The Surgical Elimination of Violence? Conflicting Attitudes towards Technology and Science during the Psychosurgery Controversy of the 1970s

Topectomy versus leukotomy: J. Lawrence Pool's contribution to psychosurgery

Surgery of the mind has a rather checkered past. Though its history begins with the prehistoric trephination of skulls to allow "evil spirits" to escape, the early- to mid-20th century saw a surge in the popularity of psychosurgery. The 2 prevailing operations were topectomy and leukotomy for the treatment of certain mental illnesses. Although they were modified and refined by several of their main practitioners, the effectiveness of and the ethics involved with these operations remained controversial. In 1947, Dr. J. Lawrence Pool and the Columbia-Greystone Associates sought to rigorously investigate the outcomes of specific psychosurgical procedures. Pool along with R. G. Heath and John Weber believed that nonexcessive bifrontal cortical ablation could successfully treat certain mental illnesses without the undesired consequences of irreversible personality changes. They conducted this investigation at the psychiatric hospital at Greystone Park near Morristown, New Jersey. Despite several encouraging findings of the Columbia-Greystone project, psychosurgery practices began to decline significantly in the 1950s. The uncertainty of results and ethical debates related to side effects made these procedures unpopular. Further, groups such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the American Civil Liberties Union condemned the use of psychosurgery, believing it to be an inhumane form of treatment. Today, there are strict guidelines that must be adhered to when evaluating a patient for psychosurgery procedures. It is imperative for the neurosurgery community to remember the history of psychosurgery to provide the best possible current treatment and to search for better future treatments for a particularly vulnerable patient population.

Queer signs: The women of the British projective test movement

As queer history is often hidden, historians must look for "signs" that hint at queer lives and experiences. When psychologists use projective tests, the search for queer signs has historically been more literal, and this was especially true in the homophobic practices of Psychology in the mid-twentieth century. In this paper, I respond to Elizabeth Scarborough's call for more analytic history about the lesser known women in Psychology's history. By focusing on British projective research conducted by lesbian psychologist June Hopkins, I shift perspective and consider, not those who were tested (which has been historically more common), but those who did the testing, and position them as potential queer subjects. After briefly outlining why the projective test movement is ripe for such analysis and the kinds of queer signs that were identified using the Rorschach ink blot test in the mid-twentieth century, I then present June Hopkins' (1969, 1970) research on the "lesbian personality." This work forms a framework upon which I then consider the lives of Margaret Lowenfeld, Ann Kaldegg, and Effie Lillian Hutton, all of whom were involved in the British projective test movement a generation prior to Hopkins. By adopting Hopkins' research to frame their lives, I present the possibility of this ambiguous history being distinctly queer.