Pennhurst State School and Hospital

Note: Hello beautiful! This post is heavy with content and has been broken into 3 pages to help with load time. When you reach the bottom of this page, please click to continue.

Pennhurst State School and Hospital was a public institution in Spring City, Pennsylvania that was established in 1908 to house and provide care for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. It was initially lauded as a model facility, but over time, it became infamous for its overcrowding, understaffing, and inhumane treatment of residents, including physical and sexual abuse.

The institution was ultimately closed in 1987 after a series of lawsuits and investigations revealed the extent of the mistreatment and neglect suffered by its residents. Today, the former Pennhurst campus is a site for historical tours and educational programs, as well as a reminder of the ongoing struggle for the rights and dignity of people with disabilities.

cherry blossoms in bloom on the tree in front of pennhurst administration building against bright blue sky — Administration Building and Cherry Blossoms, 2010.

Background

In order to understand Pennhurst, you should have a basic understanding of eugenics, because they go hand-in-hand. I will do my best to explain. These institutions were built to offer a safe haven to vulnerable populations. But they turned into being used to hide people so they wouldn’t disrupt society.

Subsequently, with the rise of the eugenics movement, Pennhurst, which had once been a safe haven, underwent a dramatic transformation. It became an under-funded, under-staffed, non-productive, and abusive environment where patients were subjected to involuntary sterilization and horrific procedures in the name of science.

Construction

From 1903 to 1908, the first buildings were constructed on 633.913 acres of Crab Hill in Spring City, Pennsylvania, Chester County on what was referred to as the lower campus. Out of the first few buildings constructed, ‘F’ was the Girl’s Dining Room, ‘G’ was the Kitchen and Store Room, ‘H’, ‘I’ and ‘K’ were a Cottage for Girls, ‘N’ was the Boys’ Dining Room, ‘P’ was the Teacher’s Home, ‘Q’, T’, ‘U’ and ‘V’ were a Cottage for Boys, ‘R’ was a School, ‘W’ was Laundry and Sewing, and ‘X’ was the Power House.

‘P’ was used as a temporary Administration building until the institution’s opening in 1918 along with the opening of ‘L’ and ‘M’ in 1919. In 1921, Whitman and Wilson I and II were constructed along with Penn Hall for employee housing; in 1929, the Assembly building was complete and functioned as the gymnasium and auditorium.

The buildings on lower campus are currently labeled with letters such as ‘F’, ‘I’, ‘K’, ‘P’, ‘Q’, ‘R’, ‘N’, ‘U’, ‘V’, ‘T’, ‘W’ and ‘X’ with names later assigned in the 1960s.

In 1930, the first buildings on the upper campus, otherwise known as the Female Colony, were completed and named Pershing, Buchanan, Audubon and Keystone. Capitol Hall was erected after World War II along with Devon constructed on lower campus. Horizon Hall opened later in 1971.

Lower Campus

Administration, Philadelphia, Quaker, Rockwell, Franklin, Nobel, Union, Vincennes, Tinicum, Industry, Penn, Devon, Mayflower, Limerick, Assembly, Storeroom, Laundry, Whitman, Wilson I, Wilson II, Hershey.

Upper Campus

Pershing, Buchanan, Audubon, Keystone, Capitol, Horizon.

Other Buildings

Powerhouse, Treatment Plant, Director’s House, Green House, and Dairy Farm.

Appearance of Buildings

The older buildings, designed by Philip H. Johnson, were two-storied, and made of red brick, terra cotta, and granite trimmings. They were connected by fire-proof tunnels with walkways on top of the tunnels for the use of transporting residents, with a parallel steam piping system, and were distributed on the 1,400-acre campus in the cottage plan formation.

The buildings were designed to provide a large number of small rooms occupied by two to three beds, a few small dormitories with eight to ten beds, and a large day room for exercise. George Lovatt was the architect for several of the buildings built after the year 1937.

The central Administration building has two side porte-cocheres, a front portico and a copper cupola in the center of the roof. The hospital building, Whitman, and Wilson I and II are not tunnel-connected, nor is Penn Hall and the Powerhouse. The remaining cottage buildings are ‘L’ and ‘I’ shaped with the exception of Dietary, which is ‘Y’ shaped, and Devon Hall, which is ‘H’ shaped.

Early Beginnings

Sterilization of Mentally and Physically Unfit Persons

However, it was not until three years after the passage of this controversial act that the institution was constructed. On March 21, 1905, the Legislature of Pennsylvania passed “An act for the prevention of idiocy” which called for the sterilization of mentally and physically unfit individuals residing in institutions for at least one year, particularly those whose conditions were hereditary and could be passed down to their offspring. This act essentially gave the government the power to involuntarily sterilize individuals deemed unfit, without their consent.

After being passed by the legislature, the bill was rejected by the state governor Samuel W. Pennypacker. He expressed that allowing such a procedure would be cruel to a vulnerable group within the community that the state was responsible for safeguarding. Pennypacker stated, “To permit such an operation would be to inflict cruelty upon a helpless class in the community which the state has undertaken to protect.”(Ray, 1905).

Pennhurst Opens its Doors

On November 23, 1908, “Patient number 1” was admitted to the hospital. Within four years of operation, Pennhurst was already overcrowded and under pressure to admit immigrants, orphans, and criminals.

Classifications and New Legislature

Upon admission, residents were categorized according to their mental state as either imbecile or insane, their physical condition as either epileptic or healthy, and their dental status as having either good, poor, or treated teeth.

The branches of industry which residents were assigned to were mattress making, shoe making and repair, grading, farming, laundry, domestic duties, sewing, baking, butchering, painting, and working in the store.

In 1913, the Pennhurst Board of Trustees raised concerns that prompted the legislature to appoint a Commission for the Care of the Feeble-Minded. The Commission’s report stated that individuals with disabilities were unsuitable for citizenship and posed a threat to the peace, and thus proposed a custodial care program. Additionally, the Commission aimed to prevent the mingling of the genes of those confined in the institution with the broader population.

In the Biennial Report to the Legislature submitted by the Board of Trustees, Pennhurst’s Chief Physician quoted Henry H. Goddard, a leading eugenicist, by stating “every feeble-minded person is a potential criminal” (Miner, 1918), which he stated in his book (PDF) on Feeble-Mindedness: Its Causes and Consequences.

Aeriel Maps

Pennhurst’s original maps were photographed in the 1920s from an “aeroplane” and printed on large 5-foot by 5-foot pieces of paper, as shown below:

aeriel map of pennhurst lower campus1920s — Lower Campus

aerial map of pennhurst upper campus1920s — Upper Campus

Moral Treatment 1840s – 1910s

an old black and white photograph image of some pennhurst boys — Pennhurst Male Patients. 1920-1930’s.

The first meeting of the Association of Medical Officers of American Institutions of Idiotic and Feeble-minded Persons (AMO) was held in 1876 at the Pennsylvania Training School. The AMO’s main goal was to study the causes, conditions, statistics, to discuss the management, training, education of feeble-minded persons, and to lobby for the construction of institutions.

It is not enough that the State provide temporarily for this division of unfortunates: it must be a life-school for its inmates, thereby preventing the transmission of infirmities to a still more degraded progeny.

-F. M. Powell, in his 1886 presidential address

In 1896, the AMO launched its first publication called the Journal of Psycho-Asthenic (JPA) and was the only journal devoted to the feeble-minded and epileptic.

yellow pennhurst inventory sticker says "pennhurst 000278" — Inventory Sticker.

Around this time, institutions were changing formalities and began admitting adults. The adults were legally considered children and were called such. Institutions began adding words like “colony” and “home” to their name to reflect the emphasis on lifelong care.

Many legislators and members of the public believed that the residents of the institution were unable to learn and, thus, the institution should not have funding beyond that of an almshouse.

-AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS FOR THE FEEBLE-MINDED, 1876-1916

Fact: The 1890 Census saw a 228% increase in feeble-mindedness among new immigrants.

In 1893, the lunacy law authorized the detention of 575 epileptics in various institutions, prompting a call to establish a dedicated institution for the treatment and scientific study of epilepsy.

In 1898, the AMO began using standardized state commitment statutes that gave each institution’s superintendent the power to retain or release a resident. The use of classification made it easier to pin-point the specific types of education each type of disability benefited from.

In 1901, the AMO’s Committee on Psychological Research revealed a new standardized individual assessment to help classify persons in institutions. Henry Goddard created the Binet test to standardize the different degrees of feeble-mindedness.

pennhurst state school and hospital dormitory building — Pennhurst State School, Dormitory Building

Congress authorized the construction of an institution in 1903 and began construction on the new institution called the Eastern Pennsylvania State Institution for the Feeble-Minded and Epileptic, which opened on November 23rd, 1908, under the Act of May 15th, 1903, P.L. 446, in Spring City, Pennsylvania, Chester County atop Crab Hill. Crab Hill is a one-thousand-four-hundred-acre peninsula of rural farmland on the Schuylkill River-bend. It’s thirty miles north-west from the city of Philadelphia.

The institution opened to five-hundred feeble-minded and epileptic court-ordered male youth. They arrived from the 34 Pennsylvania counties east of the Allegheny Mountains. During this period, there were no provisions for females, but the state expressed its intention to expand its services. Just after the first four years of operation, the 5-building institution was well over-capacity with 10 percent of the residents exceeding 20 years old.

A clean and organized dining hall for children. Dietary, Pennhurst. (1915). Image courtesy of Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance.

Although young men were supposed to receive special education and training to become productive members of society, they ended up acquiring vocational skills that allowed the institution to offset the cost of their care.

Individuals with disabilities had difficulty finding fulfilling work in the broader community, and those who did find employment were often underpaid.

There were parents who voluntarily admitted their disabled children to Pennhurst to receive specialized education that the public school system couldn’t provide. Their desire was for their children to return home after acquiring the necessary skills. In contrast, other parents admitted their children because they were unable to cope with their disability or were ashamed of them, leaving these children with no place to call home.

pennhurst cupola roof fall leaves bright colors blue sky — Autumn Colors Splash and Paint the Grounds of Pennhurst. Fall 2007.

In the beginning of the eugenics era, attitudes shifted toward a negative view of feeble-mindedness. People were associating them with crime, drunkenness, prostitution, and immoral behavior. The public demanded that the state accept all categories of feeble-minded, not just the teachable ones

Many individuals believed that all feeble-minded people needed to be institutionalized to safeguard society. However, providing lifelong care to an increasing number of individuals necessitated more funding and building construction. As a result, one solution was to mandate that adult residents work for the institution.

With increased government funding came political interference and people, with no knowledge of feeble-mindedness, were appointed to boards of trustees.

The Mysterious Missing Building “K”

Building “K” was demolished in #### before the buildings were given names in the 1960’s. It has and always will be known as Building “K”. It was used as a girl’s dormitory.

Eugenics Movement 1910s – 1940s

In 1913, a commission appointed by the legislature determined that mentally and physically disabled individuals were perceived as criminals and unsuitable for citizenship because they posed a threat to societal peace. The commission recommended that such individuals should not reproduce and must be removed from society to obtain appropriate treatment.

The feeble-minded were segregated from society to prevent hereditary transmission. It was considered a problem and institutionalization was the solution. By 1914, 30 states had marriage laws preventing feeble-minded persons from marrying. AMO President Martin Barr believed these laws were not good enough and sterilization should be enforced to prevent the feeble-minded from passing on their genes.

For a period of four months in 1914, Dr. Wilhelmine E. Key conducted a survey for the Public Charities Association of Pennsylvania.

steps in mental development — Steps in Mental Development

By 1915, it was apparent that there were more feeble-minded and epileptic individuals in the state than the means to provide for their care. Feeble-mindedness was widely believed to be hereditary, and the causes of poverty, alcoholism, prostitution, and crime were attributed to the feeble-minded, who were deemed in need of lifelong care rather than mere treatment.

There was a push for less legislation and more provision. The two state institutions, Polk and Pennhurst, should be enlarged to house more feeble-minded and an appropriation was made to admit females to two newly constructed cottage buildings. It would raise the population to two-hundred-and-six men, seventy-two women, three-hundred-and-forty-eight boys, and eighty-three girls.

In 1916, the Public Charities Association of Pennsylvania inaugurated a traveling exhibit on feeble-mindedness, advocating for the segregation of feeble-minded women. The belief was that if all feeble-minded women were separated from society, the issue of feeble-mindedness would cease to exist since they would not be able to reproduce.

As a result of these convictions, a female colony was established at the Eastern Pennsylvania State Institution for the Feeble-Minded and Epileptic to institutionalize feeble-minded youth of both genders, separating them from society and from one another.

Society’s endeavors to prevent the feeble-minded from reproducing were disheartening since they were ineffective. Marriage laws that prohibited feeble-minded individuals from marrying failed to stop them from reproducing, sterilization was widely criticized, and mandatory institutionalization of all feeble-minded people would only be successful if there were enough institutions available.

Pennhurst State School, Administration Building

Not only did society want to institutionalize the feeble-minded, but they also supported the practice of sterilization.

Sara M. Soffel, a county court judge said in 1935, “If we selectively sterilize the feeble-minded, we will block off a large part of the population who contribute to our social problem.”

A bill advocating the sterilization of the unfit was presented to the board of the State Federation of Pennsylvania Women with hopes of presenting it to Legislature. Dr. Camilla Anderson of Mayview State Hospital said, “We have immigration inspections at all our seaports, but we leave birth – the greatest port of entry – entirely unguarded.”

Deinstitutionalization

Pennhurst, as we call it today, is historic because it was the first institution to draw attention from the media on harsh conditions in a five-part 1968 television report anchored by news correspondent Bill Baldini. The report called “Suffer the Little Children” and the 1974 lawsuit, Halderman vs. Pennhurst State School and Hospital, found the institution guilty of violating the constitutional rights of patients, leading to its eventual closure by 1986. This sparked a nationwide investigation into all state institutions, and ultimately initiated the process of deinstitutionalization.

Old memo listing 14 bullet points of the third shift ward routine.

On April 10, 2010, a historical marker was unveiled at the Pennhurst property commemorating the history of the institution. It reads:

Between 1908 and 1987, over 10,500 individuals in Pennsylvania with developmental disabilities resided at Pennhurst.

The closure of the institution was the ultimate result of public controversy surrounding the inhumane treatment of its residents and two decades of complex litigation, which included three arguments before the US Supreme Court.

Groundbreaking advocacy and new public policy, including transition to community-based living, made Pennhurst a milestone in the disabilities civil rights movement.”

Some Who Went to Court

George Sorotos, who was seven years old in 1970, was committed to Pennhurst by a social welfare agency. Despite his foster mother visiting him every week for seven years, he was found injured on almost every visit. Recently, Sorotos was found with apparent cigarette burns on his chest.

Nancy Beth Bowman was subjected to physical abuse by a staff member who used a shackle belt on her. She was also abused on two other occasions. During her stay in the institution, she learned to bite and push people. In response to this behavior, the institution punished her by confining her to a bare, locked seclusion room for several days at a time.

Vintage 1920s aerial image of the lower and upper campus at Pennhurst State School and Hospital. Spring City, Pennsylvania.

Linda Taub spent nine years at Pennhurst with no significant activities to occupy her time. While on the ward, she often just sat and rocked. Although Linda was able to walk, her parents discovered during one visit that she had been restrained in a wheelchair with a straitjacket. When they questioned the staff about it, they were told that restraining her in this manner allowed the staff to always know where she was.

This post is continued on the next 2 pages.

Pages: 1 2 3