Thomas Szasz: The Uncompromising Rebel and Critic of Psychiatry

Besides Szasz’s controversial views are brilliant contributions to clinical practice, including the following examples: (1) He elaborated the physician-patient relationship with three models—“activity-passivity,” “guidance-cooperation,” and “mutual participation.” (2) In The Ethics of Psychoanalysis (1965), he promoted “autonomous psychotherapy,” which involved noncoercive dialogue between therapist and patient that would lead to education and growth for the latter. (3) He argued that transference is part of the analyst’s judgment and the patient’s experience, and that there is a relationship between transference and learning. (4) He used principles of “object relations” theory to explicate deeply the signs and symptoms of schizophrenia. Contrary to popular belief, he was not “antipsychiatry” simpliciter. As a theorist, he clarified language and tried to understand pain. As a practicing clinician, he advocated ways to help people in distress, urged embracing the freedom and autonomy of patients, and treated them as persons with abilities to help themselves.

Download Full-text

Schizophrenia: Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry. By Thomas Szasz. Oxford University Press. 1979. Pp 237. £5.95.

The British Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.1192/s000712500004650x ◽

1980 ◽

Vol 136 (6) ◽

pp. 603-603

Author(s):

Christopher de B. White

Keyword(s):

Oxford University ◽

Thomas Szasz ◽

Oxford University Press

Download Full-text

Szasz and the Law: An Alternative View

The Journal of Psychiatry & Law ◽

10.1177/009318537600400407 ◽

1976 ◽

Vol 4 (4) ◽

pp. 551-558 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lee S. Weinberg ◽

Richard E. Vatz

Keyword(s):

Mental Illness ◽

Human Behavior ◽

Legal Theory ◽

Human Freedom ◽

Theory And Practice ◽

Alternative View ◽

Previous Issue ◽

Medical Models ◽

Institutional Psychiatry ◽

Thomas Szasz

In a previous issue C. G. Schoenfeld attempted to disprove Thomas Szasz’ theory that mental illness is a “myth” and to dispute Szasz’ contention that current views of “mental illness” promote violent subjugation of human freedom in institutional and legal settings. This article argues that typical of many who criticize Dr. Szasz, Mr. Schoenfeld misunderstands and misrepresents Szasz’ rich theoretical arguments concerning “mental illness” and the prevalent use in law and institutional psychiatry of medical models for analyzing human behavior. Additionally, the authors urge responsible researchers to further pursue the implications of an accurate understanding of Szasz’ arguments for legal theory and practice.

Download Full-text