David Rosenhan in his work; “On Being Sane in Insane Places”, presents a colorful argument against the assumption that psychiatrists can be able to make rationally accurate diagnosis on normality or insanity. He argues that sanity or insanity has much to do with the labels which are applied to individuals in specific environments. He argues that these diagnoses are based on the thoughts of the observers and not the traits portrayed by mentally ill individuals. Thus, psychological deliberation of insanity is meaningless and harmful.
He presents the findings of an experiment which involved the secret admission of eight normal people (Pseudo-patients); who have never suffered any psychiatric disorder. The experiment was focused in determining if they were found to be normal and the process of determination. This paper discusses the reaction to confinement by the Pseudo patients in the various hospitals of admission. It also examines how they perceived patients and staff at the hospitals. Thirdly, a discussion of Rosenhan’s characterization of mental hospital staff members is given. Finally, the paper discusses the recommendations given by Rosenhan to solve the problems he highlighted in the study.
After gaining their secret admissions, the pseudo-patients stopped the simulation of symptoms which suggested mental illness. Over some instances, they experienced as short period of mild anxiety and nervousness because they did not believe they would be admitted with such ease. Majority of them had fears that they will be exposed soon after admission as fraudsters, resulting in great embarrassment. They were also uncertain of what might happen to them, being in hospital as patients. Nevertheless, the tension and anxiety was to be short-lived, they conducted themselves normally; speaking to patients normally, engaging them in conversations. They also responded positively when asked about their conditions; responded to instruction from ward attendants, medication...