Most Helpful Customer Reviews
36 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Freud, Prozac, and managed care, June 5, 2000
By A Customer
This review is from: Of Two Minds: The Growing Disorder in American Psychiatry (Hardcover)
This most recent book by T. M. Luhrmann distills the results of four years' observation, interviewing and experiencing the theory and practice of American psychiatry, in venues ranging from one of the last private psychoanalytic residential centers to neuroscience labs, psychiatric conferences, and elite biomedically oriented hospitals. Her previous books dealt with how people make sense of their worlds: Persuasions of the Witch's Craft showed how witches in modern England come to believe in astrology and magic; and _The Good Parsi_ examined the Parsis' reaction to their fall from grace as India's colonial elite. Now she turns her attentions to some of the great existential questions of modern society: what is mental health? how can we intervene in people's lives when we only have imperfect knowledge? and what does it mean to be a person? Luhrmann began by following the training process of a group of new psychiatric residents, to see how medical students become psychiatrists, and how they negotiate between the two, often antagonistic, models of psychiatry: biomedical and psychodynamic. The book contains great descriptions of patients and residents, of the quirks of different kinds of programs, and of how neither the psychoanalysts nor the biomedical specialists really believe in most of the DSM categories per se, but use them empirically and pragmatically as a means to treating the problems they represent. Luhrmann is sympathetic to the position of psychiatrists, but fair. She makes the point quite strongly that both biomedicine and analysis have their down sides, that both have internal theoretical and practical problems, but that they're addressing an absolutely real need. The dichotomy between the two, according to Luhrmann, is a false one which grew out of historical differences (namely the near-monopoly of psychoanalysis in the 1950s and 1960s) and which has been prevented from a reconciliation by the perceptions and policies of managed care, probably to the detriment of both patients and of the financial bottom line. The book is extremely readable, which is welcome in the field of medical writing, which is often either thinly disguised politics or thickly layered jargon. Luhrmann manages to range from William Styron's autobiography to budget cuts in a state psychiatric clinic to debates between Hume and Kant over the nature of personhood without once losing her readers. She also has written a book which would be almost impossible for one of the insiders to write, because most psychiatric professionals are thoroughly socialized into the assumptions and habits of medicine long before they come to psychiatry. And so she does what a good anthropologist is supposed to do -- to give us a new perspective on our own lives. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in American psychiatry, the effects of managed care, or the profound challenges posed by the paradoxes of mental illness.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Well done!, January 27, 2001
This review is from: Of Two Minds: The Growing Disorder in American Psychiatry (Hardcover)
I'm a practicing psychiatrist, with the requisite 10 years in to (in theory) know what I'm doing. I'm grateful to Dr. Luhrmann for the thoroughness of her experiential research and the humanity of her expression. The book evoked memories of powerful, sometimes painful experience for me as I read her descriptions of internship and psychiatric residency; her accounts are realistic and carefully written. Her description of the profession-threatening impact of market forces should be required reading for anyone interested in the future of mental healthcare. My only real trouble with the book is in its mutually excluding premise of "either/or"; that one's perspective on human behavior and its tragedies must be viewed either objectively, in reductionistic biomolecular ("nature") terms, or intuitively, through the subjective lens of psychodynamics("nurture"). I, too, was weaned in a psychdynamic orientation, then later yanked by the both the shock of witnessing severe illness and the expediency of managed care psychiatry to a more medical model. I ultimately have been disappointed by the pure biologic orientation. It usually provides a mere pharmacologic "band-aid", insufficient for lasting change unless the patient's experience of the world is also addressed - something no pill can achieve but the "heavy lifting" of psychodynamic psychotherapy can. My own conclusion is that neither model stands up fully on its own, either diagnostically or in treatment. I suspect the best path is in integrating the perspectives. And why not? We know, for instance, that the scarring of witnessing/experiencing trauma in early life commonly leads to the extreme suffering of PTSD - a syndrome that, though fully "situational" as opposed to genetic, appears, and is, "hard-wired" and responsive to medication intervention. Yet we also know that some who experience similar trauma don't become cursed with insomnia, night terrors and hypervigilence - suggesting a component of a biological nature. We trust so in the dogma of the double-blind study, but even that gets tarnished when recent studies show 80% or more of supposed blinded subjects can guess whether they are on active drug or placebo - potentially casting at least a little doubt on a generation of pharmacology research, not to mention an entire industry. Frankly, we really still know so little! That Dr. Lurmann preferentially interviewed either babes-in-the-woods(with an understandibly shaky perspectival foundation) or academic attendings (who are commonly where they are via a narcissistic confidence in the camp he or she cast his or her fate) - may account for the intellectual myopia inherent in insisting primacy of one of the two stances. Only in attempting to integrate the two and understanding the field within a wider philosophical and spiritual perspective have I found an inhabitable worldview. My own study has reached outside the usual to philosophy, anthropology and spirituality (I recommend reading Hegel, Aurobindo and especially Ken Wilber in attempting to understand how to integrate this complex matter). Nevertheless, this book is a wonderful piece on how things are in the polarized climate of the psychiatric profession; I recommend it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
psychiatry today, May 24, 2000
By A Customer
This review is from: Of Two Minds: The Growing Disorder in American Psychiatry (Hardcover)
Of Two Minds is destined to become a classic. Luhrmann writes with style and verve about more than three 3 years of participant observation of the modern world of psychiatry. Her book is rich in quotes and observations about the daily life of psychiatrists. The main thesis of Luhrmann's book is that the world of psychiatry is currently split between two different therapeutic models, the biological and the psychodynamic, and, at this point, the big battalions belong to the biological camp. Luhrmann succeeds in describing what this actually means with respect to human life - the lives of both patients and psychiatrists. Luhrmann's book takes on one of the major problems of modern society. The book is a good read, the illustrations are gripping, and the treatment is always balanced and far-sighted. She is sensitive to the moral dimension of human life and the great underlying American conflict between doing things the efficient way versus the moral way.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|