|
"LA PSICHIATRIA EUROPEA DAL 1800 AL 2004: ISTITUZIONI, CONCEZIONI E POLITICHE. EUROPEAN PSYCHIATRY FROM 1800 TO 2004: INSTITUTIONS, CONCEPTS AND POLICIES"
Note a margine del 'symposium' organizzato dalla "WPA section on History of Psychiatry" il giorno 11 novembre 2004 nel contesto del WPA International Congress (Firenze, 10-13 novembre 2004).
|
|
Giovedì 11 novembre 2004,
nell'ambito del "World Psychiatric Association International Congress"
(Firenze, 10-13 novembre 2004), si è tenuto il simposio della Sezione della
WPA di Storia della Psichiatria. Tre sono state le relazioni presentate:
quella della prof. Guarnieri dell'Università di Firenze ("Madness in
the home. Family care, psychiatry and welfare policies for the mentally ill
in the 19th and 20th centuries in Florence"), quella di P. Hoff (Zurigo,
Svizzera) dal titolo "Concepts of mental disorders in the 19th and 20th
century: why do they matter for present-day psychiatry?", ed infine
quella di E. Engstrom (Germania) intitolata "Jurisdictions of
psychiatric practice: on the emergence of university clinics in Germany".
Di seguito riportiamo gli 'abstracts' delle tre relazioni.
|
|||||
News del 2003 | ABSTRACTS | |||||
Recensioni dalla stampa 2003 | ||||||
MADNESS
IN THE HOME. fAMILY CARE, PSYCHIATRY AND WELFARE POLICIES FOR THE MENTALLY
ILL IN THE 19 TH AND 20TH CENTURIES IN FLORENCE.
P. Guarnieri University of Florence, Italy The view that the asylum is the only place for the
care of mentally ill was a prejudice. And it was necessary to promote
family care. This represented the main advice that noted psychiatrists
such as Lombroso and Tamburini offered at the time that the first Italian
law on insanity was being drafted. Why did this 1904 law, which insisted
on the dangerousness of patients in psychiatric hospitals, brush aside the
original advice of the experts? They model that they intended to extend to
the national level was clearly in force in Florence, where family care
began early –in 1866- and assumed important and lasting dimensions. In
some cases the psychiatric patients were sent to a farm family on contract
(according to a similar model for looking after abandoned children). But
most often the patients were officially assigned in custody to their own
families and subsidizes by the government (contrary to the idea that it
was the poor who wished to disembarrass themselves of their mentally-ill
relatives). The study of this experience, on the basis of archival sources
of the asylum and the provincial government, permits an understanding more
scholarly than activistic of a law that lasted too long, from 1904 to
1978, until the so-called Basaglia law. And
the confrontation of evidence and self-interest –on the part of the
municipality doctors, the psychiatrists, the police, the neighbors and in
addition a lady who was a
militant advocate of “aiding the working class”- gives us a rich group
narrative of attitudes and behavios concerning the mentally ill, important
for the history of psychiatry as well as for the history of the family and
of society.
|
||||||
Rivista Frenis Zero |
CONCEPTS OF
MENTAL DISORDERS IN THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY: WHY DO THEY MATTER FOR
PRESENT-DAY PSYCHIATRY?
P.Hoff Departement of Psychiatry, University of Zurich, Switzerland The concept which is applied by the individual psychiatrist in the treatment of his or her individual patient is not only a theoretical issue. It has a lot to do with practical questions like doctor-patient relationhip, patient's autonomy and long-term therapy planning. This paper discusses three major approaches to the concept of mental disorders since the late 18th century: the realistic, nominalistic and biographical approach. This framework is still in use nowadays. The implications of each concept for practical issues in psychiatric therapy and research are discussed.
|
|||||
Recensioni bibliografiche 2003 | JURISDICTIONS
OF PSYCHIATRIC PRACTICE: ON THE EMERGENCE OF UNIVERSITY CLINICS IN GERMANY.
E. Engstrom Max-Planck-Institute for Psychiatry, Munich, Germany The paper explores the emergence of university psychiatric clinics and their impact on professional development in late-nineteenth century Germany. It argues that these clinics represented a fundamental redistribution of expert labor insofar as academic practitioners acquired jurisdiction over the work of laboratory and bedside research, professional training, and hygienic prophylaxis. Focusing mainly on Wilhelm Griesinger's reform project at the Charite hospital in Berlin, it explores the professional politics of competing jurisdictional claims to control psychiatric practice - claims that pitted academicians, alienists, and representatives of other medical specialties against one another. The paper situates these jurisdictional disputes within the context of insitutional priorities, administrative structures, regional systems of psychiatric care, and growing public scrutiny of the profession in Imperial Germany. It illustrates how the organization of contemporary psychiatric practice is prefigured in debates that are nearly 150 years old.
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
Copyright- 2004 A.S.S.E.Psi.- Ce.Psi.Di.
Editor del sito web e responsabile editoriale: Giuseppe Leo