Recently, I had the opportunity to hear Susannah Cahalan
speak about the inspiration for her latest book, The Great Pretender. To
hear her speak about this book felt like a bit of a detective story, one that I
wanted to read.
Her own experience of being misdiagnosed with a mental
illness left Susannah with a keen sense of empathy and understanding for those
who are actually mentally ill. Upon hearing about a famous study, On Being Sane in Insane Places, she felt
the need to investigate further. In 1973, Stanford psychologist David Rosenhan
and seven other people sought to understand or expose the mental health system,
by pretending to be insane. With just a few symptoms, hearing voices that said “thud,
empty, hollow” led to varying stays in mental hospitals and overwhelming
diagnoses of schizophrenia. How could seemingly “sane” people be labelled as “insane”?
What does it say about doctors and the entire mental health system if they
could be so easily fooled by “sane” people? Plus, why would anyone subject
themselves to this kind of study? At the start of this journey, Susannah had a
deep respect and admiration for Dr. Rosenhan. In his own way, he was trying to
help. But did he help? That’s the big mystery Susannah was trying to solve.
It’s been sooooooooooo long since I read a non-fiction book
cover-to-cover. Full disclosure, I work at a book publisher (not the one that
published this book) on non-fiction books. Because I work on non-fiction five
days a week, I rarely read it for pleasure. But I was fascinated by this book.
I had never heard of this study. I understand the point of doing a study like
this, but what about the long-term impact on the participants? Many of the
people, a.k.a. pseudopatients, were put on heavy-duty medication – not everyone
was able to fake swallowing the pills. How does that effect there psyche going
forward? I’m not entirely clear if it was an ethical breech for Dr. Rosenhan to
be an actual pseudopatient, but it sure looks that way. How could he be
objective when might have had a predetermined outcome?
The results of the study showed there was an emphasis on
medication versus actual treatments, like therapy. Shove a pill down someone’s
throat and hope they’re cured of depression or of hearing voices. Looking into
the benefits of alternative therapies seems to be a modern-day technology. Some
good came out of On Being Sane in Insane
Places, the criteria for mental diagnoses became more stringent. But as
Susannah delved deeper into Rosenhan’s records, she found his research was
lacking. He took liberties, stretching the truth into outright lies. There were
lots of holes/inconsistencies in his methodology. It’s quite possible that not
all of the pseudopatients even exist. Did he just make things up? Who knows,
but he definitely twisted things to fit a narrative rather than just reporting
the facts. Would such a shoddy study be published in a medical journal today? I’d
like to think it couldn’t happen, but anything is possible.
This book was compulsively readable but sad at the same
time. In modern society, the mental health system isn’t much better than it was
in 1973. Instead of being treated in hospitals, the mentally ill are more often
to be found in prisons or homeless. It’s hard to get into a hospital, due to
the lack of beds, doctors, and treatment. The book ends where it began, “If. .
.sanity and insanity exist. . .how shall we know them?” (Pg. 298). I'm not sure.
Rating: Superb
No comments:
Post a Comment