Mental diseases: a public health problem. James Vance May
Читать онлайн книгу.
of material which we have in our hospitals, together with the excellent clinical and laboratory facilities at our disposal, should enable us to accomplish much more. An analysis of our case records, if properly made, would give us definite information as to the clinical aspects of the mental diseases we are dealing with. These should be made the subject of exhaustive study by the scientific institutes and other research departments conducted by the various state authorities to an extent never yet undertaken or even attempted. If it cannot be done by the states it should be instituted by the federal government.
The fact that the field of influence of our public institutions should extend far beyond the walls of the hospital is one which has received general recognition only within the last few years. Every hospital has a large number of patients still within its legal custody but who have been allowed to return temporarily to their homes or occupations while still under observation pending their final discharge. These are now, to a very limited extent, under the supervision of social workers. The hospitals have unfortunately, owing to a lack of funds, never had a sufficient number of social workers to look after them properly. The hospitals as a rule now maintain out-patient departments where those who have been allowed to go home on visit or resume their occupations are encouraged to come for assistance and advice. The public is gradually learning to take advantage of this opportunity to obtain expert advice on matters relating to mental hygiene and secure professional opinions as to the disposition and treatment of members of the family showing symptoms of incipient mental disorders. This field of influence extends even further. Clinics have been established in various locations outside of the hospitals in the larger cities in several states. In New York they are conducted by state hospital physicians in Binghamton, Brooklyn, Buffalo, Plattsburg, Dunkirk, Jamestown, Olean, Salamanca, Poughkeepsie, Peekskill, Yonkers, Mount Vernon, Mineola, Newburgh, Kingston, Rochester, Middletown, Ogdensburg, Malone, Watertown, Utica, Schenectady, Ovid, Ithaca and New York City. Physicians and social workers are in attendance at all of these places. The last published report of the New York State Hospital Commission (1919) shows that 7,203 visits were made to these clinics during the year. Paroled patients made 5,102 of these, discharged patients 265 and others who had no connection with the hospitals at all, 1,836. In addition to this the hospital social workers made 3,496 visits to paroled patients as well as four hundred and sixty-two visits to other patients for the purpose of preventing mental diseases. Situations were obtained for one hundred and sixty-seven discharged patients. An enormous amount of work was also done in history taking, etc. Numerous clinics have been established in Massachusetts by the Department of Mental Diseases. [28] During the year ending November 30, 1919, a total of 4,333 visits were reported. Of these 3,057 were first visits. The number reported by the various hospitals was as follows:—Worcester State Hospital 1,278, Taunton State Hospital 182, Northampton State Hospital 458, Danvers State Hospital 282, Westborough State Hospital 177, Grafton State Hospital 129, Gardner Colony 65, Monson State Hospital 70, Foxborough State Hospital 27, Massachusetts School for the Feebleminded 541, Boston State Hospital (Psychopathic Department) 2,112. Clinics were maintained in the following localities:—Athol, Boston, Brockton, Danvers, Fitchburg, Foxborough, Gardner, Grafton, Gloucester, Greenfield, Haverhill, Lawrence, Lynn, Malden, Medfield, Monson, New Bedford, Newburyport, Northampton, Pittsfield, Salem, Springfield, Taunton, Waverley, Westborough, Worcester and Wrentham.
This is a gratifying evidence of progress. There are indications of an awakening. The hospital treatment of mental diseases will eventually be conducted on a much higher plane and along lines more nearly comparable to those of the general hospital. A study of legislation relating to mental disease shows that efforts are being made very generally to make their treatment a medical problem rather than a legal question. It has been no easy matter to obtain treatment for mental diseases, assuming a desire on the part of the individual to take advantage of such an opportunity. A review of our legal enactments shows that as a general rule it means a formal application, properly verified, an elaborate examination by two qualified physicians, an order of commitment by the judge of a court of record, a legal notice and an opportunity for a hearing if one is demanded. Pennsylvania as early as 1883 made provision for the immediate admission of such cases as required it, pending the usual court procedure. As has been shown in another chapter, arrangements have been legalized in many states for the emergency reception of mental cases, at least for those persons who are known to be dangerous to themselves or others. Temporary care enactments have been written into the law in various communities, making it possible to keep mental cases under observation for a limited period of time. In a large number of states it is now possible for a person requesting treatment voluntarily to receive it on his own application without any other legal formalities. Perhaps the greatest advance is the custom, not so infrequent now, of sending persons held by courts under a criminal process to a hospital for observation as to their mental condition. The fact should not be lost sight of that it is still possible to find "insane" persons in jails, poorhouses and county institutions in many parts of the country. Worse than this, however, is the custom of delegating their care to police officers. Nevertheless, distinct progress has been made.
As has already been shown, a study of methods of care in this country indicates that every state has passed through several very definite preliminary stages. These may be summarized as follows:—
1. A period of home care only. During the colonial days mental cases were cared for at home or not at all. There was nothing else that could be done for them at the time.
2. Confinement with criminals. In cases of unusual violence, dangerous persons were confined in jails, lockups and prisons. If necessary, under certain circumstances the law in some states even authorized the use of chains.
3. Almshouse care. There has been a time in practically every state when the poorhouse has been looked upon as the proper place for the insane.
4. Asylum care. As a result of the agitation of Dorothea Dix and others, mental diseases were eventually given custodial care in asylums.
5. Modern hospital care.
In 1894 Dr. S. Weir Mitchell [29] delivered the annual address at the semi-centennial meeting of the American Medico-Psychological Association in Philadelphia. It was a very painful occasion for many. His remarks may be summed up as a vigorous arraignment of the asylum methods of that day. He severely criticized the public, the state legislatures, boards of management and the hospital superintendents. His principal charge was that they were operating asylums along the lines of the past and were perfectly satisfied with what they had accomplished. He pointed out the necessity of properly qualified physicians, more scientific methods and modern treatment. "We have done with whip and chains and ill usage, and having won this noble battle have we not rested too easily content with having made the condition of the insane more comfortable?" It seems incredible that in the case records of that day he should have found no evidences "of blood counts, temperatures, reflexes, the eye-ground, color fields, all the minute examinations with which we are so unrestingly busy." One institution was unable to furnish Dr. Mitchell with a stethoscope or an ophthalmoscope! One of his criticisms was that few institutions for mental diseases had a training school for nurses or any provisions for hydrotherapy. His last words were almost a prophecy: "Fifty years hence, when we must all have been swept away, another will possibly stand in my place and tell your history, and to him and the bountiful wisdom of time I leave it to be declared whether I was right or wrong." Dr. Mitchell's description of the asylums and their methods was bitterly resented. Who is there today who would not feel that he was fully justified?
The time has come when we must again look to the future and prepare for it. The purely custodial care of mental diseases has led to a dread of asylums on the part of the public. There are unfortunately too many hospitals that are asylums in everything but name. The establishment of psychopathic hospitals and psychiatric clinics and the way in which they have been welcomed by the public is suggestive. The problems of mental diseases, as far as possible, must be approached from a general hospital point of view and the psychiatric hospital of the future must have a modern equipment, an efficient staff and adequate facilities for the employment of the latest methods. Above all, the institutions must be such that they will be looked upon by the community not merely as a place to which the insane may be sent for final disposition, but as hospitals where the development of mental