[The debate over "hysteria"].
The debate on hysteria at the "Société de Neurologie" in 1908 signed the official death certificate for Charcot's hysteria, which even in his day had started to come under attack. The article by Babinski in 1901 had delivered the "coup de grâce". The debate paints an astonishing picture of the medical world of the day, and also of hysteria, which would never again present the spectacular clinical picture seen up to that point. Babinski, dominating the debate with his strong personality, prevented a discussion on the mental basis for hysteria, requested by several participants, in favour of pithiatism, which in his view offered an acceptable definition of hysteria. It is surprising that more was not made of the contradiction in terms in the expression "auto-suggestion", and of the fact that Babinski was begging the question when he asserted that it could not be asserted that a patient had been subject to suggestion! This debate effectively banished hysteria from the columns of the neurological press, whose pages it had tended to overburden. It cannot however be blamed for not having made a positive contribution to our understanding of this neurosis which, even today, remains enigmatic. It does our Society credit to have ruled out "for ethical reasons" the hypothesis of simulation.
Laplane
D
D
Bonduelle
M
M
D000328:Adult; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D005260:Female; D005602:France; D049672:History, 19th Century; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D007046:Hysteria / Q000266:history* / Q000523:psychology; D008297:Male; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000266:history / Q000523:psychology; D008959:Models, Neurological; D008960:Models, Psychological; D009422:Nervous System Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000266:history / Q000523:psychology; D009462:Neurology / Q000266:history*; D010297:Paris; D012955:Societies, Medical / Q000266:history