Scan barcode
haleybre's review against another edition
dark
hopeful
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Confinement, Medical content, Medical trauma, Suicidal thoughts, Forced institutionalization, Mental illness, and Schizophrenia/Psychosis
sabrinaakina's review against another edition
1.0
Not really sure how to write a review for this book. The book jumped all over the place without any concrete foundation to do so.
nderiley's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting read that attempts to shed light on issues facing the mentally ill. Not as griping as Brain on Fire, but still a good read that will make you question some things about the industry
saranies's review against another edition
I wasn't able to finish this book as it needed to go back to the library. I think it suffered from coming to me at the beginning of the pandemic; I lack the attention span to really dig into it, and also just care less about investigative long non-fiction right now.
kb_hg's review against another edition
4.0
I loved the audio book and I also love learning about new things so win win.
mmanuelap's review against another edition
2.0
I'll start off by saying that I love the topics and premise of this book: mental health, the systems we've put in place to take care of these patients throughout the past decades, and the mystery around a study that greatly changed how we see and approach these subjects.
Though the story of the study is entertaining and the contextual history of psychology/psychiatry treatments and hospitals is a good addition to understand the study's impact, I found myself dozing off when the author tried tying all of this with her own experiences in mental health. I get that it was a huge motivator for writing this book, but it just felt forced to have it brought up again and again. It turned into a story about an author doing research on a study, instead of a story about the study itself and how accurate it is (or not).
Another thing that really bothered me is the ending. I won't say much about it, but having a whole book about the rights and wrongs in psychiatric treatments and diagnosis in the past decades and only one page on potential solutions and hopes for the future, felt forced.
I wanted this book to be more of an exploration of well accepted norms (and whether or not they should be the norms, and why), but it turned out to be a memoir of someone researching how a study was done. Generally an ok book, but doesn't deliver on what it promises.
Though the story of the study is entertaining and the contextual history of psychology/psychiatry treatments and hospitals is a good addition to understand the study's impact, I found myself dozing off when the author tried tying all of this with her own experiences in mental health. I get that it was a huge motivator for writing this book, but it just felt forced to have it brought up again and again. It turned into a story about an author doing research on a study, instead of a story about the study itself and how accurate it is (or not).
Another thing that really bothered me is the ending. I won't say much about it, but having a whole book about the rights and wrongs in psychiatric treatments and diagnosis in the past decades and only one page on potential solutions and hopes for the future, felt forced.
I wanted this book to be more of an exploration of well accepted norms (and whether or not they should be the norms, and why), but it turned out to be a memoir of someone researching how a study was done. Generally an ok book, but doesn't deliver on what it promises.
mmcasey9's review against another edition
3.0
I think the main idea of this book is that the author believes that the field of psychiatry still greatly struggles with properly diagnosing patients despite revolutionary work completed in the 1970s and 80s (specifically the pseudo patient study that is the key focus of the book). For me, this book read a little like a disjointed term paper and as a result, I struggled to fully comprehend where it was heading at times. The beginning is compelling as the author revisits her almost disastrous psychiatric misdiagnosis from her memoir “Brain on Fire” and she wonders how many other misdiagnoses may have lead to terrible outcomes for patients with physical ailments vice psychiatric ones. She then takes us on her investigative journey researching the pseudo patient psychiatric study which ultimately leaves her with more questions and misgivings regarding the main doctors and their research methods. I was very impressed by her research overall as it is incredibly extensive and also must have been quite difficult given most of the key players have passed away. This book may be more impactful for someone deeply engaged or interested in this area of study, but I personally struggled through parts of it and can’t say too much of it stuck with me.