Dear Hadmess readers, two new articles recently published in the journal History of Psychiatry may be of interest to you.

The first, entitled Reform of care for people with mental illness in two German states before reunification: An oral history approach, is authored by Georg Bornemann. The second, The clinical, philosophical, and political insights of James Frame (1803–1876), or the exemplary singularity of the common, was written by Nicolas J. Schwalbe.

Please find below the abstracts of these two publications.

Reform of care for people with mental illness in two German states before reunification: An oral history approach, by Georg Bornemann

“Between 1960 and 1985 efforts to reform psychiatry took place in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). Although to differing degrees, these efforts showed parallel approaches, for example with regard to negotiations on coercion or the participation of mentally ill people. Oral history interviews conducted with contemporary witnesses from both states suggested changes in the direction of the reform of psychiatry and progress in social participation during the period. Contrasting historical sources with the interviews reveals a dissonance that can be understood in terms of discourse theory. Initial results indicate a convergence, across different political systems, toward improving social participation. Future research would benefit from cross reading this study’s results with other sources”.

The clinical, philosophical, and political insights of James Frame (1803–1876), or the exemplary singularity of the common, by Nicolas J. Schwalbe

“James Frame was a nineteenth century Scotsman, psychiatric patient, and author. He published two books during his lifetime, the Philosophy of Insanity and the Asylum Diaries, which detail his lived experience as a patient at the Glasgow Royal Lunatic Asylum. This book review-essay engages with recent scholarship on Frame to argue that these recently re-published writings offer more than historical curiosity: they articulate a consistent philosophy of madness and a political theory of care that continues to be relevant for contemporary psychiatry. Frame’s testimony provides a rare first-hand account of the Scottish “no-restraint” movement, prefiguring both anti-psychiatry and patient-centered care, while foregrounding the therapeutic significance of environment, community, and the relational dynamics they foster. At the same time, Frame’s work develops a singular ethics, epistemology, and ontology of madness, insisting that reason and unreason are not opposed but entwined, thus demonstrating that the ontological impropriety of any singular life—what the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls its “exemplarity”—is what makes it most common. By analyzing Frame’s synthesis of testimonial combined with practical, philosophical, and political insight, as well as recent historical and clinical scholarship on his works, the review-essay shows how his writings anticipate both psychoanalytic concepts such as transference, as well as ethical critiques of profit-driven health systems. The piece concludes that Frame’s work remains a conceptual resource for rethinking the intertwined epistemological, ethical, and political dimensions of psychiatry in the 21st century”.