Abstract
Within the tradition of psychoanalytic and psychiatric case studies, one generally tends to locate personal agency within a single subject. Even Freud’s most unusual and celebrated cases, such as “Rat Man,” “Schreber,” “Wolf Man,” etc., all the while being understood within the broader context of familial relations, nonetheless remain the individual subjects of psychoanalytic interpretation. However, in the case we will subsequently examine, namely, that of “Christopher,” one is confronted by an entirely new dynamics of agency, an agency shared by two distinctly different and removed subjects. This double agency is characteristic of a recently discovered and enigmatic psychiatric disorder, Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome (MBPS).1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Although the syndrome is oftentimes designated somewhat differently in the professional literature (e.g., Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, MSBP - or, likewise, MSP), we have here used the name preferred by Herbert A. Schreier and Judith A. Libow in their comprehensive book on the subject, Hurting for Love: Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome ( New York: Guilford Press, 1993 ).
Schreier and Libow, op. cit.,p. 15.
Stephen J. Boros, M.D., and Larry C. Brubaker (Special Agent, FBI), “Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy: Case Accounts,” FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, June, 1992, p. 20.
One of the most dramatic and widely covered of these cases was that of Ellen Storck. The New York Times, Newsday,and many other national and regional newspapers detailed her repeated court hearings from October of 1992 through May of 1994. Popular interest in the syndrome is reflected in numerous articles that have appeared in such widely read magazines as Newsweek, Good Housekeeping, The New Yorker, Redbook,etc.
Richard Asher, “Munchausen’s Syndrome,” The Lancet,Feb. 10, 1951, p. 341.
Cf., e.g., B. Cramer, M.R. Gershberg, M. Stem, “Munchausen syndrome: Its relationship to malingering, hysteria, and the physician-patient relationship,” Archives of General Psychiatry (1971), 24, 573–578, and J.P. Curran, “Hysterical dermatitis factitia,” American Journal of Diseases of Children (1973), 125, 564–567.
In a forthcoming volume entitled The Disordered Mother: Medical Power and the Construction of Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome,we present a historical account of factitious disorders, extending from witchcraft through hysteria, to MBPS. The principal argument in the text is that MBPS, like witchcraft and hysteria, is a fully constructed “disorder.”
Jean Baudrillard, Simulations, trans. by Paul Foss, Paul Patton, Phillip Beitchman ( New York: Semiotext(e), 1983 ), p. 2.
The whole section is virtually a reprint of Schreier’s earlier article, “The Perversion of Mothering: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy,” published in 1992 in The Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic. One obvious difference consists in the very authorship of the two versions. In the earlier article, Schreier begins his case study of “Christopher” by stating, “In one fairly typical case I consulted on…” (p. 424). In Chapter 5, the analogous passage states: “In one not particularly unusual case on which we consulted...” (p. 88).
Hurting for Love,pp. xiv-xv.
Ibid.,p. 89.
Ibid.,p. 221. Continuing: “As a friend put it, `You’re hot,’ meaning, of course [sic],that the syndrome has suddenly caught the eye of the media and the fascination of the public.”
Ibid.
Ibid.,p. 91.
Ibid.,p. 89.
Ibid.,p. 102.
Ibid.,p. 90.
Ibid.,p. 90.
The Perversion of Mothering,“ op. cit.,p. 426.
Hurting for Love,p. 91.
Ibid.,p. 91.
Ibid.,p. 90.
Ibid.,p. 92.
Ibid.,p. 93.
Ibid.,p. 90.
The Perversion of Mothering,“ op. cit.,p. 426. Here, the brothers and sisters are spoken of in the plural, since Schreier claims that the family has five children.
Hurting for Love,p. 91.
The Perversion of Mothering,“ op. cit.,p. 426.
Hurting for Love,p. 90. The incident is referred to in the Menninger Bulletin article as “One of Edith’s lies” and as a “deception.”
Ibid.,p. 91.
The Perversion of Mothering,“ op. cit.,p. 427 (emphasis added).
Hurting for Love,p. x.
Ibid.,p. 91.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Allison, D.B., Roberts, M.S. (1995). Reading the Case of Christopher. In: Babich, B.E. (eds) From Phenomenology to Thought, Errancy, and Desire. Phaenomenologica, vol 133. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1624-6_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1624-6_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4576-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1624-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive