Mental illness and disability were family problems for English people living between 1660 and 1800．Most women and men who suffered from mental illness were not institutionalized，as this was the period before the extensive building of mental hospitals．Instead，they were housed at home，and cared for by other family members．
Now a new study by Cambridge historian Dr．Elizabeth Foyster will reveal the impact on families of caring for mentally ill and disabled relatives．
Much has been written about the insane themselves but few studies have considered mental illness from the perspective of the carers．The lifetime burden of caring for those individuals whose mental development did not progress beyond childhood，and who contemporaries labeled as 'idiots' or 'fools'，has been little explored by historians．Foyster's research，which has been funded by the Leverhulme Trust，will carefully examine the emotional and economic consequences for families at a time when the Poor Law bound them to look after their mentally ill and disabled family members．
By asking key questions about the impact of 'care in the community' in the 18th century，F(xiàn)oyster hopes that her research will bridge social and medical history．Specifically，she aims to provide an historical perspective for contemporary debates such as how resources can be stretched to provide for children with learning difficulties and an aging population．
"The stresses and strains of family life were worsened by high infant mortality and low life expectancy，and many individuals were pushed towards mental breakdown，" she explained． "Moreover，inherited conditions，senility（高齡） and what today would be described as 'special needs' could put great emotional demands on family members who had primary responsibility for their sick or disabled relatives．"
The research will shed light upon how caring for the mentally ill and disabled raised difficult issues for families about the limits of inter-generational responsibility，and whether family ties were weakened or strengthened by the experience．The questions of how far shame was attached to having insanity or idiocy within a family，and at what point families began to seek outside help，will also be addressed．
"The family must have seemed an inescapable feature of daily life between 1660 and 1800，" said Foyster． "Although there were those who were abandoned and rejected，for the majority，mental disability was accommodated within the family unit．I aim to get to the heart of what this really meant for people's lives．"
（1）Which is NOT the reason why those mentally ill and disabled were not institutionalized from 1660 to 1800？
C
C
A．Mental illness and disability were family problems then．
B．The extensive building of mental hospitals didn't start yet．
C．They were abandoned by the government and the family．
D．The family would be found guilty if they didn't care for them
（2）Why does Foyster want to carry out this study？
A
A
A．Because it can provide some food for thought for some current social issues．
B．Because the stresses and strains of family life have driven many people crazy．
C．Because she's looking for ways to communicate with the sick or disabled people．
D．Because the limits of intergenerational responsibility in such families interest her．
（3）Which question will NOT be studied in the research？
A
A
A．How should resources today be stretched to provide for an aging population？
B．How did caring for the sick and disabled affect the family's earning power？
C．How shameful did a family feel when their insane or disabled relatives were found out？
D．At what point did those families have to begin to look for outside help？
（4）The passage is written in order to
D
D
．
A．reveal the impact on families of caring for mentally ill and disabled relatives
B．provide an historical perspective to contemporary debates
C．shed light upon whether family ties were weakened or strengthened
D．introduce a new historical study carried out by a Cambridge historian
