[民主德国的精神病学是一个“利基”——介于适应和自主之间]。

IF 0.7 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1055/a-2186-3108
Antonia Windirsch, Olaf Reis, Hans Jörgen Grabe, Ekkehardt Kumbier
{"title":"[民主德国的精神病学是一个“利基”——介于适应和自主之间]。","authors":"Antonia Windirsch, Olaf Reis, Hans Jörgen Grabe, Ekkehardt Kumbier","doi":"10.1055/a-2186-3108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>  With the help of statements from contemporary witnesses, it shall be deduced, if and to what extent Psychiatry was experienced as a shelter for employees and patients in the state controlled society of the GDR and which effort of adaptation to the authoritarian regime was needed to organize protected and protective spaces, here called \"niches\".</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>  74 guide-based interviews from subjects including former patients and different staff groups of the East german Psychiatry were analyzed qualitatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>  Many quotations show, that Psychiatry in the GDR was experienced as a \"niche\" for dissenting people and could offer a certain amount of protection for patients. On the other hand, the autonomy of the psychiatric care was often violated by political intrusions regarding individual treatments. Moreover, treatment autonomy was restricted by harsh shortages in supplies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>  Psychiatrists in the GDR could protect their patients through their actings and so Psychiatry could establish a \"niche\" for patients and employees. However, establishing such protected spaces required efforts in adaptation. In reverse, Psychiatry has also been politically instrumentalised - either directly through unjustified admissions and exit restrictions or indirectly by a stigmatization of dissenters and removing them from society.</p>","PeriodicalId":47315,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Psychiatry in the GDR as a \\\"niche\\\" - Between adaptation and autonomy].\",\"authors\":\"Antonia Windirsch, Olaf Reis, Hans Jörgen Grabe, Ekkehardt Kumbier\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2186-3108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>  With the help of statements from contemporary witnesses, it shall be deduced, if and to what extent Psychiatry was experienced as a shelter for employees and patients in the state controlled society of the GDR and which effort of adaptation to the authoritarian regime was needed to organize protected and protective spaces, here called \\\"niches\\\".</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>  74 guide-based interviews from subjects including former patients and different staff groups of the East german Psychiatry were analyzed qualitatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>  Many quotations show, that Psychiatry in the GDR was experienced as a \\\"niche\\\" for dissenting people and could offer a certain amount of protection for patients. On the other hand, the autonomy of the psychiatric care was often violated by political intrusions regarding individual treatments. Moreover, treatment autonomy was restricted by harsh shortages in supplies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>  Psychiatrists in the GDR could protect their patients through their actings and so Psychiatry could establish a \\\"niche\\\" for patients and employees. However, establishing such protected spaces required efforts in adaptation. In reverse, Psychiatry has also been politically instrumentalised - either directly through unjustified admissions and exit restrictions or indirectly by a stigmatization of dissenters and removing them from society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2186-3108\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2186-3108","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:  借助当代证人的证词,可以推断出,在民主德国国家控制的社会中,精神病学是否以及在多大程度上被视为雇员和患者的庇护所,以及需要做出哪些适应独裁政权的努力来组织受保护和保护的空间,这里称为“壁龛”。方法:  对74名受试者的指南访谈进行了定性分析,这些受试者包括东德精神病学的前患者和不同的工作人员群体。结果:  许多引文表明,民主德国的精神病学被视为持不同意见者的“利基”,可以为患者提供一定程度的保护。另一方面,精神病护理的自主权经常受到有关个人治疗的政治干预的侵犯。此外,治疗自主权受到供应严重短缺的限制。结论:  民主德国的精神病学家可以通过他们的行为来保护他们的病人,因此精神病学可以为病人和员工建立一个“利基”。然而,建立这种受保护的空间需要在适应方面作出努力。反过来,精神病学也被政治工具化了——要么直接通过不合理的准入和出境限制,要么间接通过对持不同政见者的污名化并将他们从社会中清除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Psychiatry in the GDR as a "niche" - Between adaptation and autonomy].

Background:   With the help of statements from contemporary witnesses, it shall be deduced, if and to what extent Psychiatry was experienced as a shelter for employees and patients in the state controlled society of the GDR and which effort of adaptation to the authoritarian regime was needed to organize protected and protective spaces, here called "niches".

Method:   74 guide-based interviews from subjects including former patients and different staff groups of the East german Psychiatry were analyzed qualitatively.

Results:   Many quotations show, that Psychiatry in the GDR was experienced as a "niche" for dissenting people and could offer a certain amount of protection for patients. On the other hand, the autonomy of the psychiatric care was often violated by political intrusions regarding individual treatments. Moreover, treatment autonomy was restricted by harsh shortages in supplies.

Conclusion:   Psychiatrists in the GDR could protect their patients through their actings and so Psychiatry could establish a "niche" for patients and employees. However, establishing such protected spaces required efforts in adaptation. In reverse, Psychiatry has also been politically instrumentalised - either directly through unjustified admissions and exit restrictions or indirectly by a stigmatization of dissenters and removing them from society.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
89
期刊最新文献
[Learning Evidence-Based Practice - Multi-Perspective Competence Development using the Example of Generalised Anxiety Disorder]. [Utilization of Psychosocial Support for Young Adults with Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors]. [Partnership Status And Prevalence Of Mental Disorders In Women And Men With Cancer]. [Young Adult Cancer Patients (AYA): Preferences for Outpatient Psychosocial Care and Gender-Specific Differences - Results from the AYA-LE study]. [Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy (QCAE)].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1