A Plan Designed to Deliver Services to the Multiply Mentally Handicapped

  • Helen Houston


In February 1982, I established at the Middletown Psychiatric Center (an 850-bed state psychiatric center located some 75 miles northwest of New York City) a separate treatment unit for the group of patients I describe as being “multiply mentally handicapped.” The multiply mentally handicapped are those individuals carrying an established medical diagnosis of mental retardation plus an established medical diagnosis of one of the mental illnesses. Either the mental retardation or the mental illness may be the primary diagnosis. Or the diagnoses may be deemed to coexist with other handicaps with neither area as the “primary” diagnosis; or they may be cyclical: one diagnosis and then the other is seen as being the major clinical concern.


Mental Illness Staff Member Treatment Unit Dual Diagnosis Handicapped Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Whittington HG: People make programs: Personnel management, in Feldman S (ed): The Administration of Mental Health Services. Springfield, IL, Charles C. Thomas, 1973.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mechanic D: Mental Health and Social Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 19.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binner P: Program evaluation, in Feldman S (ed): The Administration of Mental Health Services. Springfield, IL, C. C. Thomas, 1973.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roemer MI: Evaluation of health service programs and levels of measurement, in Levey S, Loomba PN (eds): Health Care Administration. Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1973.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zusman J, Le vine M: Program evaluation: An introduction. Int J Ment Health 2;2–5, 1973.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levine M, Gelsomino J, Joss RH, et al: The consumer’s perspective of rehabilitative services in a county penitentiary. Int J Ment Health 2;94–110, 1973.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Holmes D: Day care for the aged: Problems in start-up evaluation design. Gerontologist 13;97, 1973.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mannino FV, Shore MF: Demonstrating effectiveness in an aftercare program. Social Work 19(3);351–357, 1974.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jacobs AM, Nicyols G, Larsen JK: Critical nursing behaviors in the care of the mentally retarded. Int Nursing Rev 20(4);117–122, 1973.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller S, Helmick E, Berg L. et al: Alcoholism: A statewide program evaluation. Am J Psychiatr 131(2);210–214, 1974.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levin S, Bishop D: An evaluation tool for feedback and leverage of mental health delivery systems. Can Psychiatr Assoc J 17(6);437–442, 1972.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Winn RJ, Rich C, Dolby J, et al: Program evaluation of Texas mental health and mental retardation centers. Hosp Comm Psychiatry 26(1);36–38, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pierce CH: Recreation for the elderly: Activity participation at a senior citizen center. Gerontologist 15;202–205, 1975.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller PM: Behavioral assessment in alcoholism research and treatment: Current techniques. Int J Addic 8(15);831–837, 1973.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zusman J, Bissonette R: The case against evaluation (with some suggestions for improvement). Int J Ment Health 2;111–125, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weber CA: Evaluating a multiphasic consultation program in a large urban setting. Exchange 2(5);29–39, 1974.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Koret S: Evaluation of Children’s Mental Health Services. Final report, NIMH Grant MH-22997, 1974.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lanzkron J: The concept of pfropf-schizophrenia and its prognosis. Am J Ment Defic 61;544–547, 1957.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Levey S, Loomba PN: Health Care Administration. Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1973.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wyatt v Stickney: (District Court of Alabama) 344 Federal Supplement, p. 387. Modified on appeal by 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, 503 Federal Supplement, p. 1305.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Donaldson v. O’Connor: (Court of Appeals of Florida) 493 Federal Supplement, p. 507. See also: Psychiatric News 10; 14 (July 16, 1975); and The New York Times, 1 June 1975, Section 4, p. 20.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Willowbrook Consent Decree: A private agreement—simply supervised by the court—between Willowbrook’s relatives’ group and New York State.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Houston
    • 1
  1. 1.Middletown Psychiatric CenterNew York State Office of Mental HealthMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations