Between healing and repression: The role of medicine and psychiatry in Hohenschönhausen prison as reconstructed from memories.

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 Q4 HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
History of Psychiatry Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-15 DOI:10.1177/0957154X261427322
Felicitas Söhner, Kathleen Haack, Tilman Wickert, Ekkehardt Kumbier
{"title":"Between healing and repression: The role of medicine and psychiatry in Hohenschönhausen prison as reconstructed from memories.","authors":"Felicitas Söhner, Kathleen Haack, Tilman Wickert, Ekkehardt Kumbier","doi":"10.1177/0957154X261427322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigates the role of medical, and in particular psychiatric, care in the Berlin-Hohenschönhausen remand prison, situated within the repressive state security apparatus of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). Drawing on 11 oral history interviews with former political prisoners, two physicians in different capacities, and a lawyer, it examines the tensions between the professional mandate of care and the political embedding of medical practice. The central question is how doctors navigated a system that structurally intertwined care and control. The findings reveal a complex and ambivalent picture. Physicians frequently emphasised adherence to professional standards and ethical duties, and some exercised limited autonomy to influence treatment decisions. Yet, detainees describe medical care as intermittently available, often instrumentalised for political purposes, and sometimes experienced as distant or dismissive. Psychiatric interventions were rarely applied solely for therapeutic ends, but rather to maintain detainees' functional capacity for interrogation and to produce usable expert witness reports. Medical records were systematically communicated to the secret police, effectively suspending confidentiality. Reports of sedation during interrogation further highlight unresolved ethical and practical tensions. Overall, the study demonstrates that medical expertise in this context was both constrained and deployed in ways that reinforced state control, yet individual physicians occasionally exercised agency within these restrictions. By juxtaposing professional self-perceptions with detainees' experiences, the research contributes to a nuanced historical reassessment of medicine under authoritarian conditions. It underscores the duality of care and coercion, the uneven distribution of agency, and the moral dilemmas faced by medical personnel.</p>","PeriodicalId":45965,"journal":{"name":"History of Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"260-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X261427322","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the role of medical, and in particular psychiatric, care in the Berlin-Hohenschönhausen remand prison, situated within the repressive state security apparatus of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). Drawing on 11 oral history interviews with former political prisoners, two physicians in different capacities, and a lawyer, it examines the tensions between the professional mandate of care and the political embedding of medical practice. The central question is how doctors navigated a system that structurally intertwined care and control. The findings reveal a complex and ambivalent picture. Physicians frequently emphasised adherence to professional standards and ethical duties, and some exercised limited autonomy to influence treatment decisions. Yet, detainees describe medical care as intermittently available, often instrumentalised for political purposes, and sometimes experienced as distant or dismissive. Psychiatric interventions were rarely applied solely for therapeutic ends, but rather to maintain detainees' functional capacity for interrogation and to produce usable expert witness reports. Medical records were systematically communicated to the secret police, effectively suspending confidentiality. Reports of sedation during interrogation further highlight unresolved ethical and practical tensions. Overall, the study demonstrates that medical expertise in this context was both constrained and deployed in ways that reinforced state control, yet individual physicians occasionally exercised agency within these restrictions. By juxtaposing professional self-perceptions with detainees' experiences, the research contributes to a nuanced historical reassessment of medicine under authoritarian conditions. It underscores the duality of care and coercion, the uneven distribution of agency, and the moral dilemmas faced by medical personnel.

在治愈和压抑之间:医学和精神病学在Hohenschönhausen监狱中从记忆中重建的角色。
本研究调查了位于德意志民主共和国(民主共和国)高压国家安全机构内的Berlin-Hohenschönhausen还押监狱的医疗,特别是精神护理的作用。通过对前政治犯、两名不同身份的医生和一名律师的11次口述历史采访,该报告审视了护理的专业任务与医疗实践的政治嵌入之间的紧张关系。核心问题是医生如何驾驭一个结构上交织在一起的医疗和控制系统。研究结果揭示了一幅复杂而矛盾的图景。医生经常强调遵守专业标准和道德责任,有些医生行使有限的自主权来影响治疗决定。然而,被拘留者说,医疗服务时断时续,往往被用作政治目的的工具,有时被视为冷淡或不屑一顾。精神病干预很少仅仅用于治疗目的,而是为了维持被拘留者的审讯能力和提供可用的专家证人报告。医疗记录系统地传达给秘密警察,有效地中止了保密性。关于在审讯中使用镇静剂的报道进一步凸显了尚未解决的道德和实际矛盾。总的来说,研究表明,在这种情况下,医疗专业知识既受到限制,也以加强国家控制的方式部署,但个别医生偶尔会在这些限制范围内行使代理。通过将职业自我认知与被拘留者的经历并置,该研究有助于对专制条件下的医学进行细致入微的历史重新评估。它强调了护理和强制的双重性、代理分配的不均匀以及医务人员面临的道德困境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: History of Psychiatry publishes research articles, analysis and information across the entire field of the history of mental illness and the forms of medicine, psychiatry, cultural response and social policy which have evolved to understand and treat it. It covers all periods of history up to the present day, and all nations and cultures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书