Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 2023-471g4--week_2_day_2 [2023/09/07 00:10] – 68.98.147.134
+++ 2023-471g4--week_2_day_2 [2023/09/07 07:02] (current) – 68.98.147.161
@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 . Confinement at home is discussed at the beginning of Shorter's book. The mentally unwell were obviously not being treated well at home, versus in institutions later on. Accounting for anomalies in treatment, was a one size fits all approach to mental health even possible? -RJD
+. I found Pinel's three syntheses to be quite introspective. The discussion of the Silence, Mirror, and Judgement put into perspective for me just how isolating it could be in an asylum. Even if the psychiatrists have good intentions, from the patients perspective, the place can be a living hell. In what ways have Pinel's three synteheses been used today, if at all, and did  these ideas prove to be effective in helping the ill? - Evan
+. How could some scholars argue that mental illness itself does not exist, if the mentally ill had to be sent to the asylum for a reason? Without mental illness, there would be no reason to send the patient to the asylum, thereby avoiding the apparent risk of developing mental illness? It seems to me to be an aspect of humanity that is ubiquitous. - Evan ps. I hope my explanation after the question made sense
+. Something that was interesting to me was what Shorter said about Bedlam, one of the oldest psychiatric hospitals, was that even though it is known to have been brutal, it is mentioned that private patients must’ve been treated better in these older psychiatric hospitals. This makes me wonder exactly how much better were the private patients who could afford to pay were treated compared to the public patients? - Teresa
+. As said by Foucault, patients of the Retreat must become aware “of [their] own madness” through being punished for “any manifestation of madness.” Therefore they would feel guilty for the punishment they received and would have no one else to blame but themselves. I question how long they used this method of punishment and self realization? - Teresa
+. In Shorter’s work he states that “these private institutions offered custody, not therapy, for individuals too unmanageable for their own families at home.” I’m curious to know what people consider to be “unmanageable” when it comes to a person, especially their family member. -Jake Martin
+. In our reading Madness and Civilization, the author states “Everything at the Retreat is organized so that the insane are transformed into minors. They are regarded as children who have an overabundance of strength…They must be given immediate punishments and rewards.” This struck me as a little odd that they would be considering or classifying people as “Children” and treating them as so. -Jake Martin
+Something that is discussed in the History of Psychiatry and in The Mad Among Us is the increase of elderly patients. As families became less willing to care for these individuals, they would send them to these hospitals. Since many of the hospitals were placed far away from cities, it left the patients isolated and subject to abuse. Does the treatment of the patients play into the idea that society viewed these people as burdens? - Darian James
+The economics of caring for “insane” people affect everything from the buildings to the individual families. In The Mad Among Us it discusses the financial difficulties from the perspective of the hospitals, but the other economic factor is the family's financial situation. How did a community's financial situation play into their treatment of these people? - Darian James
+. Let me preface all of this by stating my anti-Foucault bias; having read Discipline and Punish, which I consider to be the pinnacle of human achievement in boredom, I think Foucault gets a fair bit wrong here. Despite his very valid and well argued critiques of asylums, and the state of mental healthcare more broadly, Foucault, in my opinion, ends up falling onto a very anti-treatment view. Foucault erroneously seems to conflate medicalization of mental disorders with ignorance or disinterest in the condition of the patient. I think this tension still exists in the popular imagination, that to be scientific, one need ignore the lived experience of a patient. While not much of a particularly rousing question, I find myself asking why?  Why can’t two things be true at once? Why must a medical eye be seen so often as callous indifference? -RM
+. It’s fascinating to me to compare the portrayal of psychiatry in Shorter and Foucault. I think in many ways Shorter takes an overly rosy view of the role and impact of psychiatric care, especially early care, while as I said, I think that Foucault takes an overly dour view. Where does this fundamental disconnect come from? What aspect of psychiatry are they each reacting so strongly to? -RM