publication of his book, most of the comments appeared in academic journals and were ignored by the popular press. See Jacques May's letter to Scientific American, 200 (May 1959): 12; Norris Haring & E. Lakin Phillips, Educating Emotionally Disturbed Children (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962): 21; and C. Gary Merritt's, review of The Empty Fortress, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 38 (Oct. 1968): 926-930.

3. This hypothesis was originally hinted at by Leo Kanner. Although Kanner allowed that the child's psychological environment could be influential he believed, though, could not prove, that autism was a disorder with which one was born. See Leo Kanner, "Problems of Nosology and Psychodynamics of Early Infantile Autism" American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 19 (July 1949): 425.

4. The first letter appeared in the Chicago newspaper, the Reader on April 6, 1990. Although it was unsigned, it was later attributed to Alida Jatitch. Charles Pekow, also a former student, accused Bettelheim of making incorrect diagnoses and of abuse in the Washington Post on August 26, 1990. Graduate student Ronald Angres, another of Bettelheim's students diagnosed with autism, took his turn in the October 1990 issue of Commentary. Bettelheim biographer Nina Sutton and others have argued that many of these former students were upset that Bettelheim had committed suicide and were lashing out in hurt and anger. Others commented that since these former students were now such functional adults, Bettelheim's therapeutic method must have been effective. Some discounted the students' claims by arguing that when under Bettelheim's care they were considered "troubled" and thus their recollections are questionable at best. Yet, in light of the other posthumous revelations about Bettelheim, the students' story seems feasible.

5. It would seem that Bettelheim believed in relative truth concerning his credentials since, according to Sutton (1996), he worried about the possibility of the discovery of many of the half-truths and outright lies he used to bolster his credibility. However, it should be noted that Bettelheim never doubted the truth of his scholarly claims.

6. Peter Hobson, The Cradle of Thought (London: Macmillan, 2002).

7. Theron Raines, Rising to the Light: A Portrait of Bruno Bettelheim (N.Y.: Alfred A. Knopf, 2002).

8. Brussels: Mardaga 2002. Chapter 15 discusses autism.

9. Here is a typically obscure remark by the Master on autism: "Autism's weight of words corresponds [...] to a serious slowing down of language serial games - and not to a state of the infans being - a slowing down which may go as far as to seal itself in a deathly silence. The absolute Master, death, submits the serial to a law which organizes it, whereas seriousness ordains that there be no possible mistake about the Master; in this sense it does not deceive." (downloaded 10/26/05).

10. A social worker in Rice County, Minnesota, in the 1990's was notorious for pulling autistic children from their homes on the ground of child abuse.

12. Richard Pollak, The Creation of Dr. B: A Biography of Bruno Bettelheim (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997): 127.

13. Freud had become even more popular by the 1960's. For a discussion on Freud in America see: Nathan Hall, The Rise and Crisis of Psychoanalysis in the United States: Freud and the Americans, 1917-1985 (New York: Oxford UP, 1995). For a feminist take on the abuse of Freud, see Molly Ladd-Taylor and Lauri Umansky, "Bad" Mothers: The Politics of Blame in Twentieth-Century America. (New York: New York University Press, 1998).

14. Bruno Bettelheim, "Individual and Mass Behavior in Extreme Situations," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 38 (Oct. 1943): 417-452.

15. Two other essays on the camps had been published in England, but received little attention in the U.S. (Pollock 116).

16. In "Extreme Situations," Bettelheim states that he interviewed over 1500 prisoners while in the camps and had resided in 5 different bunkers. The former assertion is, by all accounts, highly unlikely. The latter is categorically untrue. In his introduction of The Empty Fortress, Bettelheim asserts that the scientific method is likely unsuited for psychological studies (3). Nonetheless, he utilizes statistics and scientific language in all of his major works to gain credibility.

17. His last contribution to a major psychoanalytic journal was in 1950. In 1961 he submitted an article about an autistic girl to the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. The editorial board said that it read "almost like a novel" (Pollock 225) but that they would like it if he "would supply more details as to how he rea[c]ed his formulations (letter from John Frosch to BB, Jan. 12, 1961, Max Gittelson papers, Library of Congress, cited in Pollock 225). Bettelheim made a rather acerbic reply and subsequently discontinued writing for academic journals.

18. See Sutton's biography for a near exhaustive list of Bettelheim's life publications.

19. The first was published in the March, 1966 ed. of Redbook, the second in the April 11, 1964 ed. of the Saturday Evening Post.

20. This article first appeared in the March 5th, 1959 edition of Scientific American. In typical Bettelheim style, it was fully illustrated with "Joey's" drawings showing his progress.

21. Bruno Bettelheim to Daniel Karlin, Nov. 4, 1974, cited in Pollock 328.

22. In writing for the magazine Politics in 1948, the editor told him that "for a general magazine, (heavy scholarly prose) … is not necessary, and just loses the reader's attention." Dwight Macdonald to Bruno Bettelheim, from the Dwight Macdonald papers, Manuscripts and Archives, Sterling Library, Yale University, cited in Pollock, 169. He not only learned his lesson, he later criticized others for the same thing. "In reviewing a book for the College Art Journal, Bettelheim criticized the author for making his text 'forbidding for the college student.'" Bruno Bettelheim review of "The Aesthetic Process" by Bertram Morris, College Art Journal 3 (May 1994):166, cited in Pollock 126.

23. Pollock 224-225.

24. Lynn Hunt, The Family Romance of the French Revolution (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).

25. In making this admission, Bettelheim directly contradicts his statement in his grant application. Bettelheim had stated that there weren't any long-term studies done on the subject of autism, yet the first researcher Bettelheim contends with is Kanner (with Eisenberg), who had conducted an extended study on autism before Bettelheim had begun his project.

26. L. Eisenberg & L. Kanner, "Early Infantile Autism, 1943-1955," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 26 (1956): 556-566, cited in Bettelheim (1967) 389.

27. The child to whom Bettelheim is here referring is Patsy. Not only was Patsy never actually diagnosed with autism, but as stated earlier, by all accounts Bettelheim had little to do with her care.

28. Bettelheim is again contradicting himself here. Earlier he stated that the reason he and the counselors had originally misunderstood Laurie's second collapse was because they had just started to work with children with autism and were still unduly influenced by arguments that these children could not form emotional relationships.

29. Bettelheim conveniently omits this portion of his theory in his review of Laurie's history. For Laurie, the autistic withdrawal was brought about by the desertion of her first nursemaid.

30. L. Eisenberg, "The Autistic Child in Adolescence," American Journal of Psychiatry 112 (1956): 607-612, cited in Bettelheim (1967): 413-416.

31. This is a particularly biting comment since Rimland's own son suffers from autism.

32. Aristotle, On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse, Trans. George Kennedy (New York: Oxford UP, 1991); Chaim Perelman & Lucy Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, Trans., J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver (London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969).

33. Alan Gross, The Rhetoric of Science (Cambridge MA: Harvard UP, 1990).

34. Robert L. Scott, "On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic" Central States Speech Journal (1967), and R. L. Scott, "On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic: Ten Years Later," Central States Speech Journal (1976).

35. Gross (129-143) elaborates on this in his analysis of the peer review process. Gross views peer review as a conjunction of speech act theory and Habermas' ideal speech situation so that editing and revising becomes an ideal interaction. Gross does, however, omit that the peer review process also encompasses the more specific audience issues referred to here. In scientific communities, Perelman's conceptualization of the universal and the particular audience are very nearly one and the same. In turn, this audience's acceptance of an argument validates that argument whereas the rejection acts as invalidation - the policing function of the communal audience.

36. Perelman 33

37. Perelman 32

38. Gross (85-96) has argued that the purpose of the scientific method is to induce cause and effect in order to generalize to a natural law. As a result, these tenants of "good science" are a reflection of Bacon's insistence on "true induction" as the only means of creating objective knowledge in the experimental sciences. Objectivity and induction are thus necessarily concomitant ideals in the sciences. To insure that studies are objective and hence inductive, they must be replicable. As a result, science privileges clear methodologies which include signs of objectivity checks like agreement among researchers. If a researcher is able to replicate the methodology used, they too should be able to discover similarly objective results, typically shown as statistical data.

39. To say that science privileges inductive over deductive reasoning does not mean that a researcher engages in a study without a theory or a methodology. In most cases, a researcher examines the available methods and theories for the phenomenon to be studied and honestly reveals her selection and the reasons for making it. Often, as research proceeds, theory and method are revised per the particulars of the specific phenomenon. This revision typically does not compromise the integrity of the study. It is built in to the scientific method to allow for the best possible understanding to be achieved.

40. Bettelheim says that he could have selected some of his students who have completely recovered after his treatment of which he gives several examples, perhaps the most impressive of which is the man who received his Ph.D. from the U. of Chicago. These testimonials help improve the credibility of his theory and methods. Nonetheless, he selected the most difficult of cases because they "showed [the] deepest arrest in personality." Bettelheim 9-10.

41. For a discussion on the reenactment of the inductive process see: Peter Medawar, "Is the Scientific Report Fraudulent? Yes; It Misrepresents Scientific Thought," Saturday Review 47 (August 1, 1964): 42-43. For a commentary on the introduction of the scientific article see: J.M. Swales, Gene Analysis: English and American Research Settings (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1990).

42. Bettelheim 8

43. Bettelheim 10-11

44. It is also interesting to note that Bettelheim considered himself the students' "super ego." He was the "somebody who offer[ed] himself up for the confrontation." As the statements of former students have attested, Bettelheim's confrontation was often physically and mentally abusive. This contradiction between Bettelheim's statements and actions makes his therapeutic methodology even more suspect. (Pollock, 191-211)

45. Perelman 29

46. Bettelheim is quite right about this. Most researchers at the time, including Kanner, believed that people with autism did not relate to others.



Return to Top of Page

Return to SCE Homepage
Return to Session Program