No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 February 2018
The term “weakmindedness” is a most misleading and ambiguous one, and it is imperative that it should receive early attention. It is confusing from the very comprehensive scope of its significance, and altogether so capable of such extremely varied and general interpretation that it is rendered worthless, and perhaps worse than worthless, for the purposes of actual practice. By some, the slightest departure from the normal mental standard is regarded as “weakmindedness,” although the case in question might be one of mere eccentricity; by others, again, the term is accepted in its full comprehensiveness,—the lunatic and imbecile, the idiot and person of defective intellect (who cannot be classified with either of the above three divisions), are all included together, and in the absence of a qualifying statement, confusion is the result. It is most improbable that any two alienists would be likely to interpret the meaning of the term in the same way, and the Commissioners in Lunacy, who are most strict in the matter of validity of certificate, would certainly not accept it per se on account of its ambiguity.
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.