Talk:Bruno Bettelheim

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the science and academia work group. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Illinois Start‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Chicago Start‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Psychology Start‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Can anyone out there provide an exact citation for the "refrigerator mother" syndrome (presumably from "The Empty Fortress"? A friend of mine questions whether Bettelheim actually used this term. Any help greatly appreciated.

A search on Google Books shows that the phrase "refrigerator mother" does not occur in any book written by Bettelheim.

Here's the line: "The Uses of Enchantment recast fairy tales in terms of the strictest Freudian psychology, sometimes to unintentionally hilarious effect."

I'm reinstating this line. All but the most orthodox of Freudians find that Bettelheim goes to some laughable extremes. Remember, he wasn't *actually* a psychologist. Carolynparrishfan 18:46, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am taking the line out again, not because it is necessarily untrue that some people find the book risible, but it in no way reflects the vast influence the book has had on knowledge of and interest in folk and fairy tales. The line should only be included in a more balanced and fair account of the book. Jmc29 23 April 2006

Agree with Jmc29. It's not a question of whether or not whoever's writing this article finds it hilarious. Cite a reputable source that calls it hilarious, otherwise do not make statements like the one Jmc29 cut. Lexo (talk) 21:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This gathering had nothing to do with Bruno. Most of us there were in agreement that he was cruel, ignorant and a bully. We did not "celebrate" him in any way. In fact, his name was never mentioned in any public way.

His suicide freed up many of us to begin to talk about the evil the man inflicted upon us and to begin to heal. We needed each other, and have helped each other in many ways.

It is not true that all of the counselors who were there still admire Bruno. Most have now realized that he was a psychological terrorist and realize the damage he did to each and every one of his "patients".

The gathering was for us, not for him. He should go down in history as an abusive bully, a fraud and a liar.

• I have no opinion one way or the other about the subject of the article. However, I must ask you to please review WP:NPOV before contributing on this particular subject. We recognize it is difficult to put aside strong feelings, but because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we must always attempt to present an impartial view. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 17:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added the awards that this book won. Unlike some of this article, these are verifable objective facts. The general tenor of this article feels POV and, in my opinion, it should be flagged as such. (See also my note on his Biography)

--Roger Mexico 22:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's for starters: Refrigerator Mothers

Michael David 14:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a wikipedia article - people should go beyond that for sources.--Parkwells (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited and re-phrased some of this paragraph, to at least give it an approximation of the English language and coherence. However, some of the material still feels unsuitable for this context, and what is more there is no referencing to back up the claims. Can a dispassionate person who knows something on this subject work on this page?

Jmc29 21:50, 29 May 2006 (GMT)

This article should be flagged as self-contradictory. Separate paragraphs on Bettelheim's theory of autism and its consequences condemn and then excuse him as misunderstood by other practitioners.

The addendum on Bettelheim and homosexuality obviously breaches NPOV.

William lee0 11:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to edit the article because I would cause more controversy than the matter is worth. My credentials are as the parent of a daughter who spent twelve years at the Orthogenic School although she only overlapped Bettelheim for one of these.

That the article is grossly unfair to Bettelheim goes without saying. However he stood for an approach to the treatment of mental problems that is no longer practiced, apart from small enclaves (I assume the Shankman School continues), not because it was ineffective but because it was too expensive. In my experience the present-day drug-based approached is not one bit better. But it is much cheaper.

In this sense his life's work was not a success. He spent a number of years testing the "refrigerator parent theory" as a scientist ought to do and in the end he concluded it was false. His mode of therapy was rejected by society as too expensive. No wonder he was depressed.

He was not a diplomatic man and he made enemies. I feel the hostility that drips from the current article is offensive and unnecessary.

Why not just a straight career biography - actually there is one already in the article - a paragraph about his intellectual defeat and nothing more?

Kleinecke 02:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's known beyond a reasonable doubt that he lied about his education (he did NOT have a Ph.D. at the University, and actually did not even attend, not even for a day). Dozens of former female students have also claimed he viciously raped them, then blamed them for their trauma (because apparently it's always the woman's fault). See the book The Creation of Dr. B: A Biography of Bruno Bettelheim for further information. --Charlene 03:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the reviews of a biography simply said he completed a PhD without honors, rather than the three with honors he had boasted about.--Parkwells (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "hostility that drips from the current article" is perhaps because people are aware that because of this mendacious and formidable man, mothers across the world were told and are still being told to this day--yes, in the 21st century-- in places like France, Argentina, China, Saudi Arabia-- that they caused their child's autism by their coldness and lack of love. Bettelheim's theory has caused and is still causing divorces, conflict and untold misery in tens of thousands of families whose neighbors, friends, teachers and psychologists believed the writings of this "great man." I heard a University of Chicago vice-president mention Bettelheim approvingly twice in a recent speech, as if the university should be proud of him. His book The Empty Fortress continues in print as if it were still considered authoritative.

Bettelheim's only claim to any kind of academic authority was his expertise with autism, and that was based on lies and distortions of the truth-- even his friend Theron Raines admits in Raines' biography of Bettelheim that he was taken aback by the extent of Bettelheim's lying (he did not have the background in Vienna that he claimed, he did not spend years in concentration camps, "his" experience with an autistic girl turned out to be his wife's, his claims of cure were deliberately unverifiable because "it would disturb the patient", etc.). He should never have been given the awed reverence that he received for forty years, and still receives all too frequently. The real authority in the field and originator of the term autism, Leo Kanner, early on (1965) gave up his theory about "refrigerator mothers" because it didn't jibe with the facts he was observing. But that didn't stop Bettelheim from continuing against all evidence to blame mothers for the next 35 years, well after that mentality fell out of fashion.

I have actually seen a video of Bettelheim saying that he encourages children to urinate and spit on photos of their mothers because the mothers caused their autism.

He blamed mothers for everything. During the Vietnam war, I personally witnessed him telling a large audience of students that they opposed the Vietnam war because they hated their mothers.

He was a good writer, I'll give him that. He wrote eloquently about fairy tales.

Evangeline (talk) 08:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are several apparent inaccuracies in the lifestory as contained in this article.

Bettelheim's biography in The Uses of Enchantment (Penguin, ISBN: 0-14-013727-0) states that he did formally study psychology. He "obtained a doctorate in psychology from the University of Vienna". It also states that he was interned in Dachau and Buchenwald "during the Second World War" not simply prior to it. The uses of the phrase "It seems..." implies that the challenges are objective fact rather than a matter of controversy.

I would also query the statement that he took part in the "infamous T-4 euthanasia program of the 1930s". My only source on this is Wikipedia's own entry on Aktion T4, but it states that the program began in October 1939. How then could Bettelheim be involved during the '30s?

--Roger Mexico 22:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roger, other sources prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had no such degree, but that he said he did. --Charlene 03:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In general, this article reads as if it were written by a twelve year old. At least use the title doctor, when the article itself just about manages remember Bettelheim's credentials. "Mr Bettelheim"??

Some suggestions for improvement as the article is expanded:

• Template:Infobox Scientist should be added
• Photograph should be added
• Further organisation and subdivision would be beneficial
• Information on research should be significantly expanded
• All referencing should be converted to use an inline citation format and references section
• External links list could do with pruning

Espresso Addict 02:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• References should be from third-party sources.--Parkwells (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I was converting the links to inline citations, I looked up the original articles referenced. The editor had referred to titles and authors totally incorrectly, so may not have been any more accurate in using info from the articles. It is hard to know. There are many books listed as references, but most citations come from book reviews, hardly the depth needed for this topic. The man was well-respected and influential in his lifetime. Yes, many different facts came out after his death, but whatever is written here needs to be sourced and accurate.--Parkwells (talk) 14:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For all the writing that has been done about Bettelheim, the article needs more citations from third-party scholarly sources. Two book reviews of biographies, however thorough, and an interest group website are not the standard.--Parkwells (talk) 14:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources, sources, sources, guys. This discussion page is becoming a heated forum in which people debate about whether or not Bettelheim was a 'bully and a liar'. Wikipedia is not the place for that; do it by email if you must do it at all. This article should be about the verifiable facts of the man's life and legacy. I have only read the book on autism (The Empty Fortress) and I understand that it has now been widely discredited - but I am not just going to say so without having some good sources to back me up. I don't have a personal opinion about what kind of man he was, I just want the article to give an accurate reflection of what he did, what people said he was like and what has happened to his reputation since his death. Right now the article has serious POV problems, probably as a result of people who hate Bettelheim editing it to reflect things they personally know but can't or won't provide a citation for. I have gone through the article and removed the most glaring offenders. Lexo (talk) 21:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having gone through the article one more time, I will go further and say that this article is seriously compromised by violations of WP:NPOV and is in need of being rebuilt from the bottom up. Nearly every paragraph contains either unsourced assertions or weasel wording; if Bettelheim were still alive he could probably have sued somebody. I also note that the total sources for the assertions made in the article amount to three published magazine/newspaper articles and a website. This is pretty pathetic. I have neither the time nor the resources to acquire biographies of Bettelheim, but can't someone who does back up some of the allegations made in this article? Lexo (talk) 22:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How did Bettelheim commit suicide - is this certain (as he was 86 and typical 86 year olds are not prone to kill themselves). Could we source a website?

Also, could a more experienced wiki user flag this article as in drastic need of peer editing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.41.173 (talk) 05:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He placed a plastic bag over his head while living in a nursing home in Maryland. Prior to that he had suffered a bad stroke and could no longer walk properly, and the stroke appeared to have caused cognitive problems as well. Stroke victims unfortunately do often kill themselves, regardless of age. --Trippz (talk) 14:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]