Sociology of Psychiatry
Thomas Szasz (1920-2012) and Michel Foucault (1926-1984) are widely considered as the key figures when discussing contesting perspectives on modern psychiatry. Similarities can be drawn between Szasz and Foucault in general terms, in that they both believed that psychiatry was a product of pseudo-science. Both have criticisms on the limitations of psychiatry. Thomas Szasz, a psychiatrist, academic and author, has been a foundational figure for those who are strongly opposed to modern psychiatry. His views and ideologies came into prominence in the spirit of the 1960s counter-cultural movement, with the questioning of the role of psychiatry as merely a social control mechanism. As a psychiatrist himself, he is also widely criticised for his antagonistic approach to his own field of practice. Bracken and Thomas (2010) are strongly critical of the use of binary distinctions in his work and its lack of sensitivity and its rigidity in terms of how mental health is understood.
Michel Foucault, on the other hand, was a post-structuralist and sociologist. His role as a post-structuralist was evident in the anti-psychiatry movement, where his primary concern was on relations of power and how almost all aspects of modern psychiatry relate back to power, or ‘disciplinary power’. He also concentrated profoundly on the history of psychiatry, in what he refers to as ‘archaeology’ – a historical examination of how certain ideas came to be accepted as true. Bracken and Thomas (2010) offer us a framework of both Szasz’s and Foucault’s key concerns in relation to modern psychiatry. They ask the question ‘Does medicine have a legitimate role to play in relation to madness and distress?’ What is compelling about their analysis and criticisms is that they are also trained practitioners in the field of psychiatry; this gives us greater insight into how anti-psychiatry is interpreted by those who practice it. To a large extent, they are more in favour of the Foucauldian approach, which
Michel Foucault, on the other hand, was a post-structuralist and sociologist. His role as a post-structuralist was evident in the anti-psychiatry movement, where his primary concern was on relations of power and how almost all aspects of modern psychiatry relate back to power, or ‘disciplinary power’. He also concentrated profoundly on the history of psychiatry, in what he refers to as ‘archaeology’ – a historical examination of how certain ideas came to be accepted as true. Bracken and Thomas (2010) offer us a framework of both Szasz’s and Foucault’s key concerns in relation to modern psychiatry. They ask the question ‘Does medicine have a legitimate role to play in relation to madness and distress?’ What is compelling about their analysis and criticisms is that they are also trained practitioners in the field of psychiatry; this gives us greater insight into how anti-psychiatry is interpreted by those who practice it. To a large extent, they are more in favour of the Foucauldian approach, which
Bibliography: Bracken, P. and Thomas, P. (2010) From Szasz to Foucault: On the Role of Critical Psychiatry. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, 17 vol.3 219-28. Szasz, T. 1989. Law, Liberty and Psychiatry: An Inquiry into the Social Uses of Mental Health Practices, 1st ed., ppt 2-5. Syracuse: University Press Edition. Szasz, T. 1988. Schizophrenia: the sacred symbol of psychiatry. 1st ed., ppt 10-12. Syracuse University Press Edition. Lynch, T. (2005) Beyond Prozac: Healing Mental Suffering Without Drugs. 1st ed., pp1 335. Mercier Press. Bracken, P. 2012. Psychiatric Power: A Personal View. Irish J Psych Med, Journal Article 29 (1).: 55-58 Foucault M. 2006. History of Madness. Khalfa J, editor, translator & Murphy J, translator. Routledge; Szasz T. The medicalization of everyday life. New York: Syracuse University Press; 2007. Katsakou C, Priebe S. (2007) Patients’ experiences of involuntary hospital admission and treatment: a review of qualitative studies. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc; 16: 172-8. Foucault, M. Psychiatric Power: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1973—1