Psychiatry: An SOS Call

Social policies shaped the practice of psychiatry in the past. As the discipline becomes ever more scientific, the effects of social policy on patient well-being must not be ignored.

| 4 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
4:00
Share

© ROY SCOTT/IKON IMAGES/CORBISDuring the early 20th century American psychiatry fell under the influence of psychoanalysis. At mid-century, psychiatry broke with psychoanalysis to align more closely with scientific medicine. As psychiatry turned toward the biological sciences, state hospitals discharged thousands of severely mentally ill patients with prescriptions in hand, and federally funded mental-health initiatives, ill-prepared to cope with the deluge, sprang up in communities across the nation. This led to a split in the practice of psychiatry. For psychiatrists concerned with the brain as an entry point into a new scientific era, neurochemistry and neuropharmacology filled the void left by psychoanalysis. For psychiatrists working in the emerging community-health programs, a wide range of additional activities and their supporting sciences—sociology, psychology, and economics, as well as vocational, transcultural, and other studies—became relevant to providing improved patient care. During the ensuing years, the brain sciences flourished, while services in communities, affected by social policies, withered. Today, psychiatrists debate whether psychiatry should become an applied neuroscience focused on brain functions or a research enterprise driven by the clinical needs of patients and communities.

Clinician psychiatrists find current academic priorities and the policies that shape them unbalanced regarding which sciences and practices best serve psychiatric patients. By abruptly terminating federal funding of community services, the Reagan Administration precipitated a continuing decline in vital corollary adjuncts to psychiatric treatment. The use of drugs to manage mental disorders and the managed-care practices of insurance companies encouraged psychiatrists to abandon working in community health clinics in favor of practicing in offices. Federal policies that leave clinical drug development to industry, and the dependence on pharmaceutical companies for funding, constrained academic research. Academics and universities began to profit by selling their discoveries to such companies. Each of these developments has favored the tilt toward neuroscience and undermined psychiatry’s integration of other disciplines.

Psychiatry’s ...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Keywords

Meet the Author

  • Robert E. Becker

    This person does not yet have a bio.

Published In

Share
A greyscale image of cells dividing.
March 2025, Issue 1

How Do Embryos Know How Fast to Develop

In mammals, intracellular clocks begin to tick within days of fertilization.

View this Issue
Discover the history, mechanics, and potential of PCR.

Become a PCR Pro

Integra Logo
3D rendered cross section of influenza viruses, showing surface proteins on the outside and single stranded RNA inside the virus

Genetic Insights Break Infectious Pathogen Barriers

Thermo Fisher Logo
A photo of sample storage boxes in an ultra-low temperature freezer.

Navigating Cold Storage Solutions

PHCbi logo 
The Immunology of the Brain

The Immunology of the Brain

Products

Sapio Sciences

Sapio Sciences Makes AI-Native Drug Discovery Seamless with NVIDIA BioNeMo

DeNovix Logo

New DeNovix Helium Nano Volume Spectrophotometer

Olink Logo

Olink® Reveal: Accessible NGS-based proteomics for every lab

Olink logo
Zymo Logo

Zymo Research Launches the Quick-16S™ Full-Length Library Prep Kit