Author Archive

Review – Michal Shapira, The War Inside: Psychoanalysis, Total War, and the Making of the Democratic Self in Post-War Britain (Cambridge 2013)

shapira cover.png

Paul Lerner, University of Southern California

The psychological impact of modern war on civilians remains a little studied topic, even as the already prodigious historical scholarship on war trauma continues to expand rapidly. Michal Shapira’s recent book makes great strides in redressing this gap, vividly depicting the emotional strains of war on women, children and other non-combatants and revealing the enormous and sustained expert attention the topic received in Britain in the 1940s and beyond.  Dealing with populations such as juvenile evacuees during Germany’s brutal air assault, Jewish children rescued from Nazi-controlled Europe, and civilians separated from their loved ones in uniform, thrust psychoanalysts, a group once reticent about taking political stands, into public debates about mental health, trauma, and child development.  Indeed, Shapira shows that as Britain sought to emerge from the war as a stable, intact and democratic society in a devastated and fiercely divided Europe, psychoanalysts became key contributors to general discussions about the family, violence, criminality and sexuality.

Shapira frames these discussions broadly, drawing on Nikolas Rose’s Foucault-inspired work on the historicitiy and constructedness of the modern self, indeed furthering his argument that the individual with psychological depth and an “inner life” emerged in the middle of the twentieth century, due in part to the emergence of the “psy” disciplines.  Shapira builds on this insight with parallel interventions in the history of childhood, focusing on a crucial transitional moment from Victorian attitudes toward children as pure and innocent to more modern, developmental and psychologically-nuanced ideas, which saw childhood more as a precursor to adulthood where nascent sexual urges, aggression, and psychodynamic conflicts leave a lasting imprint on the psyche.  Child rearing and education then became bound up with Britain’s larger national project of emerging from the trying ordeal of war and returning to a normal domestic order.  This order, propped up by psychoanalysts, social scientists and the postwar social democratic state, involved re-inscribing traditional gender roles and emphasizing the centrality of the mother to healthful child development and domestic tranquility.

A great many of these elements can be traced back to the First World War and the interwar period.  Shapira’s first chapter goes back to that era to argue that wartime experiences helped chip away at the strict division between healthy and pathological psyches, and most significantly, that medical and psychological professions became more accepting of fear and anxiety as normal, healthy reactions to wartime experiences.  Psychoanalysts in particular played a pronounced role in this shift.  Their work with war neurotics, along with Freudian ideas about trauma, helped remove the stigma from sufferers of anxiety-induced conditions.  By the beginning of World War II, Shapira argues, these changes had taken root in lay attitudes as well, and amid Germany’s aerial bombing campaigns, many Britons openly expressed their terror and anxieties or confided them to psychologists frankly and without shame.

Most of the book’s subsequent sections focus on children as subjects of psychological treatment and expert intervention.  Its second chapter foregrounds the work Anna Freud and other psychoanalysts conducted with child evacuees and refugees.  Here the theme of the “war inside” begins to emerge, as contemporaries equated the potentially traumatizing consequences of bombardment, violence and separation with the internal turmoil of the child’s psyche.  For Anna Freud, then, violence and aggression were normal childhood tendencies, stages that all children navigate through as part of the maturation process.  The problem then was not that war-produced violence threatened to shatter fragile, beatific babes, rather that external violence could stunt children’s psychological development, that it could seem like a normative state and that kids therefore would not learn how to manage their emotions and overcome it.  Plumbing rich collections of case histories, Shapira tells of children equating German military aggression with adult anger, or bombing with parental punishment, suggesting the extent to which external danger and internal dynamics were intertwined.  The solution lay in (re)-establishing parenting and familial bonds which Anna Freud and her colleagues saw as crucial for the resolution and management of these childhood conflicts.

The famous Anna Freud – Melanie Klein dispute takes center stage in the third chapter, in which Shapira covers tensions between the existing British psychoanalytic community and the newer cohort of Central European émigré analysts.  As is familiar to scholars of psychoanalysis, Melanie Klein considered children’s play to be akin to adult psychoanalysis, in other words a setting for transference, rife with symbolic meanings for the analyst to decode. Freud viewed this notion skeptically, doubting that children were sufficiently psychologically developed for these dynamics and emphasizing instead the need for corrective pedagogy, betraying her indebtedness to Austrian educational theory from the 1920s and 30s.  Shapira’s contribution to the historiography of this debate is to call attention not to the disparity in the two positions, but to stress the common ground between the famous rivals (and the many “independent” analysts in the middle), in their shared representation of the emotional dynamics of childhood and the articulation of psychoanalytic therapeutics for children.  Shapira credits Klein with playing a crucial role in the creation of modern selfhood as she developed a deep psychological approach to understanding the impact of war and violence, in implicit contrast to the more sociological analyses of Erich Fromm and his Frankfurt School colleagues or the more materialist and mechanical theories of mainstream psychology and psychiatry.  Her key point here is that despite their theoretical and clinical differences, together Freud, Klein and others turned the child into an object of technical expertise and state intervention and made their care a matter of national concern.

The fourth chapter broadens out to the popularization of psychoanalytic expertise, which Shapira traces through a series of radio broadcasts created by Donald Winnicott and the BBC between 1943 and 1966.  Detailing the collaboration between Winnicott and his BBC producer Janet Quigley, she shows how psychoanalytic ideas about child development buttressed the new emphasis on family in postwar Britain and placed responsibility for children’s emotional wellbeing firmly on the mother, a theme she takes up again near the book’s end.  Winnicott and his BBC sponsors thus fed into postwar pronatalism and the emerging conception that the family was the bedrock of a healthy democratic state.  The gender-political implications of this stance are clear, and given the mobilization of British women in the armed services and wartime work, psychoanalytic expertise here served the larger political aim of bringing women back into the domestic sphere and blaming working women for their children’s emotional struggles.

Chapters five and six treat the Institute for the Scientific Treatment of Delinquency (ISTD) first during the war and then amid the establishment of the postwar “therapeutic” welfare state.  Here she traces the transition from more punitive approaches to a new emphasis on treatment and rehabilitation, in part, due to the influence of psychoanalysts who were strongly represented in the ranks of the ISTD researchers.  No less a figure than Sigmund Freud himself, along with Ernest Jones, Otto Rank and Carl Jung, among others, served as ISTD vice presidents.  Criminality represents a kind of bridge, an issue which brought psychoanalytic perspectives on childhood and development into the public sphere and into the administrative apparatus of the postwar welfare state.  As she moves into the postwar period, her discussion shifts to issues like prostitution, homosexuality and deviance.. Shapira elucidates the psychoanalytic side of the discussion but also surveys the work of state officials, social scientists and members of the judicial system, revealing that not only were psychoanalysts addressing these issues, but that people in power were listening to them.  Consequently, the postwar years saw a broader acceptance of psychological, as opposed to moral or economic, approaches to crime and deviance.

In her concluding chapter on child hospitalization and attachment theory, Shapira comes full circle.  Having begun with the evacuation of children during wartime bombing and their resulting separation from their parents, she ends with the broader embrace of the salubriousness of the  mother – child bond, as demonstrated, for example, in the reversal of older policies that kept hospitalized children sequestered from their mothers and fathers.  Using media sources and letters from parents, she is able to document the wider diffusion of psychoanalytic ideas about childhood and parenting not only in official circles but also among the general public.  Indeed this book’s varied source base is one of its great strengths.  Based on case histories, archival sources, professional journals, and radio, television and newspapers, the book operates on many levels and provides a broad overview of many of the ways a psychoanalytic sensibility crept into public discourse in these years and meshed with the goals of the nascent welfare state.  At the center of their concerns was of course the mother and the importance placed on her presence as a domestic anchor, the fundament of the healthy family and the restored nation.

Carefully researched and tightly argued, this book makes broad and intriguing claims about postwar British subjectivity and the origins of modern, psychoanalytically informed notions of the self.  While generally persuasive, these claims could have been further substantiated with additional discussion of British political culture.  Whereas Shapira gives some attention to the ascent of Labour after the war, she completely neglects the loss of empire which, as other historians have argued, was deeply intertwined with the emergence of the welfare state and which certainly influenced notions of Britishness, citizenship and selfhood in the postwar period.  Parallel to her discussions of sexuality, gender and the family in the reconstitution of British political life, including race and post-imperial identity could have deepened the analysis and broadened its appeal.  It would also have been interesting to place the British case, at least speculatively, in a broader context with some acknowledgement of parallel developments in North American and on the European continent.  These points notwithstanding, The War Inside is a vital addition to the study of psychoanalysis and its diffusion, the history of childhood, and the rise of the therapeutic-administrative state.  It successfully gets at the fundamental but extremely elusive process by which our emotions, feelings, and drives became things for us to manage, part of the individual’s project, helping show how the modern self emerged from the rubble of the middle of the twentieth century.

Workshop announcement: Brainwashing, Film, and the Psy Sciences

The Hidden Persuaders Project and the Birkbeck Institute for the Moving Image cordially invite you to:

Brainwash: History, Cinema and the Psy Professions

3rd and 4th of July 2015, 10:00am-6:00pm

Birkbeck Cinema
43 Gordon Square
WC1H 0PD London

The history of cinema, like the history of psychoanalysis, psychiatry and psychotherapy, percolates with Western suspicions that our minds are susceptible to covert, even unconscious manipulation. Cinema and psychoanalysis—two essential exponents of subjectivity in the twentieth century—have been celebrated as royal roads to the unconscious, catalysts for our dreams, and means of self-discovery and human emancipation. But cinema and psychotherapy, Freudian or otherwise, have also been castigated for their special capacity to tap the unconscious, and as tools for mind control, even as they have depicted and shaped understanding of what it means to have or to manipulate a mind.

In this workshop we ask whether the Cold War obsession with brainwashing was a break with past narratives and anxieties over mental manipulation and suggestion. We consider how far cinema, television and video have been caught up in this history of hidden or coercive persuasion, and how far they have changed the terms of debate. What forms of human experimentation inspired interest in brainwashing, and vice versa?  And how and why did depictions of automatism on screen so often connect to fears of the ‘psy’ professions?

In addressing these questions we revisit some iconic and obscure brainwashing sagas of the past. By re-examining Cold War films and some of their precursors, we invite discussion of the representation of coercively altered states of consciousness—the dangerous spell that film and ‘the talking cure’ have been said to exert.

Workshop Programme

3 July

Raymond Bellour (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique): Cinema and Hypnoses: Mabuse as an example

Laura Mulvey (Birkbeck, University of London): From Momism to The Feminine Mystique
Maya Oppenheimer & Rod Dickinson (University of West England):  Re-enacting Obedience: laboratory on film

Jelena Martinovic (Geneva University of Art and Design): Depatterning desire: Aversion therapy on film
Laura Marcus (University of Oxford): Flicker

Marcie Holmes (Birkbeck, University of London): Flickering lights: mind control on screen

4 July

Ian Christie (Birkbeck, University of London): The Soviet story: From interrogation to confession

Ana Antic (Birkbeck, University of London): Cinema and education: Building the new communist person
Erik Linstrum (University of Virginia): Interrogating The Interrogator: Cyprus, the BBC, and the performance of violence

Gavin Collinson (BBC): Brainwashing on the Box: Depictions of brainwashing on British TV
Daniel Pick (Birkbeck, University of London): Suddenly: Some thoughts about assassination at the cinema

Simon Schaffer (University of Cambridge): Manchurian Automata

The full programme and free registration for this event can be found on Eventbrite.

Hidden Persuaders: Brainwashing, Culture, Clinical Knowledge and the Cold War Human Sciences


Under the direction of Daniel Pick, the Birkbeck College project ‘Hidden Persuaders: Brainwashing, Culture, Clinical Knowledge and the Cold War Human Sciences’, has launched a website with an accompanying blog:

Upcoming events and announcements include the following:

14 May seminar with Catalina Bronstein
Prof. Catalina Bronstein will lead a seminar on “Working in Fear: Memories of Psychiatry and Psychoanalysis during the Argentinian Dictatorship.” This seminar will be held from 11:45-13:30 on Thursday, 14 May, at Birkbeck. Catalina Bronstein is a Visiting Professor in the Psychoanalysis Unit, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology within the Division of Psychology and Language Sciences (PALS) at University College, London where she is the coordinator of the MSc seminars on Melanie Klein. She is a Training Analyst and Supervisor and a Fellow of the British Psycho-Analytical Society. Prof. Bronstein originally trained in Medicine and became a Psychiatrist in Buenos Aires, Argentina. She will be speaking about her experiences as a psychiatrist during Argentina’s ‘Dirty War.’
21 May seminar with Robert Jay Lifton
Robert Jay Lifton will lead a seminar on Thursday, 21 May at Birkbeck. Prof. Lifton is a psychiatrist and well-respected author of many books, including Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism (1961) and The Nazi Doctors (1986). Prof. Lifton will speak on his early research on Chinese ‘thought reform’ – exploring what this can tell us about what he calls ‘totalism’ – and his study of the psychological and ethical issues surrounding the atomic attack on Hiroshima. He will reflect on his psychohistorical research methods, including the development of his interview approach, use of psychoanalytical principles, and his perspective on the psychoanalytical movement in America.
Doctoral Studentship—deadline 1 July
The project’s website has announced a doctoral studentship. Students interested in applying for this can find more information here:


Book Review – Jan Goldstein, Hysteria Complicated by Ecstasy: The Case of Nanette Leroux (Princeton University Press 2011)

Screen shot 2013-01-11 at 3.15.33 PMBy Michal Shapira

Jan Goldstein’s new book Hysteria Complicated by Ecstasy: The Case of Nanette Leroux is a compelling and intriguing demonstration of what can be gained by close study and analysis of one archival manuscript of a medical case history. The case in point tells the story of eighteen-year-old Nanette Leroux, a village girl from Savoy who fell ill in 1822 with diverse nervous symptoms (among them convulsions, lethargy, sleepwalking , and what her physicians called catalepsy, that is a muscular contraction that fixed her limbs and other body parts in their positions when the symptom took hold). Nanette’s doctors believed the girl to be suffering from “hysteria complicated by ecstasy” following repeated “frights” caused by a rural policeman said to have tried to “offend her modesty.” Goldstein discovered the lengthy (200 page) manuscript at the Institut de France in Paris, and she uses this archival find as a window into a wide-range of historical contexts and methodological questions. The book is divided into two parts which in themselves serve as an interesting model for a historical critical edition: the first half of the book is a meticulous exercise in micro-history providing context for and interpretation of the archival text, and the second half includes the translated and transcribed manuscript itself. Indeed, despite the manuscript’s obscurity, Goldstein is able to successfully “milk it for what it’s worth” and to demonstrate why it is noteworthy. Her ability to reveal and discuss early nineteenth century rural and small-town life in the Alpine region of Savoy and some of the medical debates and conceptualizations of the time is inspiring.


While the psychiatric case as a genre grew in length over the course of the nineteenth century, here we have a detailed, and therefore significant, archival example from early on in the century. Through the text, we learn about the patient herself. Described as a somewhat passive, simple village girl, she also had also her moments of wit, creative use of self-expression to assert some control over her situation, and even rebellion against medical practice. We also learn about her two French physicians, Alexandre Bertrand and Charles-Humbert-Antoine Despine, and their conflicting views as they produced the medical edition. The two men came from different backgrounds. Despine was a materially comfortable man of the provinces working for the medical administration of the state-run thermal baths at Aix-les-Bains.  Bertrand, on the other hand, was a young and struggling Parisian but a scientist of the big city. What brought these two physicians together was their mutual interest in animal magnetism and Despine’s search for a worldly colleague to help him in the writing of the case. Their relationship allows Goldstein to explore the production of science in the provinces and ties with metropolitan expertise. Despine first meets Nanette after she had already been examined by a local physician and was also helped by a supportive layman. Despine’s advice was that she should be bought to Aix-les-Bains for therapies such as baths, showers, and electro-magnetism. He approached her both as a doctor trying to cure her and as a scientist aiming to experiment with the case in order to produce scientific knowledge.


True to her goal of getting as much as possible out of the text, Goldstein uses this micro-history to artfully explore larger macro-historical trends. Indeed her thorough approach leads her to wonder when the historian needs to stop contextualizing or when is ever “enough context.” Her method is an exhaustive one. Like a true detective, she restores the different backgrounds to the manuscript, from the immediate textual contexts of the scientific debates at the time to the larger social, cultural, political, and economic circumstances in which Nanette, her doctors, and others mentioned throughout the case lived. The result is dazzling, demonstrating how with imaginative scholarly work a broader picture can be pieced together. For example, Goldstein offers fascinating facts about the Savoy region itself under the Old Regime, the Revolution and the Piedmontese restoration. She also reveals the spa at Aix-les-Bains as an interesting and unique setting where urbane, cosmopolitan, tourist crowds meet the provincial misfortunate in a new age of travel and consumerism.


The context Goldstein provides is so rich that at times it seems that she drifts too far away from the medical case itself. Yet, again and again she is able to demonstrate how seeing the whole setting is important to understanding the particular episode. For instance, she shows how the tension between the traditional ways of Nanette’s native life and the burgeoning modernity and consumer market culture that the girl experienced in the spa town in fact played out in her illness. Without studying the rich background of place and time, Goldstein argues, the case’s details would have remained unclear. For historians of science and medicine, the scientific debates of the time and the different diagnostic labels of catalepsy, hysteria, and ecstasy assigned to the case are of special interest. Goldstein points out that the concept of hysteria emerged in the 1820 but that at the time it was not necessarily a uterine malady and could still be considered gender-neutral and devoid of erotic connotations. She also reveals the complex and conflicting gender dynamics at the time both between Nannette and her caretakers and impressively also inside Despine’s household.


But beyond contextualizing the manuscript, Goldstein is also interested in analyzing and making sense of the case. It is here that the more theoretical and methodological questions of the book emerge. A key issue is trying to answer how contemporaries conceptualized Nanette’s illness. While for post-Freudian twenty-first century readers of the text it might seem as if Nanette is suffering from sexual trauma due to the assault of the policeman, Goldstein emphasizes how the concept of psychological trauma was not yet available to contemporaries, as it would only develop from the 1870s onwards. What the participants in the manuscript did believe was that Nanette’s experience of fright served as a trigger to her illness. This early nineteenth century belief, Goldstein insists, was manifested in a manner that was utterly different than in the fin de siècle. Nanette’s doctors, for example, were not interested in a more all-embracing psychological explanation of her illness as key to self-understanding, or in memory-recovery of the violent episodes. They only aimed to eradicate her symptoms and restore her health and to find out whether animal magnetism could accomplish such goals. While the two doctors shared interest in magnetism, they favored different explanations for it. Despine subscribed to the late 18th century tradition of Mesmer, believing that the cure is of a physicalist nature, while Bertrand preferred a mentalist view of magnetism, and at times was willing to look at the illness from a psychological point of view, seeing it as stemming from Nanette’s “ideas” or “imagination.”


Goldstein takes her work a step further when she proposes a twenty-first-century interpretation of the case, using both Michel Foucault and Sigmund Freud to reread it in a more theoretical fashion. She defends this approach in an appendix that one wishes was more developed, especially given the theoretical tensions between these two writers. Her rationale for advancing in such a direction is that Nanette’s physicians shared certain limitations in understanding her illness that Goldstein believes invite the historian to try to improve on their work. In trying to explain why the two doctors ignored the sexual elements in the case—so obvious to a twentieth-first century reader— Goldstein uses Foucault to claim that Despine and Bertrand lived in a transitional moment in the early nineteenth century, just on the threshold of “sexuality” as it was later understood. For them, sexuality was not yet turned into an object of scientific knowledge

and was not yet part of a causal scientific explanation of a wide array of human behaviors. Despine and Bertrand functioned in the era “before sexuality” as they did not automatically connect their patient’s pathology to sex and did not locate sex at the center of her being and of her illness. Their sensitivity to sexual matters was different than ours and their concept of hysteria therefore was not so closely tied to sexuality. Hence they saw no point in analyzing in depth what seemed to be attempted rape.


Goldstein then uses a Freudian approach to try to conceptualize Nanette’s own subjective understanding of her situation and the causes of her illness. In a sense here Goldstein brings the case “back to sexuality” – a reverse move from the Foucauldian reading she utilizes thus far and one that could have been elaborated upon further. Goldstein is guided by the psychoanalytic assumption that Nanette possessed an unconscious mind that enabled her to manipulate cultural symbols and discursive possibilities available to her for her own means. In this manner, for Goldstein, the fact that Nannette demanded a watch of her own “surely speaks of her wish—probably unconscious and hence articulated symbolically through the medium of symptom—for some freedom from society’s relentless demands on her biological performance [as a woman], some measure of self-regulation.” (p. 118) Such a hypothesis may not appeal to all historians and may raise the question of whether it is the role of the historian to explain the described illness by twentieth-first century standards. Yet such creative reading does enable a certain interesting interpretation of the case, according to which Nanette’s illness was an expression of an unconscious psychic conflict that centered on questions of rebellion, autonomy, and traditional patterns of behaviors and dependence for a woman in her era. Goldstein argues that Nannette’s taking refuge in illness had to do with the historical change of the post-revolutionary era that exposed her to alternative, and more egalitarian, visions of the future. Located between traditional and modern lifestyles, Nannette literally embodied the contradictions of her historical moment. As this elegantly written book combines an erudite survey of multiple historical contexts, a micro-history of early nineteenth-century French and Savoyard medicine, gender and politics, and an imaginative conceptualization of a medical case, it should be of interest to any serious historian.


Michal Shapira is a Thomas Arthur Arnold Research Fellow at the Department of History, Tel Aviv University. She is a modern European historian focusing on the impact of total war and the development of expert culture in the twentieth century. She is the author of the book The War Inside: Child Psychoanalysis, Total War and the Making of the Democratic Self in Postwar Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2013).


Conference – DSM: The History,Theory, and Politics of Diagnosis. University of Surrey, Guildford, 25-27 March 2013

DSM: The History,Theory, and Politics of Diagnosis



History & Philosophy of Psychology Section
Annual Conference
25-27 March 2013
University of Surrey, Guildford

Keynote Speaker: Professor Ian Parker

2013 marks the 40-year anniversary of the vote by the members of the American Psychiatric Association to remove ‘homosexuality’ from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). 2013 is also the publication date of the fifth edition of the DSM.

To mark this anniversary and this event, the History and Philosophy Section have themed the 2013 conference ‘DSM:The History,Theory, and Politics of Diagnosis.’

Individual papers or symposia in any area dealing with conceptual and historical issues in Psychology, broadly defined, are invited.

The conference is open to independent and professional scholars in all relevant fields, not just Section or British Psychological Society members. A limited number of bursaries will be available to students who have had their paper accepted for presentation.

All submissions (abstracts of 200 words) should be sent via email to Dr Geoff Bunn: by Friday 14 December 2012. Further information is available on the Section’s website:

UN – Global Mental Health, WHO Action Plan, Oct. 11, 2012

The NGO Committee on Mental Health

Affiliated with the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations (CoNGO)

in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations


In Commemoration of World Mental Health Day


“Global Mental Health, WHO Action Plan 2013-2020:

Integrating Physical and Mental Health”



The World Health Organization (WHO) projects that depression will be the number one global burden of disease by 2030, surpassing heart disease and cancer, and anticipated to be the number two burden by 2020. The 2011 UN Summit on Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) addressed the rapid increase of chronic illnesses and the need to focusing on primary care to develop effective prevention and intervention steps, including the need for behavioral and mental health strategies.  The May 2012 World Health Assembly Resolution to develop country wide mental health programs and the drafting of the recent draft WHO Global Mental Health Action Plan to implement strategies are essential to curbing this looming epidemic, as well as from the trauma and emotional disorders arising from violence, war, and conflict that not only threaten global well-being, but the economies of all nations.


Thursday, October 11, 2012

2:00-4:00 PM

U.N. Church Center

777 United Nations Plaza, New York City, NY

44th Street and First Ave.

2nd Floor Conference Room

Please RSVP to



Dr. Elizabeth Carll

Chair, NGO Committee on Mental Health; U.N. Representative, International Society

for Traumatic Stress Studies; President, CCCUN


Dr. Jacob Kumaresan

Executive Director

WHO Office at the United Nations, New York; WHO Action Plan for Mental Health 2013-2020


Adama Diop,

First Vice President, Conference of NGOs (CoNGO)



H. E. Dr. Josephine Ojiambo – Keynote

Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative

Republic of Kenya to the United Nations


Dr. Gabriel Ivbijaro 

Chair, Waltham Forest Clinical Commissioning Group, London; Joint editor Wonca/WHO -“Integrating Mental Health into Primary Care: A Global Perspective”; Europe Vice President, WFMH


Terrie M. Williams

Founder/President, Terrie Williams Agency; Mental Health Advocate; Author, “Black Pain: It Just Looks Like We’re Not Hurting” led to national mental health advocacy campaign “Sharing Ourselves..Healing Starts With Us”



Further information contact

Co-sponsored by

  Communications Coordination Committee for the United Nations (CCCUN);  International Council of Women (ICW);  National Council of Women-USA;  World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH); International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ISTSS); International Council of Psychologists (ICP);  NGO Committee on Ageing; NGO Committee on Sustainable Development; International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP);  World Council of Psychotherapy;  International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences;  International Association of Schools of Social Work;  Human Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities (HRCBM); NGO Forum for Health, Geneva  

New book announcement – Journeys into Madness: Mapping Mental Illness in the Austro-Hungarian Empire

Journeys into Madness. Mapping Mental Illness in the Austro-Hungarian Empire

(Berghahn Bo0ks 2012)


Edited by Gemma Blackshaw and Sabine Wieber


For more see here

%d bloggers like this: