Edmund Burke once said that, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." This is often quoted as simply, "Evil prospers when good men do nothing." In light of this statement, and 20th Century history, what should be the U.S policy towards genocide? As we discussed in class there have been numerous cases of genocide over the last 100 years from the Armenian genocide to The Holocaust, the killing fields of Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, and the ongoing conflict in Darfur. These unfortunate events have provided opportunities for the U.S take the lead and make a stand on the issue of genocide. Do you believe that appropriate measures were taken? How might we have handled them differently?
What can still be done today, if anything? Historically speaking, what significance will our use of the word genocide, or lack thereof, have when referring to certain events? Should the U.S. officially recognize the Armenian genocide as an act of genocide or would this symbolic action, so long after the fact, be insignificant? What would it accomplish if Turkey officially recognized and apologized for the actions of those in power during the First World War? Is anything accomplished by distinguishing acts of genocide from other deaths during wartime, especially one with killing on the scale of WWI? Is this a significant distinction? Is the recent increase in awareness that System of a Down has brought to this atrocity significant? Why or why not?
Finally, what should be done about the ongoing crisis in Darfur? Should the U.S. have done, or be doing, more? Is it in our interest to intervene and if so how? Should we condemn with official statements, impose economic sanctions, or intervene militarily to protect innocent lives? Or, should we, as one of the comments on the video in the previous link declares, "Let the Arabs kill the blacks, that is what the war is about and since it doesn't affect the USA or Europe, it is of no great interest to the the world"? Can the U.S. police the world or must we choose our battles to prevent our military from becoming overextended? Follow the above links to learn more and let me know your position on these issues.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
"Sybil"
"Sybil", a pseudonym to protect the identity of Shirley Ardell Mason, is arguably the most famous psychiatric patient in history. That being said, her case is also one that has been plagued with controversy.
The case was groundbreaking for several reasons. It was the first documented case of Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), now known as Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), to be treated through classical Freudian psychoanalytic techniques. Dr. Wilbur's use of hypnosis and age-regression as a means of reintegrating the alters was a very creative, yet time-consuming approach to therapy (the therapy lasted for 11 years). It also opened Wilbur up to criticism after the book, and later the movie, was released to the public. Some claimed that the memories of abuse and the suggestion that Shirley had alters could have been "planted" by Dr. Wilbur while Shirley was under hypnosis. Others claimed that she was only creating this intriguing and heart wrenching story to cash in on the fame it would bring her, as evidenced by the book and movie deals. They claimed that she manipulated Mason for her own financial gain (a claim that seems odd in light of the fact that Wilbur shared the profits from the book and movie with Mason and also left her $25,000 when she died in 1992). Still others claimed that the close, loving friendship that Wilbur developed with Shirley was unethical and crossed too many lines in what should have been a doctor/patient relationship. They claimed that Wilbur's affection for "Sybil" clouded her judgment and made it impossible for her to remain objective about the case.
In addition to these detractors there are many supporters of Wilbur and Mason as well. Both women were active in providing information to Flora Rheta Schreiber, the author of the book, and Shirley reportedly said that everything in the book was true. Many praise Wilbur for her work in bringing this disorder to light and helping to get it included in the DSM as a documented mental disorder.
This case continues to give rise to many questions. What are your opinions on this case? Do you believe that "Sybil" was a true multiple? Do you think that Dr. Wilbur did anything unethical in becoming such a close friend of her patient? Why do you think that the number of diagnosed cases of MPD/DID skyrocketed after this case was publicized? Was it simply because of the new awareness and understanding of the disorder that the public was afforded as a result of the book and movie or was Sally Field's amazing portrayal in the film simply a blueprint for attention-seeking copycats? Do you even believe that this MPD/DID is a valid diagnosis or is it too difficult to prove? I would love to hear your thoughts on these questions as well as your own reactions to the film and any questions that arose in your mind related to this case. Check out the links in this post for more information.
The case was groundbreaking for several reasons. It was the first documented case of Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), now known as Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), to be treated through classical Freudian psychoanalytic techniques. Dr. Wilbur's use of hypnosis and age-regression as a means of reintegrating the alters was a very creative, yet time-consuming approach to therapy (the therapy lasted for 11 years). It also opened Wilbur up to criticism after the book, and later the movie, was released to the public. Some claimed that the memories of abuse and the suggestion that Shirley had alters could have been "planted" by Dr. Wilbur while Shirley was under hypnosis. Others claimed that she was only creating this intriguing and heart wrenching story to cash in on the fame it would bring her, as evidenced by the book and movie deals. They claimed that she manipulated Mason for her own financial gain (a claim that seems odd in light of the fact that Wilbur shared the profits from the book and movie with Mason and also left her $25,000 when she died in 1992). Still others claimed that the close, loving friendship that Wilbur developed with Shirley was unethical and crossed too many lines in what should have been a doctor/patient relationship. They claimed that Wilbur's affection for "Sybil" clouded her judgment and made it impossible for her to remain objective about the case.
In addition to these detractors there are many supporters of Wilbur and Mason as well. Both women were active in providing information to Flora Rheta Schreiber, the author of the book, and Shirley reportedly said that everything in the book was true. Many praise Wilbur for her work in bringing this disorder to light and helping to get it included in the DSM as a documented mental disorder.
This case continues to give rise to many questions. What are your opinions on this case? Do you believe that "Sybil" was a true multiple? Do you think that Dr. Wilbur did anything unethical in becoming such a close friend of her patient? Why do you think that the number of diagnosed cases of MPD/DID skyrocketed after this case was publicized? Was it simply because of the new awareness and understanding of the disorder that the public was afforded as a result of the book and movie or was Sally Field's amazing portrayal in the film simply a blueprint for attention-seeking copycats? Do you even believe that this MPD/DID is a valid diagnosis or is it too difficult to prove? I would love to hear your thoughts on these questions as well as your own reactions to the film and any questions that arose in your mind related to this case. Check out the links in this post for more information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)