Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Social Psyche and Post-War Syndromes: Response to Commentary by Sheila Hafter Gray

Social Psyche and Post-War Syndromes: Response to Commentary by Sheila Hafter Gray Charles C. Engel, Jr. Sheila Hafter Gray raises several points in response to my article entitled, "Post-War Syndromes: Illustrating the Impact of the Social Psyche on Notions of Risk, Responsibility, Reason, Responsibility, and Remedy." I will focus on four of her central assertions: 1) key points of my article are based on biased historical interpretations; 2) there are self-serving inconsistencies in my interpretations of empirical evidence pertaining to the treatment of postwar syndromes; 3) dualism "haunts" this historical analysis of social determinants of post-war syndromes; and 4) the paper is short on psychodynamic or psychoanalytic wisdom. I will address these one at a time. First, Gray notes that some of my key points are based on secondary rather than primary sources, and hints that these sources offer "biased" interpretations of history. Indeed, I reference several historical reviews that draw scholarly but subjective conclusions. However, it is inappropriate to characterize these reviews as biased. These mainstream scholarly works offer novel perspectives employing standard historical methods. From my perspective, having served as a psychiatrist in the military during both war and peace, these perspectives are at least as valid as the doctrine that military psychiatrists have long promoted. In fact, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis & Dynamic Psychiatry Guilford Press

Social Psyche and Post-War Syndromes: Response to Commentary by Sheila Hafter Gray

Loading next page...
 
/lp/guilford-press/social-psyche-and-post-war-syndromes-response-to-commentary-by-sheila-BsD6OpkAHp
Publisher
Guilford Press
Copyright
© The American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry
Subject
ARTICLES
ISSN
1546-0371
DOI
10.1521/jaap.32.2.341.35279
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Charles C. Engel, Jr. Sheila Hafter Gray raises several points in response to my article entitled, "Post-War Syndromes: Illustrating the Impact of the Social Psyche on Notions of Risk, Responsibility, Reason, Responsibility, and Remedy." I will focus on four of her central assertions: 1) key points of my article are based on biased historical interpretations; 2) there are self-serving inconsistencies in my interpretations of empirical evidence pertaining to the treatment of postwar syndromes; 3) dualism "haunts" this historical analysis of social determinants of post-war syndromes; and 4) the paper is short on psychodynamic or psychoanalytic wisdom. I will address these one at a time. First, Gray notes that some of my key points are based on secondary rather than primary sources, and hints that these sources offer "biased" interpretations of history. Indeed, I reference several historical reviews that draw scholarly but subjective conclusions. However, it is inappropriate to characterize these reviews as biased. These mainstream scholarly works offer novel perspectives employing standard historical methods. From my perspective, having served as a psychiatrist in the military during both war and peace, these perspectives are at least as valid as the doctrine that military psychiatrists have long promoted. In fact,

Journal

Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis & Dynamic PsychiatryGuilford Press

Published: Jun 1, 2004

There are no references for this article.