As someone who studied history, it’s not surprising that one of my favorite podcasts is called “Archive on 4.” It’s produced by BBC’s Radio 4 and the premise is quite simple but yields rich tales. The host, often a journalist, plunders the station’s archive for primary sources on a specific topic, which are then interspersed with current day interviews and analysis.
The most recent one I heard was on lobotomies, the controversial and now debunked surgical procedure of removing a part of someone’s frontal lobe to cure them of mental illness or developmental delay.
I didn’t know about this procedure until I read Kate Clifford Larson’s biography about Rosemary Kennedy, whose father Joe Kennedy forced her to have a lobotomy without even informing his wife. Rosemary, who was developmentally disabled, was permanently damaged by the lobotomy.
Listening to this program was heartrending. There were survivors who shared how the procedure affected their cognitive abilities. Other survivors related that the procedure was forced on them by circumstance more than medical necessity. One man said that his stepmother had him lobotomized as a teen when he was struggling emotionally with his parents’ divorce and new family structure.
Other medical professionals shared that for some patients, a lobotomy was an eleventh-hour treatment, a last resort before a complete nervous breakdown, or even suicide.
It harkened to a time when there was so little understanding of mental health. All kinds of people with various mental disabilities were housed together. Treatment was not differentiated. Anti-depressants were not yet discovered. Many would argue that today mental illness is still woefully misunderstood and mistreated.
It reminded me how little we often know of illness. Medical professionals, like all scientists, follow a process of research, test, analyze, improve — and repeat. Especially when it comes to new treatments, we need to remember how uncertain it can all be.
For example, today, it’s standard practice to give children struggling with gender identity — but suffering no physical ailment — puberty blockers. How will that be seen in 50 years’ time? Might it be viewed as akin to a lobotomy, which cut into and removed healthy tissue, a practice that contradicted surgical ethos?
I obviously cannot answer this. But listening to the history of lobotomies reminded me that when celebrating or adopting new medical practices, it’s important also to maintain humility.
Shana Goldberg may be reached at [email protected]
Copyright © 2021 by the Intermountain Jewish News
