1999
DOI: 10.1177/0957154x9901004005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

'Pitiless psychology': the role of prevention in British military psychiatry in the Second World War

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The report left the core dilemma unsolved: how to compensate the truly deserving (courageous men traumatized by combat) without rewarding those for whom psychological injury merely offered an escape from military duty (Shephard 1999). Its publication represented a high-water mark in the history of shell shock and henceforth the term disappeared from official medical and military vocabularies.…”
Section: History Of Post-combat Disorders E Jones 537mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The report left the core dilemma unsolved: how to compensate the truly deserving (courageous men traumatized by combat) without rewarding those for whom psychological injury merely offered an escape from military duty (Shephard 1999). Its publication represented a high-water mark in the history of shell shock and henceforth the term disappeared from official medical and military vocabularies.…”
Section: History Of Post-combat Disorders E Jones 537mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, the modern situation has forgotten lessons of the world wars (Shephard, 1999). Rather than self-consciously avoiding the effects of medical diagnoses, we have given adversity-linked distress its own terminology: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.…”
Section: Emergence Of Ptsd In the Dsmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Again, the key was to prevent these morbid psychological symptoms from forming (Spiegel, 2000). Shephard (1999) has characterized treatment approaches emerging from the world wars as "Pitiless Psychology," wherein adopted policies where characterized by "deterrence" strategies that included avoidance of diagnostic terms, rest with an expectation of return to battle, and elimination of pensions for war neuroses.…”
Section: Lessons From the World Warsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This distinction was invoked in making decisions about the grounds for determining disability both during and after combat, and it was also significant for determining criteria for awarding pensions. 6,10,11 Veterans from World War I were eligible for pensions as a consequence of suffering from shell shock, but concerns were raised about the large number of recipients and the possibility of malingering. As World War II loomed in the future and then occurred, British policy created strict criteria for recognizing and awarding disabilities secondary to shell shock/stress/neurastheniaall in the direction of minimizing or eliminating any rewards for disabilities considered to be psychogenic.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As World War II loomed in the future and then occurred, British policy created strict criteria for recognizing and awarding disabilities secondary to shell shock/stress/neurastheniaall in the direction of minimizing or eliminating any rewards for disabilities considered to be psychogenic. 10 After the end of World War II, American psychiatry decided to create a standard nomenclature that would be used by all psychiatrists; the impetus came initially from the Veterans' Administration and was influenced by the World War II experience, which required that psychiatrists from across the United States and from diverse training backgrounds develop a common language for discussing psychopathology, making diagnoses, and determining disability. This led to the formulation of a diagnostic category called Gross Stress Reaction, which appeared in the first Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-I), published in 1952.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%