While mythical elfin figures, dwarfs, and leprechauns have fired the imagination of story tellers for centuries, the social adjustment of short children with growth retardation lacks the fairy tale luster, and the economic, social, and psychological impact of their body size often result in deviant and marginal status (Ablon, 1985). Growth retardation, a major universal clinical problem, is caused by a great variety of en docrine, genetic, and chronic illnesses, and Ablon (1988) refers to more than 100 types of differing etiology and physical characteristics. According to Rimoin and Lachman (1983), more than 80 specific cases of skeletal dysplasias and primary disorders of the bone struc ture result in short stature. Regardless of etiology, early literature described children with short stature as a single group and studies of personality characteristics have generally por trayed them as psychologically maladjusted (Young-Hyman, 1986). Holmes, Karlsson, and Thompson (1988), in a brief review of psychological adjustment problems of short stature, list more internalizing behavior problems, a greater number of somatic complaints and with drawal, less aggressive and dominant behaviors than their peers of average stature. Parents report high levels of problems related to internalizing and externalizing behavior and their teachers describe more internalization at school (Holmes, Hayford, & Thompson, 1982). Low self-esteem, high degree of social isolation, withdrawal, immaturity, and distur bance of body image are listed by Richman, Gordon, Tegtmeyer, Grouthamel, and Post (1986). The notion of psychological maladjustment of children with short stature has been chal lenged by Drotar, Owens, and Gotthold (1980) who report no significant differences in gen eral psychological adjustment, sex role development, or body image maturity between growth hormone-deficient children and a matched control group, and by Stabler and Underwood (1977) who found no significant differences in locus of control as anxiety in chil dren with the same etiology. Gordon, Grouthamel, Post, and Richman (1982) warned that since children with hypopituitarism represent less than 1% of the short children, the findings were not generalizable to children with short stature of different etiologies. These re searchers compared a group of children with constitutional short stature with children of nor mal height, both groups without a previous history of psychiatric difficulties, and found that children with constitutional short stature had significantly more behavior problems and less self-esteem than their matched control. The children with constitutional short stature were socially withdrawn and aloof individuals who expressed emotional concerns internally and tended to view themselves less favorably than children of normal height. Children with short stature were reported to be equally satisfied with their physical appearance. These divergent results may well reflect a lack of homogeneity in the adjustment process of children with short stature due to differing etiologies and to availability or nonavailability of treatment.