Profit and Loss: Institutional Labour in England, 1913-2004

损益：英国的机构劳动，1913-2004 年

• 批准号: 2634076
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Nottingham Trent University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2021
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2021 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2634076
• 关键词: Profit; Loss; Institutional; Labour; England

The aims of this proposed study will be:* To investigate the use, extent and importance of patient, or inmate, labour in English and Welsh institutions and colonies, from 1913, the year the Mental Deficiency Act was passed, to 1948, the year of the establishment of the NHS.* To investigate and identify the changes in institutional activity and production methods after 1948, up to 2004, when the original Bristol-based Industrial Therapy Organisation closed.* To rethink, through this two-pronged analysis, how disability was constructed in the professional and public imagination, and thus to fill a significant gap in the existing historiography.For at least 100 years, people with Learning Difficulties worked, without wages or pensions, in institutions, hospitals, occupation centres and colonies which would not have survived without their labour. Indeed, The Wood Committee (1929) had advocated the formation of self-sufficient 'colonies' that would cater for all groups of mental defective, regardless of age or level of disability. These institutions were designed to rely on patient labour for their very survival - large-scale, indefinite confinement was costly. Mental deficiency was not, in itself, curable. This fact alone might go some way to account for its lack of exploration in the published histories of madness and confinement, from the early nineteenth century. Mental deficiency did not generally offer the physician the opportunity to theorise, experiment and so to triumph. Nobody was going to find a chemical, surgical or even therapy-based cure for mental deficiency, and later behaviour modification therapy was controversial and could be more expensive than sedation treatments. The histories of the Learning Disabled, the retarded, the mentally defective, the imbecile and the idiot can be difficult to find. They are buried beneath the weight of our endeavours to understand, evaluate and document the ways we have dealt, through time, with madness - a condition which Scull(2015) asserts to be 'something wholly outside [civilisation] and alien to it.' Foucault (1964) draws us to note the outsider status of the patient in their delirium - a word derived from the Latin, delirare, meaning to deviate, be deranged, literally 'to deviate from the furrow'. His exploration of the theory of 'othering' as a means to exert and maintain power over a particular, deemed to be weaker, group also resonates with the concepts of construction and medicalisation of both mental illness and intellectual disability. If the mentally ill are considered to be 'other' through time, where does that place the idiot, imbecile or mental defective? Frankly, some commentators barely give them a passing mention - they are a mysterious, incurable 'also-ran'. The history of the mental institution and the mentally ill confined therein has been explored at length. We need to be aware that the idiot, the imbecile and the mad in England generally shared accommodation and treatments until the early 20th century, given a lack of legal imperative to identify and separate them. Indeed, the highly controversial surgical procedure of frontal lobotomy, 'not recommended for curing or treating intellectual or developmental disabilities' (Kate Clifford Larson, 2015) was used in American hospitals for 'feeble minded' patients into the late 1940's. However, the specific examination of the condition and experiences of Learning Disabled people throughout history is scant. Dan Goodley (2001) speaks of 'absent literature' and in 1987, Ryan and Thomas noted that, 'Mentally handicapped people are still as hidden from history as they are from the rest of life. What history they do have is not so much theirs as the history of others acting either on their behalf or against them.' Over thirty years later, we are still some considerable way from dealing with that omission.

这项拟议中的研究的目的是：* 调查从1913年《精神缺陷法》通过到1948年国民保健制度建立的这一年，病人或囚犯在英格兰和威尔士机构和殖民地劳动的使用情况、程度和重要性。调查和确定1948年后，直到2004年，当最初的布里斯托尔工业治疗组织关闭时，机构活动和生产方法的变化。通过这种双管齐下的分析，重新思考残疾在专业和公众的想象中是如何构建的，从而填补现有历史编纂中的一个重大空白。至少100年来，有学习障碍的人在没有工资或养老金的情况下，在机构、医院、职业中心和殖民地工作，如果没有他们的劳动，这些地方就不可能生存。事实上，伍德委员会（1929年）主张形成自给自足的“殖民地”，以满足所有精神缺陷群体的需要，无论年龄或残疾程度如何。这些机构旨在依靠病人劳动来生存-大规模、无限期的监禁是昂贵的。智力缺陷本身是无法治愈的。这一事实本身可能在某种程度上解释了为什么从世纪早期开始，在出版的关于疯狂和禁闭的历史中缺乏对它的探索。精神缺陷通常不会给医生提供理论化、实验化和成功的机会。没有人能找到一种化学的、手术的甚至是基于治疗的方法来治疗精神缺陷，后来的行为矫正疗法也引起了争议，而且可能比镇静疗法更昂贵。学习障碍者、弱智者、弱智者、低能者和白痴的历史很难找到。它们被埋葬在我们努力理解、评估和记录我们处理疯狂的方式的重压之下，随着时间的推移，这种状态被斯卡尔（Scull，2015）断言为“完全在[文明]之外的东西”。福柯（1964）提请我们注意病人在谵妄中的局外人地位--这个词来源于拉丁语delirare，意思是偏离，精神错乱，字面意思是“偏离犁沟”。他对“他者”理论的探索，作为对一个被认为是较弱的特定群体施加和维持权力的手段，也与精神疾病和智力残疾的建设和医疗化的概念产生了共鸣。如果精神病患者被认为是“其他”通过时间，在哪里放置白痴，低能或精神缺陷？坦率地说，一些评论家几乎没有提到他们-他们是一个神秘的，无法治愈的'失败者'。精神病院的历史和精神病患者被困在其中已经进行了详细的探讨。我们需要意识到，在英国，白痴、低能儿和疯子直到世纪初才普遍分享住宿和治疗，因为缺乏法律的必要性来识别和区分他们。事实上，极具争议的额叶切除术手术，“不推荐用于治疗或治疗智力或发育障碍”（Kate Clifford Larson，2015）在20世纪40年代后期在美国医院用于“弱智”患者。然而，在整个历史上，对学习障碍者的状况和经历的具体审查很少。丹·古德利（2001）谈到了“缺席的文学”，1987年，瑞安和托马斯指出，“智障人士仍然隐藏在历史之外，就像他们在生活中一样。他们所拥有的历史与其说是他们自己的历史，不如说是其他人代表他们或反对他们的历史。“三十多年后，我们仍然有相当长的路要走，以处理这一疏忽。