“Real” Hysteria in the Modern Age?
While many people consider “hysteria” to be a disease of the past, Erika Kinetz, of the New York Times, diverges from this position (and suggests that many members of the medical community agree with her). In the 2006 article Is Hysteria Real? Brain Images Say Yes, Kinetz asserts that, while the official name for this condition has changed, hysteria is still affecting people today and conversion disorder (the modern disorder that emerged from hysteria) is a valid diagnosis that can now be supported by evidence from brain scans. To back up her claim, Kinetz quotes Patrik Vuilleumier, a neurologist at the University of Geneva, as saying that in spite of the many variations in terminology, the general symptoms of hysteria have never changed. Patients are still complaining of hysterical issues (including paralysis and seizures) while doctors, after extensive testing, remain unable to find any physical causes.
After providing a brief history of hysteria, from the ancient Greeks through Freud (derivative of what we have covered in class discussion), and commenting on the sexist nature of the term “hysteria”, Kinetz finally gets to the crux of her argument — brain images are now able to provide “proof” of hysteria/conversion disorder. Modern doctors have more advanced technology than ever before, and thus have been able to run brain imaging studies on patients with hysterical paralysis. These studies have shown that while the patients are truly unable to move their paralyzed parts, their nerves and muscles remain uninjured.
Focusing on one specific study of a woman with a paralyzed leg, Kinetz explains that when patients attempt to move their paralyzed limbs, the primary cortex should be activated, but instead, scans show activation of the right orbitofrontal and right anterior cingulate cortex (two regions that are associated with action and emotion). These results have been interpreted to mean that emotional issues, as opposed to physical problems, are disrupting the brain circuitry that controls movement, sensation and sight. Clearly in Erika Kinetz’s opinion, these results constitute proof that conversion disorder is a true condition.
While this article attempts to use current medical technologies to add validity to an ancient diagnosis, Kinetz’s claims (as seen in this article’s title) are far too grand for the amount of evidence provided. A few studies indicating abnormal brain activity in victims of paralysis can not be taken to constitute a firm confirmation of hysteria. While Erika Kinetz is writing for the Science section of the Times, and has an undergraduate degree in biology, she has dedicated her journalism career to reporting on globalized crime, and does not have much authority on medical writing and reporting. Her lack of expertise on these topics makes it hard for me to trust her analysis of the brain scan results in relation to validating hysteria/conversion disorder as a proper diagnosis in the modern age. I appreciate the investigation into a medical basis for hysteria, and would be interested in reading more about these specific studies, but I don’t think that this article provided adequate coverage of the topic or reached it’s goal of proving that hysteria is “real”.
