will have made sufficient gains to warrant a ”success'I result. The percentage of successful cases should increase as diagnosis and treatment become more effective. Economic status was not determined in the study done at the Lansing Children's Center. But from other studies of a similar nature. it has been stated that children from families of widely varying economic status present many of the same patterns of problem behavior. Racial and minority groups are aften too small to correlate. as was the esteenced in the study made at the Lansing clinic. The largest group of this type was made up of eight negro children. In Hewitt and Jenkins study at Ann.Arbor. percentage of boys and girls ran very similar to the percentage found in the Lansing study. namely 78% boys and.22£,girls. The average age of the Ann.drbor group was about a year older»- eleven years plus. It would appear cultural norms still protect girls in that they are not referred nearly as often as boys are and yet certainly they must have nearly as many problems as boys do. In the followeup of the Ann Arbor study. best results were found in school rather than at home. with the overinhibited child. a nd when the c00peration of the parents is obtained. Hewitt and Jenkins also concluded written case histories may contain admitted shortcomings and present numerous difficulties in statistical treatment. but they are still a fruitful source of data. 1h. Services offered by a child guidance clinic cannot be duplicated easily in the community. Its concentration of purpose to help children and their problems meets a special need. Desperation with other resources in the community through referrals and consultation is essential. Like wise in the organization and presentation of an educational program . cooperation is necessary.- The Social Service Exchange provides clearing of all cases. so that there will not betduplication of service. The writer of the paper would suggest this same type of cosperation in planning fer an educational program on the various agencies' services to benefit both the agencies and the lay public. lectures. discussion groups and special activities make the community as a who more aware of problems and how to handle them. if not by individuals taking care of their own difficulties. then'by impressing upon them the available resources in the community giving Just that type of service. The role of the child guidance clinic has been defined as agency whose function is the diagnosis and treatment of behavior and personality disorders of children. The specific types of problems referred include: daydreaming. difficulty in concentrathm. quarreling. destructiveness.. unsatisfactory work in sshool due to limited intelligence or because of worries and unhappiness. Behavior problems seen in children referred are: truancy. cruelty. enuresis. masturbation. thumbsucking. lying. sex delinquency, stealing, temper tantrums. bullying. disobedience. etc. The services are diagnostic, on a treatment basis. or consultation. The first two are about equal in frequency. approximately “0% of total intake. Consultation makes up the remaining 20% of services and this is usually with other social agencies. not upon direct referral of a case to the clinic. It is impossible to draw a sharp dividing line between the above services. 1G. The Lansing Children's Center is filling a definite need in the com» munity and the surrounding areas. but not completely. The waiting list as of December 1. 19%? has a total of eighty two referrals on it. This is ‘ evidence of needs which are not being met at the present time. The requests for service are greater than that which the clinic staff is able to give. The findings of this study then, would suggest an increase in staff member- ship to take care of the lag in accepting referrals fer service. “i r» .L ‘ 3‘ "4 . -~ ‘-. ‘ ,. I") ' r‘ ,, 1.11,.41'0; \ " "1' .As a closing thought. Dr. Milton.xirkpatrick once said in an article, "Childhood is the golden era of mental hygiene. and this is the time when personality problems. which will eventually lead to maladjustment and un— happiness. inefficiency and failure. should be attacked“. The individual as a unique person recently has been emphasized and this is one concept which must be firmly implanted in the minds of men if child guidance work is to progress. APPEND I X baly and Brenner Keenan and Stone Hewitt and Jenkins Johnso n and Reid Leutitt. C.l. Rogers. Carl R. Stevenson and finith SOCIAL VORK YEARBOOK BIBLIOCEAPHI mm AND MT HAPPENED AFFIRMED Judge Baker Guidance Clinic. 1939 “Forging New Tools” girls: Midmenthu Ceteber 19147 FUNDAMENTAL PATTERN 0'.“ MAIADJ'USNEVT The Dynamics of Their Origin Michigan Children's Institute at Aifii Arbor 'Hepe for 3 out of 14" Survey Midmenthlz October 19u7 CLINICAL PSYCEIDGY Of Children's Behavior Problems 1936,1910 CLINICAL TREATMENT OF THE PROBLEM CHILD .1939 CHI“ GUIMNCI CLINICS Commonwealth Fund. 19314 Child Guidance Articles lit Face Sheet of Case Record Lansing Children's Center F . . Case N 0 hi Telephone r Last Given Middle has ‘ Street No. City County ge of Address has Sex Color Religion i i; ace—Patient Father Mother in] Grade Teacher I it Father Name Mother ' Stepfather 0f Stepmother L235 Father Address Mother ’ Stepfather...... 0f Stepmother f in living with parent, with whom? Eonship [THEIR ”HER RINGS :eof referral Nationality :3}; Referring Child he of Agency Worker fly Physician stations :1 for Referral g--—_ Accepted Education Date Type of Service Address THE LANSING CHILDREN'S CENTER, INC. NAME Lost Given Middle Clinic Year Case No. ADDRESS TELEPHONE REFERRAL SOURCE BEL INTELLIGENCE AVERAGE OR ABOVE ow MONTHS UNDER TREATMENT TREATMENT RESULT UNIMPROVED IMPROVED SATISFACTORY UNKNOWN HABIT DISORDERS NEUROTIc DISORDERS PERSONALITY AND BEHAVIOR DISORDERS «a 3 DELINQUENCY Z 0 g NEUROTIc DELINQUENT PSYCHOSES EDUCATIONAL DISABILITY OTHER DISORDERS REMARKS Schedule need in recording data in study made in 19143 7~44~——-IM SCHEDULES FOB RECORDING DATA Lansing Children's Center Total Referrals Januaryl to July 1. 19u6 A Source of Find of Date Name Sex Age County Referral Service I I d i ll Lansing Children's Center Treatment Referral s Januaryl to July 1, 19u6 Interviews Outcome . Cas Delay-in Referral with about psych- length of Test- f Acceptance Reason pt. nt. Si§1213L_cnt+.UnhmP- Unkn.wActiye Wreatl__ 1mg; I . i ‘ I I - 1. ‘ I 4 i J Ii «J Lansing Children's Center Treatment Cases January 1 to July 1 . 10h} , Source of Treatment Case f Sex Age Diagnosis Referral County Length Results A CHARTS Lansing Children's Center Treatment Referrals January-July'19u3 & 19u6 h h -umgounties Served --LH,E2“E____ %?“E‘ Ingham 43 ha Jackson 1 2 Eaton l 7 Shiawassee - 1 Livingston - u Hillsdale - - Clinton - 1 Total MS 59 l_.c____n Lansing Children's Center Treatment Referrals Januarbeuly Of 19“} & l9h6 Source of Referrals 19M} 19U6 Social Agencies 7 l7 SChools 10 21 Courts 7 ,1 Private Physicians 9 9 .Friende. Self. Relatives 10 9 Others h 2 Total RT 59 CHARTS, continued Lansing Children's Center Treatment Referrals January-July 1993 & 19h6 Diagnosis of Problem 19h} l9h6 Habit Disorders 3 g neurotic Disorcers 2 6 Personality a Behavior 21 29 Disorders Delinquency 5 5 Neurotic Delinquency 6 u Psychoses u 2 Educational Disability 1? 38 Others 2 _ Total 60 92