Were this a subject list published in the last century and never revised since, such terms might pass unremarked, the assumption being that at that distant time people didn't know any better and that on no account would any library still employ such a collection of antique absurdities as a cataloging tool. (Instead, it would be classes among "curiosa," a souvenir of a long-past folkways and follies.) It boggles the imagination to stumble upon them not in some dusty relic, but boldface-printed by LC in 1966. To compound the puzzle: below the psychiatrically laughable term IDIOCY appears "Epilepsy as an sa referent. Must these people, who suffer enough with the malady itself, be further burdened with stupid reproaches, with superstition rooted slander?

Remedy: (a) Discard both "idiot" forms completely. IF a work deals with "Mental deficiency," "Brain damaged children", the "Mentally handicapped," "Psychiatric hospitals," or "Asylums," these terms already exist as primary heads, though "Mental retardation" might better express the ongoing condition of sub-normality than "Mental deficiency," while INSTITUTIONS (FOR ALCOHOLICS, THE BLIND, DEAF, etc._ would mark an improvement over the Dickensian ASYLUMS.

(b) It should be standard procedure once "a" is accomplished, but nonetheless worth underscoring, that "Idiocy" will be cleanly amputated from the "xx's" under EPILEPSY.