Customer Reviews

The Lives They Left Behind: Suitcases from a State Hospital Attic

5 star:		(24)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

I was excited about this book when I heard about it and looked forward to it eagerly. The idea behind it was absolutely brilliant. How wonderful would it be to have access to the possessions, writings, and records of the disenfranchised people who were committed to psychiatric facilities back in the "dark ages of psychiatry"? The writers made a claim that they researched intensively when writing this book; however, I was able to locate 15 errors in the first 50 pages without even looking twice. What happened to the "10 years of research"? The further I read, the more unsettled I became. The entire book was an exercise in blaming the mental health field for everything that ever happened to anyone with psychiatric issues, and, although the field frequently needs slapping, it needs an "eyes open" slapping instead of the blindfolded and repeated slam-crash-bang of a pinata stick.
The bottom line is this. Tell me the truth. Tell me upfront that you think that institutions stunk and that people were treated cruelly and that everyone was sick and blighted who was ever associated with the running of them. But don't take the lives of people who had pretty wretched lives to begin with and then use them to underscore your personal belief that psychiatry and institutions are bad and evil. That is bathos and victimization at its finest. No one who was "exhibited" in this book gave their permission for their lives and for the minutiae that made up their existence to be examined and cross-examined and interpreted so broadly. That is taking advantage of people with psychiatric issues and using them for your own purposes. That is what I object to. It's making a profit off of other people's misery and to that I object and will always object. That is intellectual dishonesty and making a buck off someone who was helpless by using them to make your point, whether or not they would have agreed with you. And in my egg-headed highfalutin' world that is a bad thing.
The absolute worst thing about this book was that the authors didn't allow these people to have their psychiatric issues. They tried to reframe all their subjects' interactions so that every bizarre thing they did, said, or thought was reframed as "normal" and any interpretation of their thought processes as being "different" was seen as the inherent evilness of the doctors and "the system". This makes me worry about the intent of the authors. Is mental illness or psychiatric illness or whatever you want to call it such a bad and shameful thing that we can't call it by its name or look at it in the daylight? Are we so ashamed of it that we have to make it into something that it isn't? If we do so, then we deny the humanity and struggle that is part and parcel of it just to soothe our own personal fears. Where is the bravery and the dignity in that, pretending something doesn't exist just because we ourselves are frightened by it? I personally like a lot of people who have psychiatric issues but I don't need to pretend that everything they do is normal to like them. Too bad the authors don't have the same viewpoint. This could have been a classic work with the all the rich sources of information they had access to. Instead it's a cheap dime store crime novel without any of the subtleties of the genre.

I bought this book primarily thinking that it would be an even-handed exercise in sociology and amateur archaeology. As someone who really enjoys exploring abandoned buildings and postulating on the things people "leave behind" to be forgotten and then found again, I was really excited about the idea of finding out more about the lives of actual mental patients during the period of widespread institutionalization. Overall, my reaction to this book was mixed.

First of all, the authors of this book take a very strong anti-asylum tone. While it stands to reason that conditions in the asylums at the time were far from what would be considered acceptable today, no comparison is made nor information given as to how Willard compared to other asylums at the time. Furthermore, the authors shed very little light on the condition of psychology as it existed in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s. Other than arguing that a culture prevailed which encouraged a maintenance of the status quo in order for the hospitals to exploit the free labor of the patients, little insight is given (and even this argument is weakly made).

Another problem that I found with this book is that very little information is given on how the details of the lives of these people were acquired. While some of the information is explicitly drawn from the case files as well as interviews with workers at the asylum, the narratives are filled with holes in which the authors posit a number of intriguing, but unsupported theories. An example of this may be seen in a description of someone as being "close to her family" due to the fact that she had personal phone numbers in her possessions. Likewise, on several occasions the book posits that a patient may not have been popular or easy to get along with, due to the frequency of her changing address. While certainly one possibility, such assertions are made continuously on a whole variety of subjects with what appears to be scant grounding.

Generally, the portrayal of health care the authors seek to portray is one which is callous, cold, unsympathetic, and deliberately exploitative. Generally, the people analyzed by the authors are portrayed as being generally normal, ordinary people- who through some quirk, a high degree of emotional stress, or even sinister machinations- were involuntarily warehoused in a sort of prison which only worsened their condition. The symptoms of the patients are presented in a curious, detached sort of way, and at no time do the authors raise any questions with regards to what sorts of conditions the patients may actually have had, or that they were genuinely suffering from serious mental disorders. While some of this may certainly be true, the positions of the authors- that people were incarcerated for decades in mental hospitals simply for becoming upset in public or trying to talk with the president-- seems unlikely.

When the man in question is arrested by the Secret Service and sent to a mental hospital for trying to see the president, the authors postulate that the Ukranian man was just misunderstood and didn't realize that one does not simply walk into the White House to meet the president. The fact that he refers to himself as Jesus Christ in his interviews is not seen to be a sign of mental disorders, so much as an unusual way of expressing his personal innocence. While this is all very psycho-analytical, it does very little to explain how a handful of doctors-- faced with overcrowding and deteriorating facilities-- would have been unable to see the misunderstanding and let him go instead of keeping him locked up for 30+ years.

Furthermore, the book is compounded by a number of factual errors. For example, in describing the arrival of a Ukranian national to the hospital, the authors refer to the armies of tanks which fought in the Ukraine in 1940 after the Germans had pushed past Leningrad (for the record, the Germans did not invade until 1941 and Leningrad is in Russia, on the opposite side of the country from the Ukraine). Likewise a half-French, half-Italian woman is described as coming from countries from which there were "few immigrants to the United States."

Overall, this book is an interesting look at the lives of people held in almost permanent sequestering inside a mental hospital. However, given the ideological bent of the writers, one cannot help but feeling as though the tragic lives of these people are being filled in or "colored" in order to make a case for the elimination of in-patient mental health care.

In this this extraordinary, groundbreaking book, the authors introduce us to buried treasure. From their belongings and hospital records, the "forgotten lives"of institutionalized mental patients are re-constructed. Not only do we become privy to the harsh environment in which they are forced to subsist, also we see their unique hopes and dreams - evidence that these mental patients are more like us than different. The profiles of the ten individuals are rendered with tenderness and sometimes a bit of humor, not at the patient's expense but rather at their keepers. At bottom and central, is the illumination of a dark period of our history that the authors point out remains relevant today. Most importantly, a reading will provoke feelings and generate a different way of thinking about how one tumbles into the role of life-long mental patient.
Ronald Bassman, PhD

Not one review before mine gave a score of "average". Folks either really like this book or absolutely hate it. The numerous errors and typos were easy to spot. The authors quickly established that they had "an axe to grind". But in most of their observations they were talking about institutional care of the past, rather than the current system. Not to say that events upon which they report aren't still happening. I do think the authors do a reasonable job of showing that a number of the cases upon which they report did not have a "wretched" before Willard. Examples such as "She is in a [private boarding] home and refused to leave after being ordered out and used vulgar and obscene language" seems pretty weak as justification for a lifetime of institutional commitment. And it does seem clear that the culture of the time resulted in very little timely research regarding the underlying reasons behind the patient's abnormalities. I do not share the view that these folks would have been upset with their stories being told, in fact with varying degrees, those that could think coherently would have probably welcomed it.

I was gravely disappointed by this book. What could have been a unique, enlightening, and fascinating piece of work was simplified beyond belief, full of opinions instead of research, and really did far less justice to the individuals profiled than the author appeared to believe.

And...ok, this is an extreme pet peeve of mine...the editing was terrible. What it is lately about editing that has become so difficult? And we're not even talking about true editing, just simply making certain there are no typos and that form and grammar are correct. This was so poorly done it was painful to read.

I had looked forward to this book for some time, so I was very disappointed when I got through the first ten or so pages and realized it really wasn't for the thoughtful reader who wants solid research behind a story. No, it was a quick read for a non-critical thinker that likes to be hand-fed polemics.

Sorry.

As a student in the field of abnormal psychology, mental illness and neuroscience, and having a younger brother with Autism, I was insulted to find what this book really held. I do believe that this book could have real potential if it was written the right way, by people that have the compassion and understanding for people with mental illnesses. All I found was the victimization of the people who once resided at the institution, and the bad assumptions of how mental health should be taken care of by people who don't truly know what they're talking about. I don't understand why they turned the idea of psychoanalysis into something that should be left untouched because it is evil. There is much to be learned from the field, and it shouldn't just be swept under the rug or be turned on when it is brought up. Shame on the authors of this book. You all are really missing the bigger picture.

There seems to be a common link in all the negative reviews: people who haven't been brought up-to-date on the latest psychiatric research, people who think that these people were "dangerous" mentally ill persons, and people who think these things were fine for the patient's own good.

First, there is a very large and constantly growing base of research suggesting that psychiatric medication is either of very little use or even detriment in many cases. Please look up the evidence of the inefficacy of antidepressants, the addictive properties of benzodiazepines, and tardive dyskinesia.

I would also like to point out that, while many people have spoken of and believe in chemical imbalances in the brain, there is absolutely no conclusive evidence for it and quite a few studies to cause doubt. Robert Whitaker's "Anatomy of an Epidemic" lists many good studies to this affect.

Secondly, many people still buy into the erroneous and disturbing belief that mentally ill persons are dangerous to "normal" people. May I suggest educating yourselves through the information available from organizations like nami.org. It is estimated that one in four people will experience a mental illness at some point In their lives. Also, the mentally ill are LESS likely to commit a violent act, but ten times as likely to be a victim. If you think you know no persons with mental illness, perhaps they are just too scared to tell you.

Lastly, do a google search on "mental health recovery." There are many who had been institutionalized for decades, people who now live full, happy, productive lives. Do you think institutionalization "fixed" these people, that it was for their own good? Those who lost years, decades, who missed seeing their children grow, who were kept, INVOLUNTARILY confined with no conviction and no crime... I believe they would not agree, especially with the newfound knowledge that they are healthy, thriving citizens now.

I would, as a final word of caution, like to point out a startling trend of saying, "Well, that was just the culture back then!" Let me remind you that, at various points in human history, things such as slavery, inequality for women, and death for "backwards" religious thinking were "just part of the culture." Does that make any of those things justifiable? Or did outrage with such intolerances fuel much-needed change within various social systems?

Why then would you condemn a man or woman with no violent tendencies, no criminal record, without even a hint of dangerous leanings aside from "mental illness", to a lifetime of incarceration?

THAT is why this book and others like it is important. People can try and rationalize their unwarranted hatred and bigotry all they like, but in the end, it is still hatred and bigotry unwarranted.

This book is so much more than just empty suitcases. Its the story of how many individuals were left to rot in mental facilities. There are stories where people existed in these institutions for half their life or more. Some who were not ill but were banished to these hospitals for just an episode of weird behavior.

Its a sad tell of living on the inside that should not be ignored. Its about how the system worked at particular times and how the system affected people's life. Good book for those people interested in mental health at various times in history.

This book was recommended to me by someone who is not involved in psychiatric care and I would also recommend it to someone who doesn't have a lot of knowledge about psychriatric care. Other reviews talk about the author's biases and some of the writing flaws in the book. And those flaws are definately there but I think those flaws are not so strong that they should override the stories of the people who owned those suitcases.

As someone who has spent some time in Syracuse and Chenango County it was interesting to see how the history of those areas is tied to some of these patients. I thought it was also interesting that most of these patients were part of the "Greatest Generation." I've often wondered what happened to those that were not strong enough to deal with the Great Depression and the wars. It's just not something you hear much about. I think that it is a topic that more people need to learn about, especially in light of our current social and political landscape.

The one thing that I found very strange is that despite the need to keep the center self-substaining no one seems to have raided the suitcases for clothing or other valuables. On one hand it's good that the center didn't take absolutely everything these people had but on the other hand it's got to be a terrible thing to lose complete physical contact with the world you used to know. That, in an of its self, would be a terrrible mental burden.

The book has its flaws but what book doesn't. I still think it's worth reading to gain a unique look at 10 people's lives.

I like one-of-a-kind books, and this is one of them. Many reviews tell what the book is about. So i'll make this short and sweet. The stories left me wishing they'd wrote about everyone who had a suitcase left in the attic. I couldnt put this book down; my heart was pounding, and i cried over some of the stories/lives. The photos are amazing and i wish there were so many more of them. I hope to be able to see the traveling exhibit in person.

I thank the authors for their project, and for writing the book, and allowing readers into this world. I have recently added historical non-fiction to my list of many fav types of books, and this one added to my learning. For those who dont like critisizms of the way things were done in the past - that's how we learn and move on and do better. This is the way things were done then - and it's pretty horrible. The reason i chose this book also was becuz i came on Amazon.com looking for a book about the mental hospital near Philly that reporter Bill Baldini had done a famous video series on - but could find none. I chose this one instead, and i'm glad i did.

People need to not hide from bad things. Sometimes people give their lives to help others - and i feel that the people who left their suitcases behind did just that. Awesome book.