DEAF AND BLIND PERSONS

HC Deb 21 February 1964 vol 689 cc1535-67

11.5 a.m.

Mr. Denzil Freeth (Basingstoke)

I beg to move. That this House, recognising the special needs of those persons who are at the same time both deaf and blind, calls upon the Government, local authorities and the general public to give increased attention to their problems, to co-operate in providing more visitors, both professional and voluntary, in seeing that these are suitably trained, and also in providing training for the deaf-blind themselves so that by active occupation and regular and frequent communication with other persons, both similarly handicapped and those having hearing and sight, they may be enabled to lead lives as full and satisfying as possible. I have always felt that it was one of the great things about the House of Commons that, having considered great issues of State and the needs and fate of millions of people, it can turn to deal with the problems even of individuals and certainly of small sections of the community. I am asking the House today to consider the needs of a very few people and for that reason the Motion has been drawn very narrowly.

The Motion does not deal with the problems of the blind who can hear, great though these are. It does not deal with the problems of the deaf who can see, difficult as these always will be. The Motion deals with the problems of those who are both deaf and blind, a very small minority, whose problems and needs are in inverse proportion to their numbers. I believe that this is the first time that this House has ever considered their problems and their needs, and I am grateful to the luck of the Ballot that I now have the opportunity to ask the House to focus its mind on the problems of these people, who are so few in number. Many people go through the whole of their lives without ever meeting a per- son who is both blind and deaf, a person who is, therefore, doubly deaf and doubly blind.

In a leaflet issued some years ago by the National Deaf Blind Helpers League, Elizabeth Taylor, the first editor of the League's quarterly organ The Rainbow, which is written in Braille, wrote as follows: Combined blindness and deafness make double walls of darkness and silence to enclose the deaf-blind in a prison cell of solitary confinement, impenetrable except through hand-language and Braille". Because this may seem hard to take in and to grasp with one's imagination, I should like to quote a commentary upon this written by Miss Frieda Le Pla, herself deaf-blind since her early thirties, in her book "Glimpses into a Hidden World". She first depicts how the deaf who can see can make up for their lost hearing by the use of sight and how even the blind can make up for their lack of sight by the use of hearing. It will not be beyond the recollection of the House how magnificently Sir Ian Fraser, as he then was, Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale, was able to fulfil his duties as a Member of Parliament even though blind.

Miss Le Pla writes: The deaf-blind, however, have none of these substitutes for sight and hearing—they cannot use sight for hearing, and hearing for sight, because they are robbed of both. They live always in a prison cell of solitary confinement behind the doubly-enclosing walls through which neither sound of friendly human voice nor sight of kindly human face can penetrate; and equally shut out are the beauty of music and the beauty of colour and form. For them there is nothing to see but drab greyness or blackness; and nothing to hear but the various tormenting (and sometimes discordant) noises in the ear, which, by their relentless refusal to die away even for one moment's respite, can sometimes almost drive their victim crazy. These deaf-blind fellow-beings of ours cannot tell when there is anyone near them or whether they are alone; nor can they tell the whereabouts of any person or persons they may think present in the room. Except in the house and garden where they live, whose geography is familiar to them, they have little independence of movement, for they cannot go about alone with safety. Unless they are specially told, they know nothing of what is going on around them, even though there may be much noise of talk and laughter and music, and perhaps children's fun and entertaining games. Of these handicapped folk there are, I believe, in Great Britain about 3,000. They are the responsibility of over 150 local health and welfare authorities, and, therefore, I think one can say, very roughly, that in each county or county borough there will be only about 20 such people. On the one hand, it may be thought that such a small number of such people would make a concentrated effort to help them easier, but I am afraid it is true that, because there are so few of them and because they are scattered over so large an area of the country, too often they become considered merely as part of the problem of the blind; but I hope I have shown that their problems are, in fact, quite different.

The only Government report which I know on this subject was published in 1951, the Report on the Special Welfare Needs of Deaf-Blind Persons. Politically, 1951 is to some of us rather a special date; I think that it is also a special date in that it was the date of publication of this important Report. But, at any rate, it was some time ago. I hope that thinking on this subject has gone on in my hon. Friend's Ministry. Permit me to say how pleased I am to see my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary on the Front Bench to reply to this debate, for I know that he takes a great interest in these problems. I hope that since 1951 ideas on this subject have developed.

My first question to my hon. Friend must be this: what has been done to implement the recommendations of this Report? Where nothing has been done, why not? Even more important, what has been done instead and for what reasons?

I was much heartened by a letter my hon. Friend wrote to me on 7th February last year. Perhaps the House will permit me to quote from it: The Minister's Advisory Committee on the Health and Welfare of Handicapped Persons is currently considering the needs of special groups of handicapped people and it is proposed, in the light of evidence brought to the notice of the Ministry from various sources…to ask the Advisory Committee to consider the problems of deaf-blind people and to make recommendations for improving the welfare facilities for this group. It was with this need in mind that I put a Question to my right hon. Friend and it was answered on 10th February of this year. I asked my right hon. Friend when his Department's inquiry into the needs of people who are both deaf and blind will be submitted to him; whether it will be pub- lished; and what action he is taking to provide better trained and more numerous visitors to such people. My hon. Friend, in his reply, said: The Council for Training in Social Work is now considering what type of training is required by social workers to equip them to help the deaf and the blind. This is very pleasing, but I was a little disappointed that in the first part of the reply my hon. Friend said: The Ministry is studying the needs of the deaf blind, but no formal report will be made."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 10th February, 1964: Vol. 689, c. 2–3.] I should, therefore, like to repeat my question to my hon. Friend, perhaps in a more accurate form. When will the Advisory Committee report to the Minister? Will that report be published, and, if not, why not?

As we have in fact so little information from official reports, perhaps I may give the House my own views gathered from discussions with very many who have devoted almost the whole of their lives to the deaf blind. I do not think it would be right for me to mention their name but I think it would be wrong of me to omit to mention the name of Mr. Arthur Sculthorpe, the general secretary to the National Deaf-Blind Helpers' League, of Peterborough, which does such great work for the deaf blind.

First of all, I deal with those who are either born deaf and blind or become so daring childhood. There are, I believe, several special schools run by the National Institute for the Blind. I must ask my hon. Friend, are there enough such schools? Do the Government and the local education committees provide enough money? How many children under 15 are deaf-blind? I know that they are not strictly the responsibility of the Ministry of Health, but my hon. Friend is here to answer my questions today, and, as he knows, paragraph 10 of the 1951 Report deals with this particular problem and ends by stating: In this matter there will need to be the closest co-operation between officers of the Health, Education and Welfare Committees of the Authorities. I would also hope, between the Ministries of Education and of Health. How many of these children are not in residential schools? Should they not all be in residential schools? And what action are the Government taking to get local education authorities to work together on this problem—which is, I am certain, vital because the number of children is so few—to see that there are sufficient facilities of the right kind?

Most of our 3,000 deaf-blind people become so by degrees, losing first one faculty and then the other, although, of course, accidents can result in both faculties being lost at once. For those who lose both faculties by degrees, there is a relevant paragraph in a pamphlet issued in September, 1962, on "The Prevention and Alleviation of Blindness", prepared by the Standing Medical Advisory Committee for the Central Health Services Council and the Ministry of Health. Paragraph 12 of that pamphlet says: Since the onset of both disabilities is usually insidious, the family doctor can do most to stave off the most distressing effects of this double disability by referring the patient for expert advice as soon as possible, and urging him to persevere with treatment. He should also be encouraged to learn to practice whatever form of communication (Braille, sign and manual language or typing) remains available to him, so that he may be able to maintain those normal relations with other people upon which so much of human happiness and usefulness depends. Quite frankly, I think that more is needed than is suggested in that paragraph. I believe that there should be one or more rehabilitation centres run by the Ministry for training those who have certainly become, or are likely very soon to become, deaf and blind. In the absence of such a national centre—or of such national centres, for we shall need more than one, I think—the National League, to which I have already referred, is starting a small project at Peterborough, where a certain number of deaf-blind will be brought, given flats of their own, and encouraged to be independent from the beginning.

They will be taught, for example, how to overcome what to those who have lost their sight and hearing is the most difficult problem, that of maintaining their balance. They will be taught the new disciplines and social habits, which will be essential to them, such as the need for men to sit when urinating. They will be taught not merely handicrafts; they will be taught cooking, sewing, gardening and, above all, communication, by the use of hand sign language and Braille. They will be re-equipped with poise and confidence to meet the outside world on its own terms. Until they are able to do that the rest of the community will not have done its job by them. The Peterborough centre is small. It is a voluntary enterprise, plugging a real gap in our health and welfare services. The Government should finance and, if necessary, run this sort of rehabilitation centre.

What about the deaf-blind person who returns home, to his own family? There is the extremely difficult question of communication. Few of us know the deaf-blind alphabet, but it is now accepted among those who have studied the problem that the use of printed Roman capitals upon the hand should be practised, as being much easier both for the deaf-blind person to learn and for those who wish to get into communication with him. This is done at Peterborough. It is much easier to learn than the deaf-and-dumb alphabet that we have all seen. I should also mention the Royal National Institute for the Blind's talking disc, which the blind can obtain at a concessionary rate of about 1s. 7d., and which enables very slow but real communication to be established if no other means are available.

Because of this lack of communication, many deaf-blind persons, whether at home or in institutions, are lonely. There is an enormous need for trained visitors, who can communicate with them. Paragraph 3 of the 1951 Report thought that the home teachers of the blind should fulfil the rôle of acting as visitors to the deaf-blind. I should like to know whether this is still the Ministry's policy. It does not seem to me to be ideal, because the problems of each are very different, and this policy leads to the rather strange idea, voiced in paragraph 7, which states: As a general rule Home Teachers of the Blind should not be required to devote the whole of their time to the deaf-blind, unless a particular officer has a vocation in that direction. I suggest that what is needed is special training for a special contingent—if that is the right word—of home teachers who are willing to devote themselves to the deaf-blind. I do not believe that in any other way we shall attain the ideal which is set out in paragraph 5 of the Report, which goes on to list four ways of improving the home teachers' ability to cope with the problems of the deaf and blind. First, it suggests refresher courses for the certificated teachers, and secondly, courses for those who are not certificated—in other words, for the voluntary visitor—to be run by local authorities. I ask my hon. Friend, in that connection what progress has been made about the recommendation contained in paragraph 5(b) of the Report.

Thirdly, the Report suggests that special advisers should be appointed, either for individual local authorities—that is to say, counties or county boroughs—or for groups of welfare authorities, Fourthly, it suggests that a determined effort should be made to try to persuade voluntary organisations and individuals to provide visitors for the deaf-blind, especially in such residential homes where the deaf-blind are staying. This is rather difficult, since there are very few such residential homes.

We must admit that the ideals sketched out in paragraphs 5 and 8 of the Report have not yet been fully achieved. I have heard of deaf-blind persons who have visitors for only half an hour a week and whose families are unable to communicate with them. That means that they have little or no communication with anyone else for 167½ hours in any one week. It is almost impossible to grasp what this means. I understand that many deaf-blind people are told little or nothing of what is going on in their families, or in the world, although they are still intelligent beings and they want to know what is happening outside. Further, many deaf-blind people are considered by their families to be happy as long as they are clean and well-fed. They are treated rather like a family pet, and not a member of the family.

In her book, Miss Le Pla quotes from a correspondent, writing on the subject of what she calls depersonalisation. Her correspondent says: Since deafness added itself to blindness I have often had occasion to feel as if I had ceased to be a real human being, a person, and had become instead just a physical body that needs only to be fed now and then, and kept housed and warm, and could then he ignored as a ghost or shadow, with no right to be consulted about anything, and no intellect or soul to be taken into account. One is shut out from household affairs, as if one didn't belong to the household any more; and if one is in a social group with a friend the other members of the group pass one by as though one was not there, even without a handshake, although they know one quite well. One gets to feel one has become a dehumanised shadow, and longs for someone's handclasp to turn one back into a person again. No wonder that some of the deaf-blind become frustrated and driven almost wild with pent-up emotion, loneliness and despair. No wonder that some of them lose the ability even to speak understandably. I suggest to my hon. Friend that local welfare authorities, either singly or jointly, should employ speech therapists to help such people.

The purpose of this debate is to jar the Government, local authorities, and also the public. First, I want to jar the central Government. I want them to recognise that the home teacher for the deaf-blind needs different training and different qualifications from teachers for the deaf alone. I want the central Government to establish the needs of the deaf-blind, and, together with the local welfare authorities, to set up training establishments for teachers and professional visitors.

Secondly, I want to jar the local welfare authorities. Under Ministry pressure, which, I hope, will be forthcoming, I want them, singly or jointly, to set up committees to look after this problem. I want them to train—or help in training—and to employ a number of teachers and visitors commensurate with the number of the deaf-blind in their areas. I want local authorities to give to voluntary helpers, and to the members of the families of the deaf-blind, the necessary grounding and training, and encouragement to enable communication to flow more freely.

I also want to jar the general public. I appeal for more voluntary part-time helpers—although it is no use their coming forward until the training facilities are available. I appeal not merely to the societies listed in the 1951 Report, which are doing such magnificent work for the deal-blind, but to the Churches, and especially to individual ministers, because they often meet and see deaf-blind persons in their congregations. I appeal to voluntary bodies, such as the Women's Institute, the Young Men's Christian Association and the Church of England Young Men's Society. I appeal to anyone who has the time to help his fellowman. But all these voluntary people can help only if the central Government and the local welfare authorities set up the necessary framework within which that temporary help can operate.

I now turn to the deaf-blind themselves. We must remember that they cannot look at television or read books. They cannot listen to the wireless, and they are unable to converse with speed. But they can write. There is, I know, the pocket Braille frame writer, but this is only suitable for short messages and is very slow. With the puncher, it costs about 10s. Some deaf-blind have not even got this much money. But if they really are to correspond with their fellow men who are blind or deaf-blind they need, in fact, something like the Stainsby Braille machine, the normal cost of which is 20 guineas. I understand that the concessionary rate for the blind is 7 guineas. But how many can afford this sum?

I know that the Lions Club supplies the so-called Banks machine free of charge to a number, but this machine, after all, is really only useful for notes. What I am now, therefore, asking the Government to do is to set up a national register of the deaf-blind to be administered by the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance in conjunction with the welfare authorities of the area. I want each deaf-blind person whose doctor says he or she can use one of these machines which I have mentioned to get a free Stainsby machine and a pocket Braille machine. I think that if the Government were willing to provide the finance it might well be that the Royal National Institute for the Blind would be willing to see to the distribution.

In addition, wherever possible, the deaf-blind who can type should have typewriters, and if there were a register for the deaf-blind then an appeal could be made to firms who were getting rid of typewriters in order, say, to instal electric typewriters and so on, to hand over to the local authorities the machines being replaced. I think that I should mention, in passing, the immense joy which can be given to the blind by the Braille watch so that they can tell the time: this costs about £7. There is one other aid which could be given to the deaf-blind, and that is a special handicap allowance to enable a deaf-blind person to hire at least once a week if necessary an escort-interpreter in order to go for a walk, so that the deaf-blind person may once again feel the sun, touch trees and flowers and, if living near the sea, perhaps paddle in it, because the physical touch would help them to recapture the mental picture of a world which they cannot see or hear.

So far, I have dealt with the needs of the young deaf-blind and those at home, but there are many in institutions of some kind, some in the equivalent of Part III homes for the aged which the local welfare authorities run. Some are in hospital because of old age and some, nearly 10 per cent. of the total, are in mental hospitals. But these people are in homes and hospitals designed for and managed in the interests of those with sight and hearing or of those who are only deaf or only blind and who represent 99 per cent. of the inhabitants.

The staff is very often not suitably trained for coping with the problems of always an enormous change-over in staff. Indeed, I am told that one deaf-blind person was in a mental hospital where there was no one who could communicate with her at all, not even to tell her that the visitor was having to change his day of coming to see her. I believe that we must have special homes for the deaf-blind who need institutional care, and that they should be under the regional hospital boards. A large part of the 1951 Report deals with the subject of special homes for the deaf-blind. I ask my hon. Friend what has been done here.

Another 200 or so deaf-blind people are in mental hospitals. The first question I ask is whether they should really be there. I am the last person to dogmatise on mental illness, but I know enough about it to realise that very little is known. The 1951 Report states: A deaf-blind person lives under great stress. This is obviously very true. We can all truly imagine the loneliness, the frustration of pent-up ideas and ambitions, the suspense and fear, the sense of helplessness, the lack of privacy in letters and life, the feeling of being an outcast, and the depersonalisation which I have already mentioned.

We can well imagine the strain which this must put on a person's mental balance. The Standing Mental Advisory Committee's pamphlet to which I have already referred says: The whole question of deafness and blindness in relation to mental illness needs further research. How true this is—and how much more true of the deaf-blind! I hope that the Ministry is encouraging research and helping to provide facilities and opportunities. But to do this effectively and to use existing knowledge effectively we must treat the deaf-blind in homes and hospitals which are designed for them and mainly occupied by them.

I would also like to see a review made of the deaf-blind who are in mental hospitals, and I should like that review to be made after the doctor and psychiatrist has been present with the deaf-blind person at the same time as a trained and experienced deaf-blind home teacher is present too, because so often in mental homes neither the doctor nor the psychiatrist can communicate with the deaf-blind person.

Last summer, I took up with my hon. Friend the case of a lady whom I will call Miss S. She had been deaf-blind for over seven years in a mental hospital. My hon. Friend made inquiries about her case and in September he wrote to me saying that a transfer to a deaf-blind home would be considered if her condition showed "sufficient improvement". But how can this be known when there is no doctor or psychiatrist who can communicate with her and when the nurses, who often change, have no training in deaf-blind work? I hope, therefore, that the Ministry will designate four or five mental hospitals scattered throughout the country which will cater especially for the deaf-blind, whose doctors and psychiatrists are particularly interested in the problems of the deaf-blind and are able to communicate with them and where the nurses would be specially trained. I believe that the same should apply to those who on account of old age are in need of hospital care owing to being bedridden or senile.

Of course, most of the deaf-blind are sane and active, and these, I hope, will continue to live at home with their family. However, the family will often need a break, and the deaf-blind, too, need holidays. This is borne out very strongly by paragraph 12 of the 1951 Report. I ask my hon. Friend what has been done here, because to the deaf-blind holidays are not a luxury but an essential part of their care, and also an essential part of providing a feeling of restrengthening for the family among whom they live.

I have spoken far too long, but I have covered the whole life-span of the deaf-blind and I will now sum up my case. Primarily, I want the deaf-blind considered as a special problem and as a special challenge to the welfare society. I also want a national register to be compiled of such persons. I want them to be able to receive special training so as to enable them to live with their double handicap and I want them to get aids to communication free of charge. I want there to be a national scheme worked out, in partnership between the central Government and the local welfare authorities, to attract and train more professional home teachers and also more voluntary visitors. I want there to be special homes for those who cannot live with relatives and who are in need of hospital care. Finally, I ask that there should be more facilities for holidays and accompanied excursions and walks.

We are dealing, in all, with about 3,000 such people in Britain, and, I think, about 2,700 in England and Wales. What I have asked for is not immensely expensive, nor ate these concepts in any way revolutionary. I think that they pose reasonably the needs of one in every 17,000 of the population. I suggest that the meeting of these needs is just as much a part, of the health and welfare services of the country as any other part of the National Health Service. I hope that the Government, local authorities and the public will co-operate with a new awareness of these problems and with a renewed determination to solve them.

11.40 a.m.

Mr. A. E. Hunter (Feltham)

I congratulate the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Denzil Freeth) not only upon his success in the Ballot but also on his choice of subject. In moving this Motion the hon. Member drew attention to the special needs of approximately 3,000 of our unfortunate fellow citizens who are both deaf and blind. In a very humane speech the hon. Gentleman dealt thoroughly with this subject. He instanced what may be done not only by the Government but by local authorities and voluntary organisations. I am sure that such bodies do perform very useful work. The hon. Gentleman made a number of suggestions, including the possibility of training some of these handicapped people to perform active work. He referred to the provision of facilities to enable them to write and to communicate with their fellows, and I should like to support these suggestions.

As was stated by the hon. Member for Basingstoke, the number involved is about 3,000 and therefore any financial commitment undertaken by the Government would not be very large. These people may be regarded as the most unfortunate in our community. They are denied the privileges of hearing and sight. Often they live lonely lives, especially those who have no families. Friday in this House is usually private Member's day when often we consider especially the needs of sections of the community. Today attention has been drawn to the needs of the deaf and blind. I wish to support the Motion and I know that it will receive support from hon. Members on both sides of the House. I hope that the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health will be able to give us some idea of what plans the Government have to meet the needs of these people who so bravely face the problems of living under the handicap of being unable to see or hear.

The provision of facilities for enabling these people to undergo some form of training is very important, and everything possible should be done by the Government, in co-operation with local authorities and voluntary organisations, to teach and to train the deaf-blind. The hon. Member for Basingstoke suggested gardening as an occupation, and another form of work might be writing.

The provision of visitors is another most important aspect of this question and so is the question of specially arranged holidays. These poor people cannot read newspapers, books or magazines, and so the need for visitors who can communicate and read to them is great, for they cannot follow sound radio or television programmes and they are cut off from local community and world events.

This is an important Motion and although only 3,000 people may be involved they represent a special section of the community who require welfare and social attention to live in a fast-moving physical world where the needs of minorities may be overlooked. I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will indicate that the Government are prepared to give a strong lead in this matter, and all the assistance possible to help our unfortunate fellow countrymen who are both deaf and blind.

11.49 a.m.

Lord Balniel (Hertford)

Those of us who are blessed with normal faculties find it almost impossible to imagine the psychological and physical difficulties facing someone who has lost two of those essential faculties. They have, for instance, to learn once again even how to walk and to maintain their balance. It is beyond the imagination of most of us to comprehend the problems that face those who can neither hear nor see.

I intervene briefly in this debate for two reasons. I intervene partially because I think it imperative that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary should answer the questions which have been put to him by my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Denzil Freeth). I have tried to make inquiries about what information is available to the public in this field. So far as I can make out, virtually no information has been made available by official publications about the problems facing these 3,000 persons since the Report in 1951.

Partially also I want to intervene because I think it right that this House should express appreciation to my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke, who has devoted an enormous amount of work to trying to help to solve the problems and to help with the care of these persons. We appreciate that this is an immensely complex subject and that few hon. Members will be taking part in this debate, but we wish to record our appreciation to my hon. Friend for introducing this subject, which is so important.

I wish to say a few words about the training of persons to look after the deaf-blind. Like my hon. Friend, I thought when I read the Report of 1951 that the recommendation in paragraph 7 that as a general rule home teachers of the blind should not be required to devote the whole of their time to the deaf-blind, unless a particular officer has a vocation in that direction, was to a layman a surprising recommendation. I am sure that there must be many reasons which led the Committee to that conclusion, but my impression is that the problems of the deaf-blind are unique. They are totally different from those of the deaf or of the blind, so that we need social service workers specifically trained in the care of the deaf-blind rather than trained in the care of the blind and giving only a small part of their time to the care of the deaf-blind.

It is stated in paragraph 5 of the Report that there should be refresher courses for uncertificated home teachers and those who have qualified. Have these refresher courses been introduced? Do many home teachers for the blind take trainng in the care of the deaf-blind? Since 1962 we have seen established in this country the Council for Training in Social Work. Of course, it is preparing courses for teachers and social workers working for other types of handicapped persons. Has it, however, yet set its mind to the preparation of courses for those who will teach and care for the deaf-blind?

I want to say a word or two about the kind of homes made available for the deaf-blind. I should have thought the strongest desire in the mind of a person afflicted in this way is that at all costs he should try to keep his sense of self-reliance, his sense of independence and his sense of self-respect. If at all possible he should be cared for at home where, surrounded by his family, it is more easy to keep his sense of self-reliance, of independence and self-respect. Yet I can well imagine the burden which falls on parents of deaf-blind children or on relatives of deaf-blind adults. It must be a great and terrible burden for them to bear—not the least part being the need to disguise the fact from the afflicted person.

I ask try hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, are those parents and those relatives given training to enable them to care properly for those in their family who are afflicted? I also ask about the kind of residential homes which are provided. Of course, for many a residential home or institution is necessary—but we all agree that it should be a last resort. In an entirely non-political field, it has been one of my pleasures in life to open a substantial number of homes for old people throughout the length and breadth of the country.

These are homes in which elderly people have their own home attached by a bell system to a warden's block, with communal facilities for sitting rooms and for eating and meeting together. I should have thought that if one could adapt the concept of such residential accommodation so that deaf-blind people could live in purpose-built houses specifically designed to meet their problems, with a warden's block established in their midst and in which communal facilities are available to meet their needs, we should be doing better than by providing institutional accommodation of a kind which is gradually becoming necessary to the needs of today.

I echo my hon. Friend's plea that these people should be provided free of charge with Braille typewriters. I assure my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary that there is a mood in this House that this limited number of persons should be supported with the utmost generosity. Without any question, the greatest happiness that can be given to them is to help them communicate with other people. If we could help them to communicate with persons in the outer world by means of Braille typewriters, that surely would be something we could provide for them free of any charge at all.

There is a related point to this debate which has been called to my attention in my capacity as chairman of the National Association for Mental Health. Persons who work with the National Association probably have as great a knowledge of the care of mentally- handicapped people as any in the country. They tell me that a considerable number of children are brought to the attention of the Association as being thought to be mentally handicapped, mentally deficient or autistic. In fact, they are often found to be not mentally handicapped, mentally deficient or autistic but afflicted by deafness. Too often their real disability is not diagnosed correctly early in life. Often these children are physically handicapped through deafness, and it is assumed by their parents that they are mentally handicapped. I emphasise to my hon. Friend the great importance of ensuring early diagnosis for children to make sure that they are not classified as mentally handicapped when in fact it is the physical handicap of deafness which is causing their disability.

I end by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke on undertaking a most valuable public service by introducing this debate. I hope that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary will reply fully to the many questions he has raised.

11.59 a.m.

Mr. Clifford Kenyon (Chorley)

I wish to add my congratulations to the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Denzil Freeth) for raising the subject of one of the most baffling problems which any human being has to face. Those who are blind live in a world of darkness, those who are deaf live in a world of silence. Those who have both handicaps live in a world of darkness and silence.

I feel absolutely baffled in trying to find words to describe the situation. In all the vocabulary of human speech I do not think there are words which can adequately describe the situation which faces these people. We find them in their homes where great care is taken of them by their families. But, with the best will in the world, the facilities which the home provides are inadequate to give them the weapons, as it were, needed so that they can live anything like a normal life. The only solution is life in a residential home, where the home is built so that their disabilities are catered for, where they have no stairs to climb, doors to unlock, and so on, and where the teachers are specially trained to deal with their handicap.

The hon. Member for Hertford (Lord Balniel) found surprising the proposal that teachers should not concentrate all their time on these people. I can understand that, because there is a tendency among teachers who concentrate on this type of person to suffer a psychological frustration which should be broken. That can come about only if the teacher is able to share his time among handicapped people and others who are either not so handicapped or not handicapped at all. They should be able to break up their teaching service so that they do not concentrate entirely on people who are frustrated and isolated in this way and who can be taught only in a very specialised way to overcome their handicap. Therefore, it is good for the teachers' sake that they should be able to divide up their teaching in that way.

I think that the residential homes should be under the control of the Ministry of Health. It could associate with the Ministry of Education in the teaching of children and adolescents, but this is a health problem and I feel that through the Ministry of Health all the requirements of these people could be met. I echo what the hon. Member for Basingstoke urged, namely, that the country should be generous in dealing with these people and in providing all the instruments necessary to help them. I feel sure that if we deal with this matter in a wide and sympathetic manner we will be able to bring some light and some sound into the lives of these handicapped people.

12.4 p.m.

Mr. A. G. Bottomley (Middlesbrough, East)

I join my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham (Mr. Hunter) in congratulating the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Denzil Freeth) on initiating this debate on the condition of the deaf and blind. He deserves our thanks all the more because we are all aware that he intends to leave the House at the next General Election and that this is probably his last opportunity to present a Private Member's Motion. He might have chosen a much more spectacular subject, but he has chosen this very humane one and it deserves the fullest consideration of us all.

The hon. Member talked about the need for communication. This is very important. I was faced with this problem very early in my life. One of my young friends was deaf and dumb. His sight was very bad, too. I made it my business to learn the deaf and dumb language. Although, because of modern developments, I should not be able to do it very efficiently now, I can still do the deaf and dumb alphabet. I also had in my family a blind person, and these cases have made me conscious of the need to do something to help unfortunate beings who are deaf and blind.

As has been said, we all hoped that the 1951 Report would bring about some development in this field to help these people. I do not want to be too partisan, but I am bound to say that what has happened has been in keeping with the Government's general behaviour on health and social matters. At one time we could truthfully say that our health and welfare services equalled any in the world. Unfortunately, we cannot say that today. I therefore hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will give us some encouragement that the Government will take this service more seriously now than they have done in the past.

It is sad to be told that only now is consideration being given to the kind of training of social workers needed to help the deaf and blind. In fact, we were given that information in answer to a Question of the hon. Member for Basingstoke, but it was dealt with in the Report, too.

So much can be done. Near my home there is a school for deaf and dumb children. It has been carried on with hardly any help at all by two very energetic people. I have had the opportunity of going along and having a discussion with completely deaf people without knowing that they were completely deaf. The way in which the deaf and dumb are able to communicate is also remarkable.

I think that we should pay tribute to the B.B.C., which, by its television programmes, has done much in providing the kind of service which helps the deaf and dumb. Perhaps it could be used in another way. The probability is that by means of the new methods in being radio could do something to help. In the Soviet Union, I saw a machine which people could touch and, by this means, have communication. This was done by an electronic system and it is possible that radio, by means of electronic signals, can give a service to deaf and blind people.

I should like to know whether the Advisory Committee's Report on the deaf and blind will be published. If the Parliamentary Secretary can say that it will be, that will save further questioning on the matter now. If it is not intended to publish it, we on this side will seek further information about it later.

I referred earlier to my experience of trying to communicate with an unfortunate colleague who had one of these disabilities. I recall another experience in this House in 1945 when most of us were new Members. I was talking af a luncheon table with a Member of Parliament. We were talking about Helen Keller, that wonderful woman who had overcome the disabilities of deafness, dumbness and blindness and who made such a wonderful contribution to showing how a citizen can lead a full life if given the training.

This Member of Parliament said to me, "Yes, I do know about this, and perhaps I understand it better than anyone else". I know that most of us have had an experience of some kind or another, and that is why this is a very representative House. I hardly expected to be told by that Member that he had been deaf, dumb and blind. I smiled, until he told me that he was quite serious, because in the First World War he had had the back of his head shot away and for some time he had been deaf, dumb and blind. He had a steel plate put at the back of his head. Many hon. Members will have known him. As far as I know, he still goes about—I trust fit and well, even though having this disability, but from his behaviour I can assure the House that he is now certainly not deaf, dumb or blind.

The hon. Member for Basingstoke struck the conscience of us all. It was his intention to bring this heart-rending problem to the attention of the House and the country. I go further and say that he has brought it to the attention of the world, because, although we have 3,000 people suffering from deafness and blindness, we know that in various parts of the Commonwealth and other parts of the world the problem is much more acute. I hope that those who have the opportunity of reading our debates in the House will be spurred on by this gesture by the hon. Gentleman, in the hope that the agencies of the United Nations will give as much attention to it as we have given it here this morning.

This is a very special problem. I agree with the hon. Gentleman, and I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that it is and treat it as such.

12.12 p.m.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health (Mr. Bernard Braine)

I join the right hon. Member for Middlesbrough, East (Mr. Bottomley) and other hon. Members in congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Denzil Freeth) on his good fortune in the Ballot, on his decision to draw our attention to the needs of the deaf-blind, and also on the interesting, informed and sympathetic way in which he spoke.

There is, I think, a general public awareness of the needs of the blind, a readiness to help, and a universal admiration for the way in which they overcome their disabilities. Indeed—I say this very specially to the right hon. Gentleman—our services for the blind are about the best in the world. There is less understanding about the deaf, perhaps because the disability is not always so obvious to others. There is even less understanding still of the needs of those who are both deaf and blind, and sometimes without speech as well. My hon. Friend has done a great service in focussing attention upon this small but severely handicapped group.

We all know how the blind depend upon hearing as an alternative to sight and how the deaf depend on sight as an alternative to hearing. It is, as the hon. Member for Chorley (Mr. Kenyon) said, almost impossible to grasp the extent of deprivation in one who is both deaf and blind. Not the least valuable part of my hon. Friend's speech this morning was that in which he helped us a little to understand the gravity of this double handicap.

One thing that needs to be said at the outset—and here I feel sure that I carry hon. Members with me—is that the handicapped do not want people to feel sorry for them. It is astonishing how many of them are able to come to terms with their disability. Those of us who have any contact with them know that it is not pity they evoke but admiration for their courage and good sense. What the handicapped need is an opportunity to live a life which is as nearly normal and as full of interest and satisfaction as their disability permits.

We recognised this in our Command Paper, Health and Welfare: The Development of Community Care, which, the House will remember, my Department published in April last year. In that document we set out what we felt was necessary to meet the needs of the handicapped and we published, for the first time comprehensively, the plans of all the local health and welfare authorities in England and Wales, setting out what they proposed to do in regard to their services over the next 10 years. My noble Friend the Member for Hertford (Lord Balniel) said that there was very little information about the needs of the deaf-blind. This may well be so. I would remind him, however, that the Government specifically recognised their needs in that Command Paper, and I recommend hon. Gentlemen to have another look at it.

The degree of disability and the circumstances of each case vary enormously. The first requirement is expert medical and social diagnosis to identify the precise needs. The need may be skilled help to enable the handicapped person to cope in his or her own home. It may be for a suitably equipped home of their own. Where the disablement is very severe, the need may be for residential care. It may be for a job which is within the handicapped person's capacity. It may mean rehabilitation and training for that job. Failing a job—this is very important indeed—the need may be a satisfying occupation. Or it may be recreation and holidays to keep the handicapped person in touch with the outside world.

The primary need for deaf-blind people is help in establishing communication, particularly for those without speech. Clearly, without the ability to communicate, their other needs cannot be met. Communication, therefore, is the key to bringing help to bear.

My hon. Friend has emphasised some of the problems which confront us. It might be helpful, therefore, if I describe the services available to the deaf-blind and the steps being taken to improve them. The House will know that local authorities are responsible, under Section 29 of the National Assistance Act, 1948, for the welfare of the blind and the deaf. They are assisted by a number of very fine voluntary societies which have done, and still do, so much of the pioneer work for the handicapped in this country and also play a major rôle in their care.

All local authorities maintain a special section for the deaf-blind on their registers of the blind. I see no particular need for a national register. The registers ought surely to be kept where the services are provided, that is, by the local authorities. The section for the deaf-blind is sub-divided into deaf without speech and deaf with speech, and there is a further breakdown to show handicaps additional to deafness and blindness.

There are about 2,700 deaf-blind persons in England and Wales, of whom just over 500 are without speech. While these numbers are not large, the needs of each individual are considerable. A great deal of help may be required to enable him to live as normal a life as possible. I emphasise—I do not think that this was in doubt in the mind of anybody who spoke today—that there is no danger of our losing sight of this fact, nor of failing to appreciate the nature of the problem, because the numbers involved are small. I want to make it quite plain that, while this is a relatively small group, we shall certainly not underestimate their very real need.

Traditionally, the blind welfare departments of local authorities, together with the voluntary organisations for the blind, have accepted responsibility for promoting the welfare of deaf-blind persons. They have usually worked very closely with the voluntary organisations dealing with the deaf. The local authority welfare services for the blind are staffed by home teachers of the blind. The examination for the certificate includes, as a compulsory subject, a knowledge of the facilities available to deaf-blind persons, and candidates are required to demonstrate their ability to converse by means of the manual method.

Home teachers are required to pay particular attention to blind people who suffer from other handicaps. The services provided for deaf-blind people include visiting them in their own homes, advising them of all available social services, teaching Braille reading and writing and the simpler Moon reading where practicable, teaching typewriting and methods of using other writing devices, encouraging them to attend special clubs for deaf-blind or blind and take part in ordinary club activities, enlisting the help of voluntary visitors and teaching the visitors how to communicate with the person concerned as well as acting as interpreters during interviews and at other times.

The home teacher also encourages and helps the family of a blind or deaf-blind person to give him every opportunity to enjoy normal living. For someone who is deaf-blind this includes ensuring that the members of his family know how to communicate with him and encouraging them to maintain communication. We must remember that these are people who are particularly isolated and who can easily become completely withdrawn. It is not only technical aids they need but the warmth of human companionship, the knowledge that someone can communicate with them. Social clubs and centres, holidays and outings, transport and escorts are vital for them, as for handicapped people generally.

I am glad to say that since the publication of the 1951 Report there has been a considerable expansion in these services. Special holidays have been arranged by the three English Regional Associations for the Blind, by local authorities and by voluntary bodies. There has been a big increase in the number of social clubs to which the National Deaf-Blind Helpers' League has made a very valuable contribution and in the number of voluntary members who have enlisted to give personal friendship and help. I have been particularly impressed by the arrangement under which a special guide home-help service for deaf-blind people has been established in Bristol. I hope that other authorities will study what is being done there, with a view to establishing similar services in their own areas.

The key to this welfare service, as to others, lies in personal understanding of the individual and his needs, and of the services which can help him to cope with his disability. In this case ability to communicate is a vital element. On a recent visit to a deaf-blind social centre I was struck by the seeming ease with which social workers were able to communicate with deaf-blind people who have speech and I was astonished to learn that the art can be acquired in a few weeks. But it is an art, requiring quite exceptional patience, understanding and kindliness. Of course, communication with those who are fundamentally deaf and without speech is infinitely more difficult. I cannot praise too highly the devoted men and women, paid and unpaid, who do this work.

There is a great deal of room for experiment with various methods of helping the deaf-blind. Some local authorities have appointed special home teachers to deal with them. My hon. Friend suggested that more should be done to equip special welfare officers to work in this field, but it is important to note that the recommendation made in the 1951 Report that there should be refresher courses for home teachers of the blind, with special reference to the needs of the deaf-blind, is now established practice. Such courses are regularly held by the three English Regional Associations for the Blind. Students attending these courses receive the thorough grounding in the needs of the deaf-blind which were also recommended in the Report, and they gain practical experience by attending courses or holidays arranged for deaf-blind people.

My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke suggested that a college should be established to provide for the training of specialist officers to work solely with the deaf-blind and that, in the future staffing of the services, the aim should be the employment of such specialist officers. Hon. Members will recall, however, that recent legislation put responsibility for promoting training, "in such social work as is required in the health and welfare service", firmly on the Council for Training in Social Work.

The House will be interested to know that the Council has already set up a panel to consider the training required for work with special groups such as the blind and the deaf. The panel is in touch with my Department and we will give it all the help we can. We will certainly emphasise the special needs of the deaf-blind. But it would be wrong for us to try to pre-judge the panel's recommendations and what the Council may finally decide.

It is the Council's responsibility, not my right hon. Friend's, to determine what shall be the pattern of training to equip people to undertake general social work and to acquire additional skills to fit them to deal with the blind, the deaf and the multiply handicapped. We must await the Council's considered conclusions before we can carry further any new ideas on staffing structures. I can assure the House that my Department will give all the help possible, and will give prompt attention to the implications when the Council's findings are available.

I have described the existing pattern of training and the arrangements for giving help to the deaf-blind and I have indicated how new patterns will be developed for future. I am sure that my hon. Friend will understand that for the moment I cannot take further the point which is at the heart of any welfare service—the training of workers who will have the knowledge, understanding and insight to give maximum assistance to the handicapped and be able to help parents, relatives and friends to understand what is involved and how they can help. This is not because I do not recognise that this is of fundamental importance.

I come now to the question of rehabilitation. Special provision for this is made at the R.N.I.B. residential centre for the blind at Oldbury Grange at Bridgnorth, and at the Institution's home for the deaf-blind at Burnham-on-Sea. If industrial rehabilitation is needed, a deaf-blind person whose blindness is of recent origin may go to the Institute's rehabilitation home for the newly blind at Torquay.

A pioneer project to promote independent living and to provide rehabilitation is being established by the National Deaf-Blind Helpers' League at Peterborough. A block of four flats was opened in October last year as the first part of a scheme to provide 12 fiats for deaf-blind people with a resident warden, a hostel or guest house for short stay and rehabilitation purposes, and a social centre.

Social services and personal support in the home are by no means the whole story. For deaf-blind people who have a little sight or hearing—and few are totally deaf as well as totally blind—hearing aids and the special optical aids available through the hospital and specialist service are of vital importance. Local authorities have power, too, to provide apparatus and aids to living which a deaf-blind person is able to use; for example, white sticks, writing frames and Braille machines, typewriters, tools and games adapted with tangible signs for measuring, Braille watches and clocks, as well as appliances to amplify sound or vibration. Local authorities have the power to supply this equipment.

Mr. Denzil Freeth

Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that every person becoming deaf-blind has an opportunity, within a short time, of attending one of the rehabilitation centres he has mentioned? Do these centres receive any grants from either the central Government or local authorities and are authorities which spend money on aids for the deaf-blind eligible for the general grant?

Mr. Braine

The answer to my hon. Friend's first question is, undoubtedly, "Yes"—such an opportunity can be given. I think that the answer to his second question is also, "Yes", but I should like to confirm that. If there is any doubt about it, I will communicate with him. But I want to make it quite plain that local authorities have extensive powers.

A great deal of help is given through the supply of aids, particularly by the voluntary organisations. I do not say for one moment that more aid is not necessary—it is—and I hope that local authorities will take note of this debate and use their powers more widely. This is a general theme, of course, in all the welfare services, for the elderly as well as for the handicapped. Our aim is to give support. and to provide accommodation, aids and facilities so as to enable people to remain where they want to be for as long as possible—in their own homes, not in residential homes, that is, so long as they wish to remain in their own homes.

This is the guiding theme of our welfare services, and it means that we must assess needs early and accurately, and provide services to meet them. This is the way to ensure that people are given the kind of help they require at the right time and in the right way, thereby preventing or postponing the need for residential or hospital care.

But there is no doubt that there does come a point when the measure of support required by some handicapped persons will make residential care essential, and here, again, provision is made by local welfare authorities and voluntary organisations. There are four residential homes catering exclusively for the deafblind—three provided by the Royal National Institute for the Blind and one provided by the Birmingham City Council. Others needing residential care are accommodated by local authorities or voluntary organisations in homes for the blind and homes for the deaf, and some are in ordinary homes for the elderly.

It is true to say that the present provision caters reasonably well for the deaf-blind who are elderly, and who constitute by far the majority, but more needs to be done for the younger deaf-blind. In this respect the position is the same as that for the younger physically handicapped generally, and for the multiply-handicapped in the younger age groups. We drew attention to this point particularly in our Cmnd. Paper, Health and Welfare, in which the Minister recommended that joint studies should be made by local authorities, in consultation with voluntary bodies, to determine what further provision should be made. Local authorities are at present engaged in the first revision of their long-term plans, and we very much hope that they will have taken this recommendation into account.

A proportion of the handicapped need a degree of nursing care beyond that which can reasonably be expected from a local authority. They need long-stay care in hospitals. Some, undoubtedly, will have the additional handicap of mental disorder. My hon. Friend referred to my Department's study of the needs of the deaf-blind in psychiatric and other long-stay hospitals. The findings were put before the Minister's Advisory Committee on the Health and Welfare of Handicapped Persons last November, and I am glad to say that that Committee agreed with the proposals made for further action. Subject to consultations that are at present taking place with all interested parties, we intend to issue advice in connection with this subject. As soon as the consultations are complete, we shall issue that advice without delay.

The House may like to know the kind of points we have in mind, because they have some relevance to what has been said in this debate. First, there is the need for expert medical-social assessment on admission, and periodic reviews of each case. Our aim here is to determine needs and how to meet them, whether in hospital or in the community.

Secondly, there is the reduction of isolation and inactivity of patients to the minimum. This requires that hospital and local authority welfare departments must work closely together. It requires more visits by home teachers of the blind and welfare officers for the deaf, especially where the deafness is of the type "without speech". We shall emphasise that much can be done by voluntary visitors taking special—and regular—interest in a deaf-blind patient, What is needed here is to establish a normal, continuing relationship. Where possible, holidays should also be arranged.

Thirdly, there is the training of hospital staff to communicate with deaf-blind patients in order to relieve their sense of isolation. Here, we think that local authority officers might instruct groups of nurses and others in the manual language, thus creating, perhaps, a new interest in the needs of the deaf-blind. As I have already said, it is not really difficult to acquire this skill where the deaf-blind person has some speech.

Again, we would stress the possible advantages of grouping small numbers of deaf-blind in one hospital, where the numbers in any one area make this possible, in order to make full use of staff trained in communicating by manual language. I think that we could also, by this means, bring together patients who might be able to communicate with each other. Lastly, we would stress the need for more occupation for deaf-blind patients who might otherwise be completely isolated.

The House will see that this calls for close co-operation all along the line between local authorities, voluntary organisations and the hospitals. I am not suggesting for one moment that none of this is being done now. Some hospitals and local authorities have done, and are doing, a good deal on these lines, but I agree with some of the things that have been said this morning. A great deal more needs to be done, and our purpose will be to encourage all to follow the example of the best.

I fully appreciate that hospital care is essential for most of the deaf-blind patients now in psychiatric hospitals, and that little more can be done for some of them. Others who have been in hospital for a long time might, in their own best interests, remain where they are, even if they appear not to need hospital care. It might even be cruel to move them. But where community care is preferable, and the patient would welcome this, it is important that an alternative should be made available.

The House might like to know that an interesting scheme for children has been prepared by the Oxford Regional Hospital Board. Borocourt Hospital for the mentally subnormal, in Oxfordshire, is being developed mainly as a centrally-financed project. The aim is to provide a pilot unit for blind, mentally subnormal children, some of whom are likely to have multiple handicaps, including deafness. We hope that this unit will be open in about two years, and provide accommodation for 24 children.

Tribute has been rightly paid to voluntary effort. Indeed, I can think of no field of welfare in which more has been done by voluntary organisations than in the provision of help for the handicapped. In many cases they were the pioneers, and they still provide a good deal of the services. Because the numbers are so small and the needs so specialised, these organisations provide services over areas far wider than those of single local authorities.

With the steady development of community care, it is clear that the voluntary organisations have a continuing rôle to play, Scope for their work will widen. Pioneer ventures will be welcome—indeed, we shall encourage them. It is the Government's policy to encourage closer partnership between statutory bodies and voluntary organisations in all fields of health and welfare. Local authorities have also been urged in preparing long-term plans for the development of their health and welfare services, to consult the voluntary organisations, both in making their assessment of the outstanding needs in their areas and in devising ways in which those needs might best be met. In our view, if they are to be met in the right way, the effort must be a joint one.

We have already suggested that work for the multiply handicapped is well suited to this sort of partnership. Indeed, this is as good an opportunity as any to make it absolutely plain that the development of community care as proposed in the local authorities' plans over the next decade, and the rate at which that development can progress, will be greatly influenced by the relationship that is established and maintained between statutory and voluntary effort.

Perhaps one of the best examples of partnership between the two is to be found in the field of education for the handicapped. My hon. Friend the Member for Hertford made a special point about the education of children handicapped in this way.

A special deaf-blind unit was established in 1952 by the Royal National Institute for the Blind at its school for additionally handicapped blind children at Condover Hall, in Shropshire. Other deaf-blind children are accommodated in the Institute's Sunshine Homes. On the subject of assessment I can say that very generous trial periods are given in every case to find out whether a child is capable of benefiting from education. I am advised that the Ministry of Education is satisfied that all deaf-blind children suitable for education at school are receiving it.

I can assure my hon. Friend that there are places in Condover Hall for all educable deaf-blind children requiring places. If more places are needed arrangements will be made with the Institute for their provision. I emphasise that in this as elsewhere constant atten- tion is being given to the problem of the blind. There is no question of any child affected in this way, who is capable of education, not receiving it. It is, of course, the responsibility of the local education authority, not of my Department, to assess those children requiring special education because of a handicap. All of us are very conscious of the need for special, sometimes lengthy trials, to determine whether these children are educable.

It is interesting to note that the Institute's work at Condover Hall for these children is leading to improvement in overcoming the very difficult problem of assessment. I think that this may be the answer to what was said on the subject of research. It is, of course, of the utmost importance that the deaf-blind are enabled, where their physical condition permits, to find useful employment.

My hon. Friend raised the question of rehabilitation. I am advised that the Ministry of Labour makes arrangements for the training and employment of deaf-blind people in sheltered workshops for the blind, and it provides industrial rehabilitation in appropriate eases. I must say, however—and I am sure that my hon. Friend is well aware that this is so—that the handicaps from which they suffer are very great indeed. The vast majority of the deaf-blind are elderly, and many are unable ever to undertake full-time employment. Even so, current figures provided by the Ministry of Labour and a special return made last year by the Regional Associations for the Blind show that of about 700 deaf-blind people in the working age range of 16 to 65, excluding those suffering also from mental disorder, 116 are at present employed or undergoing training in sheltered workshops for the blind, and in addition over 40 are in ordinary employment.

I note what my hon. Friend said about additional facilities and I should like to inquire further into this. Several hon. Members referred to the 1951 Report. That was a most useful document. All those who have read it will appreciate that many of the principles upon which it was based are still valid today and the development of services for the deaf-blind since its publication have been greatly influenced by the advice it contained.

Many of the developments that we have been discussing today are a fulfilment of that Report's recommendation—the provision of two additional homes for deaf-blind people, arrangements for special education, and holidays, and the organisation of refresher and other training to increase home teachers' knowledge and understanding of deaf-blind people. All this has come about since the publication of the Report.

But in the field of welfare as in that of health there is no finality. We are always pushing back the frontiers and my hon. Friend today has pressed us to consider a number of suggestions. I have already dealt with some of them and I hope he will feel that I have dealt with them adequately. I will not go over the same ground again, but I can assure him that everything he has said today will be studied most carefully and we shall certainly see what more we can do to help the deaf-blind.

Finally, I think that the whole House is greatly in debt to my hon. Friend for raising this subject today. I hope that what has been said will be read widely, that it will encourage those already working in this field, and stimulate others to take an interest, and perhaps lend a hand, to enable deaf-blind people to lead as active a rôle in the community as they would wish and to enjoy as happy and normal a life as possible.

For these reasons, I have pleasure in asking the House to accept the Motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House, recognising the special needs of those persons who are at the same time both deaf and blind, calls upon the Government, local authorities and the general public to give increased attention to their problems, to co-operate in providing more visitors, both professional and voluntary, in seeing that these are suitably trained, and also in providing training for the deaf-blind themselves so that by active occupation and regular and frequent communication with other persons, both similarly handicapped and those having heating and sight, they may be enabled to lead lives as full and satisfying as possible.