To the Editor:
In
Partisan Review
4/97 Edith
Kurzweil contends that Bruno
Bettelheim's career was built on a fic–
tional past. She bases this on Richard
Pollak's biography of Bettelheim.
The fiction of
which
he is accused is
that of claiming psychological psy–
choanalytic credentials and, thereby,
getting
his
early appointments. The
fact is that for
his
major appoint–
ments as Professor at the University
of Chicago and Principal of the
Orthogenic School he needed nei–
ther psychological nor psychoanalytic
credentials. His first and primary
appointment was in the Department
of Education for
which
a doctorate
in philosophy
was
quite adequate; at
the time, there were no particular
credentials necessary to direct a
school for emotionally di sturbed
children; and nei ther the Orthogenic
School nor the department of educa–
tion was psychoanalytically oriented.
Furthermore in 1952 (when I arrived
in Chicago), everyone who knew
Bettelheim, incl uding Orthogenic
School still and Department of
Education faculty, knew that
his
doctorate was in
art
history.
Kurzweil reports that Pollak's
biography is based on meticulous
research and is even-handed. He cer–
tainly did a lot of research. However,
in those areas with
which
I am per–
sonally familiar (both through direct
observation over many years and
through familiarity with all profes–
sional records), much of it was
presented in a very distorted and
clearly biased fashion. It is unfortu-
nate that a reviewer perpetuates these
gross misrepresentations, among
which
the above is one of the more
flagrant.
Jacquelyn Sanders, Ph.D.
University of Chicago
To the Editor:
As
the author of a major text–
book in the field of autism, I am
writing to tell you that the book
review by Edith Kurzweil entitled
"The Inimitable Bruno Bettelheim"
sullies the intellectual reputation of
your magazine. It is a strikingly illit–
erate defense of Bettelheim and
his
work.
There is consensus in the field
today that Bettelheim did not even
know how to diagnose autism,
much less treat it. He certainly did
not "help a number of autistic chil–
dren live full lives" as the book
review states at its end. What he did
do is abuse parents, particularly
mothers, of these neurologically
impaired children. I know of no
other professional in my lifetime
who so violated the rule of medi–
cine "do no harm."
Personally, I also found the
book review offensive in its defense
of Bettelheim's lifetime of lying
and cheating as a normal behavior
of immigrants to the United States.
This impinges the achievements of
the overwhelming number of hon–
est immigrants who found success
here.
Mary Coleman, MD
Lake Forest, illinois
