Laing Versus Szasz: Antagonists, Kindred Spirits, or a Misconstrued Rivalry?

Abstract

In the mid-1970s, as the role of institutional psychiatry was being debated, Thomas S. Szasz directed a severe and unexpected critique at the work of Ronald D. Laing, after which there arose an acrimonious debate between Szasz and supporters of Laing in the Philadelphia Association (PA). (Laing himself conspicuously declined to respond to Szasz). This clash of views was initiated by Szasz in The New Review (TNR), which prompted a series of rebuttals from those working alongside Laing in the PA. Pivotal to this dispute were contrasting ideas on how to guide people from breakdown to sanity and the roles to be played by professionals and institutions in engaging with them. The main purpose of this article is to evaluate whether Laing (seen through lens of his then-associates in the PA) and Szasz were “antagonists,” whether they shared a kindred spirit in their view of the psychiatric establishment, or whether their perceived differences on how to treat psychic sufferers stemmed from misrepresentations created by themselves or others. My conclusion is that, even though Laing and Szasz shared an interest in changing conventional psychiatric practice and the mode of understanding and treating psychic suffering, each side misconstrued the position of the other.