 |
Sexual Expression
of
Mentally Retarded People:
Educational and Legal
Implications |
|
Paul R. Abramson
and Tracee Parker
University of California, Los Angeles Sheila R. Weisberg
Pepperdine University, School of Law |
| Issues
of legal consent and competency, in addition to the relevant psychological literature,
were reviewed in relation to institutional policy for sexual management of mentally
retarded individuals. The significance of comprehensive sex education was also discussed.
Finally, suggestions were provided than minimize prejudicial treatment of mentally
retarded people, without eliminating their opportunities for sexual expression. |
|
| According to the
1970 census, 89% of the 6.1 million mentally retarded individuals in the United States
obtained IQs above 53 (Hepner, 1979). These 89% have intellectual capabilities equivalent
to a sixth-grade education plus the social and vocational skills necessary for minimal
self-care (American Psychiatric Association, 1980). Despite their intellectual
capabilities, however, these mildly mentally retarded teenagers and adults are rarely
provided with sex education (Garrett, 1971; Gordon, 1972; Hall, 1974; Hall & Morris,
1976; Hall & Sawyer, 1978; Kempton, 1978; Meyerowitz, 1971; Sengstock, 1972). Perhaps
as a consequence, many, individuals incompletely evaluate the meaning and significance of
dating, marriage, contraception, sexual intercourse, pro- creation, and abortion.
Therefore, inadequate sexual knowledge is used-correctly or incorrectly-to deny
opportunities for sexual expression (Carruth, 1973; Hall & Sawyer, 1978; Green- gross,
1976). For instance, if mentally retarded individuals cannot satisfy |
|
the legal definition
of competency (capable of expressing themselves), they
are often presumed by caretakers to be unable to provide legal consent to a sexual act
(Deisher, 1973); but consent as a legal concept was designed as a protection against
sexual coercion, not to deny sexual expression. For example, in order to protect
mentally
retarded people from sexual abuse, it was concluded in ,People v. Dolly, 239 Cal.
App. 143, 48 Cal. Rptr. 478 (1966) that legal consent to sexual expression presupposes
intelligence capable of understanding the act, its nature, and its possible consequences. California Penal Code section 261.6 has since codified that requirement and
states that "consent shall be defined to mean positive cooperation in act or attitude
pursuant to an exercise of free will" (California Penal Code 261.6, West Supp. 1986).
This cannot be interpreted as eliminating sexual expression; rather, it is in- tended to
allow mentally retarded individuals to act "freely and voluntarily" when they
have "knowledge of the nature of the act or transaction involved" (Aguilar,
1984). |
|
|
1
|
 |
|
|
