220 PAUL POPENOE 



auspices, there are many advantages in tying it up with what might be called 

 the clinical work of the Institute. 



In conclusion, let me turn to the question, what agencies in the United 

 States are undertaking this work of family counselling? Churches, family 

 welfare associations, social hygiene associations, social case workers, phy- 

 sicians (especially gynecologists and psychiatrists), sociologists, Y. M. C. A. 

 and Y. W. C. A. secretaries, eugenists, domestic relations courts, college 

 officials, lawyers, psychologists (especially psychoanalysts), all have from 

 time to time, and in different places, undertaken to specialize in this field. 



If my analysis, above, of common sources of friction is correct, it will be 

 evident that no one counsellor is likely to be competent to deal with every 

 possible phase, and that a cooperation among counsellors, or a pooling of 

 interests by those specializing in the field, would be desirable. 



From a social point of view, again, it is evident that some cases of family 

 maladjustment may be theoretically quite remediable, but demanding an 

 amount of work which can not be given. The welfare agency may carry 

 through a piece of family case work for two or three years, at a cost of hun- 

 dreds of dollars to the community. The psychoanalyst may carry through 

 the treatment of a case for a hundred hours of consultation, at $20 or $30 

 per hour. The solution in either event may be quite ideal. But it is wholly 

 impracticable for most families, if they themselves must meet the cost; 

 and for most communities, if they themselves must extend such a service to 

 a considerable proportion of their inhabitants. 



If the sexual maladjustments in marriage alone represent one-fourth of the 

 whole married population, as noted above, and if there are numerous other 

 problems, both before and after marriage, that fall properly within the 

 sphere of the family counsellor, it is clear that only an educational program 

 on a large scale is likely to be of any real significance, socially. 



It seems worth while to consider, therefore, whether a social agency could 

 not be built up on a new basis, with the object of getting the maximum 

 amount of result for the minimum amount of expense. Such an agency 

 would frankly recognize that some cases, beyond its own scope, might be 

 dealt with successfully by others if expense were no consideration. It would 

 proceed on the assumption that education adapted as well as possible to 

 individual needs could be offered to large numbers of people without large 

 cost; and that while this education would not be sufficient to meet the re- 

 quirement of every applicant, it would benefit a majority. If the minority 

 could find help elsewhere they would be at liberty to do so. 



Such a policy was in the minds of the incorporators of the Institute of 

 Family Relations in Los Angeles, when they began to work out their plans 



