- Email: [email protected]
A NOTE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GIRLS' PROGRAM AT THE HAWTHORNE CEDAR KNOLLS SCHOOL
A NOTE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GIRLS' PROGRAM AT THE HAWTHORNE CEDAR KNOLLS SCHOOL
Herschel Alt
As background for the papers given at this symposium, it might be useful to trace briefly the development of the girls' program at Hawthorne, touching on some of the theoretical and practical problems that Hawthorne has faced in recent years. It is pertinent to recall that what we now call the Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School was originally established as an institution for boys only. Cedar Knolls, which was a small institution for delinquent girls established in 1912 in Bronxville, was moved to the extreme north end of the Hawthorne campus in 1917. Although under the same general management, it was conducted as an autonomous, separate treatment program for many years. While unification of the work with girls and boys had been an objective of the Hawthorne administration since 1935, it was not fully achieved until 1952. What finally gave impetus to this objective and led to its accomplishment was the increase in the number of girls admitted during the war years and the need to use some of the cottages on the boys' campus to house them. The treatment of both adolescent boys and girls at the same institution, which originally served boys only, has introduced a number of unique elements into the situation. The basic problem of achieving a balance between freedom and limitations which confronts all treatment institutions becomes even more complicated when it embraces also the patterning of boy-girl relationships. Mr. Alt is Executive Vice President of the Jewish Board of Guardians, New York.
506
Program at Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School
I
507
In the early days the girls' activities were tightly supervised and controlled. Contact with boys was limited and permitted only under close supervision. Girls' classrooms were located in the Cedar Knolls building, and trips to the Hawthorne campus were confined to attendance at synagogue, movies, and later, visits to the clinic. When the girls were moved to the Hawthorne campus, many of the elements of the boys' program were put to a new test. On the whole, the boys' program had been characterized by a greater degree of permissiveness in daily living; only the degree of restriction considered essential to assure the protection of the child had been imposed. Against this background the staff began by extending the same degree of latitude to both boys and girls. Coeducational activities were designed to approximate those provided in the ordinary school community. It was soon evident, however, that neither the boys nor the girls were prepared for the same degree of freedom that the boys enjoyed in an exclusively boys' situation. It was found that the greater latitude in boy-girl contacts did not result in a wholesome boygirl relationship, but rather in increased stimulation for both (and in the establishment or continuation of pre-existing sexual acting out or fantasies) that often stood in the way of genuine participation in treatment. Also, a practical problem appeared. With more integration of boys' and girls' activities, the important contribution the separate girls' program had made in providing suitable feminine activities and interests was to a degree lost, with a diminution, too, of the importance of the role played by female staff members. Another significant fact that cut across all our efforts to achieve a liberal coeducational program was the critical attitude of the adult population toward the girls, a reappearance of the attitude the girls had experienced before coming to the institution. The nonprofessional staff in particular-and this included both men and women-was un· able to conceal its disapproval of the sex delinquency of the girls, their unattractive personal habits, and their tendency to more explosive behavior. All this added up to an attitude of general disapproval bordering on, and at times including, rejection. ]<'aced with these problems, we undertook in 1954 an evaluation of the girls' program which was focused on seeing how an actual design for living could be fashioned that would be consistent with a clinical
508
Herschel All
understanding of the girls' problems. A substantial clarification of the basic concepts underlying the treatment program for girls resulted from this effort. In general, this evaluation brought greater clarity in our work with the girls themselves and also resulted in a new balance between the program for girls and that of the older boys. It now became clear that for the girls, as well as boys, control must begin with external restriction and standards long before internalization of restraint can take place. The stimulation resulting from the continual proximity of boys and girls in class and recreation groups kept some of the girls from actual participation in the activity itself, with the result that the values of education and creative expression, of egostrengthening experiences, were minimized. Readiness to handle heterosexual contacts maturely differs widely, and the program must allow for such differences. If unrestricted behavior continues to offer relief from inner tension, treatment suffers and becomes an empty experience. The kind of behavior to which I refer includes expression of drives and impulses as seen in dress; unrestrained behavior on home visits; forms of sexual assertiveness and acting out which, though regarded as fairly normal in the outside community, are beyond the ability of these youngsters to handle responsibly. Although leaders in the institutional field have often expressed the fear that restriction of contact between boys and girls might lead to intensification of homosexual relationships among the girls, this did not seem to occur at Hawthorne during the period when coeducational activities were being progressively limited. The reorientation in our work with girls has brought about a number of specific changes in the living situation. There has been a renewed emphasis on standards and expectations more in keeping with their chronological and emotional age levels, that is, as children and adolescents rather than as women. Furthermore, the standards and values are set at relatively high and more conservative levels than current community mores. The fact that Hawthorne is a treatment and re-educational setting and that this justifies higher standards of conduct is carefully explained to the girls. It is made clear that girls are expected to dress as girls, rather than as boys or as sexually provocative women. Coeducational recreational activities are also limited; for the most part, these now take the form of carefully
Program at Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School
509
planned and organized, rather than informal, gatherings. Here, too, arrangements provide for a good deal of adult supervision. There has also been a greater emphasis on activities in those school and recreation programs specifically designed for girls. Beauty culture, homemaking, sewing, commercial training, and art have become basic girls' programs and, surprisingly, this has brought no lessening of interest in the more academic subjects. The emphasis on homemaking continues, both in the school and in the cottages. At the same time, there has been an increasing emphasis on creative and expressive activities such as art and the dance, and a greater emphasis on the status value of intellectual achievement. For the most part, the school now provides classes exclusively for boys or girls, except for those youngsters who appear able to tolerate the presence of the opposite sex without distraction from the activity at hand. The tendency on the part of the staff to accept the delinquent girl's image of herself is disappearing and is being replaced by consistent efforts to help the girls achieve an identification with socially sanctioned values and standards. I have merely touched on the point of view we bring to the environmental aspects of treatment with these girls. How this works out in total treatment of individual girls is illustrated in the cases that will be presented. In conclusion I would like to mention one question that has been frequently put to us. "Do you think it is sound to treat adolescent disturbed and delinquent boys and girls on the same campus?" Perhaps only a qualified answer is possible. It is clear that treatment of boys and girls living in close proximity, on the same campus, presents many management problems. We believe, however, that on balance, the gains outweigh the risks as well as the additional burdens this imposes. This kind of program should not be undertaken without a staff large enough to provide the necessary guidance and supervision. Allowing for this and many other safeguards that should be built into the situation, it remains our view that from the standpoint of basic needs of both sexes it represents a more wholesome situation.
Herschel Alt
As background for the papers given at this symposium, it might be useful to trace briefly the development of the girls' program at Hawthorne, touching on some of the theoretical and practical problems that Hawthorne has faced in recent years. It is pertinent to recall that what we now call the Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School was originally established as an institution for boys only. Cedar Knolls, which was a small institution for delinquent girls established in 1912 in Bronxville, was moved to the extreme north end of the Hawthorne campus in 1917. Although under the same general management, it was conducted as an autonomous, separate treatment program for many years. While unification of the work with girls and boys had been an objective of the Hawthorne administration since 1935, it was not fully achieved until 1952. What finally gave impetus to this objective and led to its accomplishment was the increase in the number of girls admitted during the war years and the need to use some of the cottages on the boys' campus to house them. The treatment of both adolescent boys and girls at the same institution, which originally served boys only, has introduced a number of unique elements into the situation. The basic problem of achieving a balance between freedom and limitations which confronts all treatment institutions becomes even more complicated when it embraces also the patterning of boy-girl relationships. Mr. Alt is Executive Vice President of the Jewish Board of Guardians, New York.
506
Program at Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School
I
507
In the early days the girls' activities were tightly supervised and controlled. Contact with boys was limited and permitted only under close supervision. Girls' classrooms were located in the Cedar Knolls building, and trips to the Hawthorne campus were confined to attendance at synagogue, movies, and later, visits to the clinic. When the girls were moved to the Hawthorne campus, many of the elements of the boys' program were put to a new test. On the whole, the boys' program had been characterized by a greater degree of permissiveness in daily living; only the degree of restriction considered essential to assure the protection of the child had been imposed. Against this background the staff began by extending the same degree of latitude to both boys and girls. Coeducational activities were designed to approximate those provided in the ordinary school community. It was soon evident, however, that neither the boys nor the girls were prepared for the same degree of freedom that the boys enjoyed in an exclusively boys' situation. It was found that the greater latitude in boy-girl contacts did not result in a wholesome boygirl relationship, but rather in increased stimulation for both (and in the establishment or continuation of pre-existing sexual acting out or fantasies) that often stood in the way of genuine participation in treatment. Also, a practical problem appeared. With more integration of boys' and girls' activities, the important contribution the separate girls' program had made in providing suitable feminine activities and interests was to a degree lost, with a diminution, too, of the importance of the role played by female staff members. Another significant fact that cut across all our efforts to achieve a liberal coeducational program was the critical attitude of the adult population toward the girls, a reappearance of the attitude the girls had experienced before coming to the institution. The nonprofessional staff in particular-and this included both men and women-was un· able to conceal its disapproval of the sex delinquency of the girls, their unattractive personal habits, and their tendency to more explosive behavior. All this added up to an attitude of general disapproval bordering on, and at times including, rejection. ]<'aced with these problems, we undertook in 1954 an evaluation of the girls' program which was focused on seeing how an actual design for living could be fashioned that would be consistent with a clinical
508
Herschel All
understanding of the girls' problems. A substantial clarification of the basic concepts underlying the treatment program for girls resulted from this effort. In general, this evaluation brought greater clarity in our work with the girls themselves and also resulted in a new balance between the program for girls and that of the older boys. It now became clear that for the girls, as well as boys, control must begin with external restriction and standards long before internalization of restraint can take place. The stimulation resulting from the continual proximity of boys and girls in class and recreation groups kept some of the girls from actual participation in the activity itself, with the result that the values of education and creative expression, of egostrengthening experiences, were minimized. Readiness to handle heterosexual contacts maturely differs widely, and the program must allow for such differences. If unrestricted behavior continues to offer relief from inner tension, treatment suffers and becomes an empty experience. The kind of behavior to which I refer includes expression of drives and impulses as seen in dress; unrestrained behavior on home visits; forms of sexual assertiveness and acting out which, though regarded as fairly normal in the outside community, are beyond the ability of these youngsters to handle responsibly. Although leaders in the institutional field have often expressed the fear that restriction of contact between boys and girls might lead to intensification of homosexual relationships among the girls, this did not seem to occur at Hawthorne during the period when coeducational activities were being progressively limited. The reorientation in our work with girls has brought about a number of specific changes in the living situation. There has been a renewed emphasis on standards and expectations more in keeping with their chronological and emotional age levels, that is, as children and adolescents rather than as women. Furthermore, the standards and values are set at relatively high and more conservative levels than current community mores. The fact that Hawthorne is a treatment and re-educational setting and that this justifies higher standards of conduct is carefully explained to the girls. It is made clear that girls are expected to dress as girls, rather than as boys or as sexually provocative women. Coeducational recreational activities are also limited; for the most part, these now take the form of carefully
Program at Hawthorne Cedar Knolls School
509
planned and organized, rather than informal, gatherings. Here, too, arrangements provide for a good deal of adult supervision. There has also been a greater emphasis on activities in those school and recreation programs specifically designed for girls. Beauty culture, homemaking, sewing, commercial training, and art have become basic girls' programs and, surprisingly, this has brought no lessening of interest in the more academic subjects. The emphasis on homemaking continues, both in the school and in the cottages. At the same time, there has been an increasing emphasis on creative and expressive activities such as art and the dance, and a greater emphasis on the status value of intellectual achievement. For the most part, the school now provides classes exclusively for boys or girls, except for those youngsters who appear able to tolerate the presence of the opposite sex without distraction from the activity at hand. The tendency on the part of the staff to accept the delinquent girl's image of herself is disappearing and is being replaced by consistent efforts to help the girls achieve an identification with socially sanctioned values and standards. I have merely touched on the point of view we bring to the environmental aspects of treatment with these girls. How this works out in total treatment of individual girls is illustrated in the cases that will be presented. In conclusion I would like to mention one question that has been frequently put to us. "Do you think it is sound to treat adolescent disturbed and delinquent boys and girls on the same campus?" Perhaps only a qualified answer is possible. It is clear that treatment of boys and girls living in close proximity, on the same campus, presents many management problems. We believe, however, that on balance, the gains outweigh the risks as well as the additional burdens this imposes. This kind of program should not be undertaken without a staff large enough to provide the necessary guidance and supervision. Allowing for this and many other safeguards that should be built into the situation, it remains our view that from the standpoint of basic needs of both sexes it represents a more wholesome situation.