You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
I have found it very difficult to write this paper. The reason, I believe, is that in this discussion we are concerned neither with scientific nor with poetic truth.
Indeed, what I have to say must be affected by the history of my own development, it must be prejudiced according to my feelings about certain key matters, and it must be a sub-total statement in accordance with the limited scope of one man's experience.
Quite simply, I wish to state that the work we do which is at present called child psychiatry is a speciality on its own. If we retain the term ‘child psychiatry’, we must be quite clear that it is not a part of general psychiatry.
I shall explore the relationship of our work to the work of neighbouring specialities, and I shall make a few positive suggestions.
The training of child psychiatrists depends on our views on the nature of the work we do, and I shall put in a plea for the retention of variety in the matter of portals of entry. In particular let no overhead planning exclude the possibility of entry into child psychiatry through paediatrics.
I shall assume that at the Child Guidance Training Centre and at the Tavistock Clinic and the Maudsley Child Psychiatry Department the same questions are being asked that I am asking in this paper. Recently there was a discussion on this subject at the Tavistock Clinic, and those who were present will agree that the ground was pretty well covered on that occasion.
The question that must be asked first is: what is child psychiatry? In child psychiatry the work is essentially practical. In respect of each case we meet a challenge. In terms of bringing about clinical improvement we may fail, and we often succeed. Real failure can only be stated in terms of a failure to meet the