The following is an extract from my Journal for Wednesday, May 22nd, 1997. It offers my brief reflection on the Scottish psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, R.D.'Ronnie' Laing (1927-1989) who was something of a cult figure in psychotherapeutic and wider circles in the 1960s and 1970s. A controversial figure he was sometimes described as being part of an 'anti-psychiatry' movement. I believe I may have made this entry because I had just read a biography of Laing by John Clay, R.D.Laing: a Divided Self: a Biography.
1997
"I want (or as our former prime minister, John Major was wont to say 'I wunt') to read more of, and about, R.D. Laing and his works. I have some sympathy for his approach which promotes the idea that we must be empathic and live 'with' the emotional disorders of others and not manage them antagonistically by locking people away in either a physical or drug induced sense.
In 1965, to fulfil his ideas, Laing established Kingsley Hall in the East End of London as a therapeutic community for troubled adults. The drawback to this - in my opinion - right approach to mental health, is that it can take too heavy a toll of some carers. It draws enormously on a carer's emotional resources. How are these replenished? This was achieved with the support every member of the community gave to each other. Not everyone survived the process and in Laing’s own personal case, in some measure he buried the emotional difficulties he faced in alcohol, drugs, and sex.
In 1965, to fulfil his ideas, Laing established Kingsley Hall in the East End of London as a therapeutic community for troubled adults. The drawback to this - in my opinion - right approach to mental health, is that it can take too heavy a toll of some carers. It draws enormously on a carer's emotional resources. How are these replenished? This was achieved with the support every member of the community gave to each other. Not everyone survived the process and in Laing’s own personal case, in some measure he buried the emotional difficulties he faced in alcohol, drugs, and sex.
A word which Laing and his followers often used to describe their approach to helping people overwhelmed by emotional problems is 'with'. They would say that it was important to be 'with' the person being helped - empathising, recognising and accepting the other’s personal construct of the world and the feelings this induces in them.
My view is that Laing’s work has been marginalised because an empiric world wants a more detailed analysis of how this 'withness' is measured. I do not know if Laing or anyone else has explained the state of 'withness' in specific terms, though it seems to me the methodology for making such a measurement might prove difficult because "withness" is an active inter-personal process and each relationship has a unique symbiosis.
To the sceptic 'withness' is a notion which lies somewhere between dubious and spurious. 'Withness' is considered a vague, hippie notion without a valid place in the field of psychiatry. For the latter only science can offer true answers. Nevertheless the sense of togetherness that 'withness' implies is surely something to which we aspire.
Laing and his followers may have been marginalised for other reasons. The whole psychiatry lobby, backed as it is by the institution of mainstream medicine, together with the drugs manufacturers who enjoy their profits so much, is a powerful one, and unlikely to allow drugless interpersonal therapy to hold sway in the field of mental health."
2019
In the main my thoughts about Laing and his works are the same today as they were then.My observations about his personal life though true, may unfairly mask a life of achievement and, in commenting on his declivities, I should also record that he was a talented pianist, an enthusiastic tennis player, but most of all he was an original thinker and author exemplified best by his classic text The Divided Self.
My own observation is that Laing's concept of 'withness' is one which we as a human community would wish to adhere to in wider aspects of our daily lives. We want to secure a good education and health for all: for those who are doing just about well enough and particularly for those who are struggling.
It is then, a strange paradox to find we have voted for a government which, though we are a wealthy country, is stripping our public services while replacing and diminishing them with private profit making provision that is not up to the task. In my view our government seems to act in a spirit of 'againstness' rather than 'withness.' This is exemplified by its attack - made in our name - upon our most vulnerable fellow citizens, those with various kinds of disability. Our government, through the Department of Work and Pensions, hires private companies to deny needy people essential financial support. The companies, who operate what is called the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment process, increase their profits every time they make an assessment that someone should be stripped of his or her PIP. The latter is not only left impoverished but to feel that she or he is a liar and somehow a fraud.
Though the United Kingdom is a wealthy community, offering financial support to vulnerable people takes its toll on everyone who pays taxes, but the altruism in giving this support shows a 'withness' to which we, as UK citizens aspire. We have no wish to be cruel to others. We want to help each other. Don't we?
On December 12th, 2019, if that is when our next General Election is to be, we must vote for a government of 'withness' and not one of 'againstness.'
2019
In the main my thoughts about Laing and his works are the same today as they were then.My observations about his personal life though true, may unfairly mask a life of achievement and, in commenting on his declivities, I should also record that he was a talented pianist, an enthusiastic tennis player, but most of all he was an original thinker and author exemplified best by his classic text The Divided Self.
My own observation is that Laing's concept of 'withness' is one which we as a human community would wish to adhere to in wider aspects of our daily lives. We want to secure a good education and health for all: for those who are doing just about well enough and particularly for those who are struggling.
It is then, a strange paradox to find we have voted for a government which, though we are a wealthy country, is stripping our public services while replacing and diminishing them with private profit making provision that is not up to the task. In my view our government seems to act in a spirit of 'againstness' rather than 'withness.' This is exemplified by its attack - made in our name - upon our most vulnerable fellow citizens, those with various kinds of disability. Our government, through the Department of Work and Pensions, hires private companies to deny needy people essential financial support. The companies, who operate what is called the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment process, increase their profits every time they make an assessment that someone should be stripped of his or her PIP. The latter is not only left impoverished but to feel that she or he is a liar and somehow a fraud.
Though the United Kingdom is a wealthy community, offering financial support to vulnerable people takes its toll on everyone who pays taxes, but the altruism in giving this support shows a 'withness' to which we, as UK citizens aspire. We have no wish to be cruel to others. We want to help each other. Don't we?
On December 12th, 2019, if that is when our next General Election is to be, we must vote for a government of 'withness' and not one of 'againstness.'
___________
No comments:
Post a Comment