Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T12:42:05.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Birth Injury as a Cause of Mental Defect: The Statistical Problem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

L. S. Penrose*
Affiliation:
University of London

Extract

Clinicians often assume, in a somewhat casual manner, that injury to the brain at birth has been the cause of this or that case of defect. Cerebral diplegia, hemiplegia, hydrocephaly and numerous types of cerebral maldevelopment have been attributed to this cause. Some American psychologists have tended to ascribe to birth injury every case of defect with plegia (Doll, Phelps and Melcher, 1932). Equally categorical denials of the influence of birth trauma in the aetiology of mental defects have been expressed (Berry, 1933). The decision between these opposing points of view involves the examination of some difficult questions. There are two rather obvious principles to be applied. First, any case in which birth injury is diagnosed must present symptoms or signs, which could reasonably be attributed to this cause. Secondly, a history of events at the time of birth must be ascertained and the evidence carefully weighed with a view to finding out whether conditions likely to produce injury were present. A third point to be kept in mind is that, even when proof of cerebral injury at birth is reasonably complete, the effect of such injury on the intelligence level has still to be assessed. In any given case of defect with a possibility of birth injury, we must ask ourselves what the intellectual level would have been in the absence of such injury.

Type
Part I.—Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1949 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berrv, R. J. A. (1933), Eug. Rev., 24, 288.Google Scholar
Bickenbach, W. (1947), Geburtshilfe u. Frauenheilk., 7, 3.Google Scholar
Brander, T. (1936), Studien über die Entwicklung der Intelligenz bei frühgeborene Kindern. Helsingfors.Google Scholar
Doll, F. A., Phelps, W. M., and Melcher, R. T. (1932), Mental Deficiency due to Birth Injuries. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ehrenfest, M. (1931), Birth Injuries of the Child. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
Freud, S. (1897), “Die infantile Cerebrallähmung.” Notnagel, , Sp. Path. u. Therap. Google Scholar
Hanhart, E. (1947), Personal communication.Google Scholar
Little, W. J. (1861), Obst. Trans., 3, 293.Google Scholar
MacGregor, A. R. (1943), Edin. Med. J., 50, 332.Google Scholar
Nevinnv, H. (1936), Uber die geburtstraumatischen Schädigungen des Zentralnervensystems. Stuttgart: f. Enke.Google Scholar
Pearson, K. (1914), On the Handicapping of the First-Born. C. U. Press.Google Scholar
Penrose, L. S. (1938), “1280 Cases of Mental Defect.” Med. Res. Co. Sp. Rept., No. 229. London: H. M. S. O. Google Scholar
Penrose, L. S. (1939). Am. J. Ment. Def., 44 (1), 33.Google Scholar
Rosanoff, A. J., and Inman-Kane, (1934), Am. J. Psychiat., 13, 829.Google Scholar
Rydberg, E. (1932), Cerebral Injury in New Born Children Consequent on Birth Trauma. Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. M. (1942), Proc. Roy. Soc. Med., 36, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Still, G. F. (1927). Lancet, 2, 795 and 853.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.