Library Collections: Document: Full Text

Giving full recognition to the significance autonomy on the part of the local member units had played in the initial organizational pattern of NARC, the "Fettinger Report" clearly and prophetically pointed up that with increasing achievement of our goals for the mentally retarded "recognition must be given to that degree of authority which will permit NARC to preserve its own position nationally" and to act on its own strength as an authorized effective spokesman of the total national membership. I would think that the events of the past months, indeed the past several days, have proven the soundness of this premise.

To me the greatest contribution of the "Fettinger Report" is a brief sentence of eight words: "Our task is to obtain, not to provide."

I am well aware that not just from state to state but indeed from community to community, we face striking differences not only in the availability of programs and services for the retarded but also with regard to the potential of improving that situation. Yet, to quote this report "We need only to think in terms of 35 to 50 million dollars annually for total programming for all the retarded in an average state in order to appreciate the real magnitude of our responsibility and the fact that this can only be achieved through support by tax-payers' dollars or through services of public and private agencies in the community. Herein rests the future potential of a total program for the retarded."

Of course the Unit Relations Study Committee saw clearly that the maxim "our task is to obtain, not to provide" had to be tempered by the recognition that the establishment of pilot or demonstration projects by local units might well be in particular situations an essential part of the process of "obtaining." But here again I wonder how many of you are aware how clearly the Committee outlined six specific elements which justified initiation and continued support of pilot demonstration projects.

Let me give you one final excerpt from the "Fettinger Report" because it seems to me the problems it deals with are as acute today as they were in 1958.

"Most member units start out as special interest parent groups and it is not until they become involved in the broader aspects of programming that they are able to subordinate special interest tendencies. While it is possible for a member unit to become divorced from special interests, there often continues a protective tendency to remain a parent group ... If we are to achieve our program of community sustained programming for the retarded, we actively must enlist the services of all available non-parent lay and professional assistance in the community to help us in our cause. In this manner, our reservoir of community assistance will become strategically strengthened, thus insuring greater member unit potential over a given period of time."

By this time I am sure I have conveyed to you all what great significance I attribute to the early years of our great Association and for this reason I want to mention as the last item on my honor list Elizabeth Boggs' brilliant evaluative report "Decade of Decision," which she prepared for the 1960 White House Conference on Children and Youth. Every new president or officer of a unit, indeed every new member, should have an opportunity to read this exciting account of NARC's first ten years, so he may be better prepared to "hold fast to that which is good."

I am fully aware that some of the old-timers in this room may well think of other articles and speeches that should have been cited here; in preference to those I have selected and there are of course more recent significant statements and I would predict that Mr. Fitzpatrick's splendid speech we heard on Wednesday night will go down as a classic.

I have brought you these many references to past writings not because it is permissible to indulge in gratuitous historical reminisences on an occasion like this but because I wanted to underline to you that my role at NARC has very largely been that of stewardship. When you hired me as your Executive, your Board of Directors and my distinguished predecessor provided me with a veritable treasure house of documents and guides which served me as beacons. These beacons are still showing us the way of our journey, emphasizing that we cannot stand still nor rest until we can be assured that every retarded child, every retarded adult is helped to obtain his own level of fulfillment. Thus, although this is not the appropriate occasion for lengthy dissertations, let me leave with you some references to areas where I see particular need for new or renewed emphasis by our National Association.

Foremost is my concern: that you will recognize and effectively deal with new frontiers in our field of mental retardation. A good case in point is the economics of mental retardation, both as this applies to meeting the needs in an entire state or providing security for a severely retarded individual who cannot contribute to his maintenance. There are those who feel that we need to increase significantly the number of available beds for residential care of the retarded, yet merely to build enough facilities to accomodate five rather than four per cent of the retarded in residential care would involve an initial construction outlay considerably in excess of half a billion or five hundred million dollars not counting annual expenditure for the care of the residents. So far there has been a minimum of sound cost accounting in terms of large numbers and long range needs, yet without this we cannot responsibly continue to recommend public expenditures.