Abstract

The authenticity of Charcot's original descriptions of hysteria has been questioned in the popular media. None the less, it is still possible to encounter florid forms of hysteria in culturally deprived communities, and to answer Charcot's present day critics we present a selection of patients from Kentucky's Appalachian counties with hysterial neurological disease. Their case histories are contrasted with those Charcot himself described and thereby form a modern commentary on such conditions as la grande hyst?rie, hysteroepilepsy, hystero traumatic monoplegia, and hysterical hemianaesthesia. Introduction Hysteria is present when there is a disproportionate relation of symptoms to disability and a discrepancy between the manifesta? tions and the anatomical and physiological arrangements of the body.1 Caution must be exercised in accepting even the most florid presentations, and hysteria presenting with neurological symptoms may be especially misleading.2 Furthermore, the physician has the added duty to understand why the patient has taken to express himself or herself subconsciously in this manner. The un? expectedly high incidence of hysterical disorders among the underprivileged white community of Kentucky's Appalachian counties is a matter of surprise, matched only by the similarities of these disorders to the original descriptions of Charcot in his clinical lectures on diseases of the nervous system.3 Clinical presentations One of the most startling forms of hysteria that Charcot demonstrated at the Salp?tri?re was la grande hyst?rie, otherwise called hysteria major or hysteroepilepsy with distinctive crises. Freud described la grande hyst?rie as consisting of four phases4: the epileptoid; violent movements; attitudes passionnelles (the hallucinatory phase); and the concluding delirium. According to Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, Lancashire PR1 6PS E M R CRITCHLEY, dm, frcp, consultant neurologist Cardinal Glennon Memorial Hospital for Children, St Louis, Missouri 63104, USA H E CANTOR, md, paediatric neurologist Correspondence to: Dr E M R Critchley. This content downloaded from 207.46.13.129 on Sun, 26 Jun 2016 07:31:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.