History of military psychology.

Military psychology is a specialist discipline within applied psychology. It entails the application of psychological science to military operations, systems and personnel. The specialty was formally founded during World War I in the UK and the USA, and it was integral to many early concepts and interventions for psychological and neuropsychological trauma. It also established a fundamental basis for the psychological assessment and selection of military personnel. During and after World War II, military psychology continued to make significant contributions to aviation psychology, cognitive testing, rehabilitation psychology and many models of psychotherapy. Military psychology now consists of several subspecialties, including clinical, research and occupational psychology, with the latter often referred to in the USA as industrial/organisational psychology. This article will provide an overview of the origins, history and current composition of military psychology in the UK, with select international illustrations also being offered.

175 Years of Progress in PTSD Therapeutics: Learning From the Past.

Traumatic stressors have always been a part of the human experience. What is now referred to as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was first studied in the context of military trauma during the Civil War and World War I but most extensively in World War II. Much of what we know about the medical and psychological management of PTSD has its origins in military psychiatric approaches, and a review of these practices reveals important tenets that should be applied in current treatment for both military and nonmilitary PTSD. These practices include intervention as soon as possible after the traumatic exposure, provision for a safe and supportive therapeutic milieu designed for an individual's relatively rapid return to his or her responsibilities and normal activities, and using a combination of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy (especially exposure to the traumatic memory). A review of current guidelines for treatment of PTSD reveals that few treatments are endorsed with great certainty, owing in large part to a paucity of clinical trials, particularly of pharmacotherapy. This shortcoming must be addressed to enable translation of promising discoveries in the neuroscience of fear into the therapeutic advances patients need and deserve. [AJP at 175: Remembering Our Past As We Envision Our Future March 1947: Psychiatric Experience in the War, 1941-1946 Brig. General William C. Menninger "Another observation which can be made as a result of our experience, is that if intensive treatment was provided early, in an environment in which the expectation of recovery prevailed, remarkable results were obtained." (Am J Psychiatry 1947; 103:577-586 )].

Battle for the mind: World War 1 and the birth of military psychiatry.

The 100th anniversary of the outbreak of World War 1 could be viewed as a tempting opportunity to acknowledge the origins of military psychiatry and the start of a journey from psychological ignorance to enlightenment. However, the psychiatric legacy of the war is ambiguous. During World War 1, a new disorder (shellshock) and a new treatment (forward psychiatry) were introduced, but the former should not be thought of as the first recognition of what is now called post-traumatic stress disorder and the latter did not offer the solution to the management of psychiatric casualties, as was subsequently claimed. For this Series paper, we researched contemporary publications, classified military reports, and casualty returns to reassess the conventional narrative about the effect of shellshock on psychiatric practice. We conclude that the expression of distress by soldiers was culturally mediated and that patients with postcombat syndromes presented with symptom clusters and causal interpretations that engaged the attention of doctors but also resonated with popular health concerns. Likewise, claims for the efficacy of forward psychiatry were inflated. The vigorous debates that arose in response to controversy about the nature of psychiatric disorders and the discussions about how these disorders should be managed remain relevant to the trauma experienced by military personnel who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The psychiatric history of World War 1 should be thought of as an opportunity for commemoration and in terms of its contemporary relevance-not as an opportunity for self-congratulation.

Shell Shock and the Kloppe: war neuroses amongst British and Belgian troops during and after the First World War.

During the First World War combatants of all armies were prey to nervous disorders or psychological breakdown. These war neuroses were a response to the highly-industrialised nature of the warfare as well as to the fatigue engendered over four years of intense conflict. Yet while fear and mental breakdown were universal, national responses varied. A comparison of British and Belgian shell shock indicates that men suffered in very similar ways but that symptoms met with rather different responses: in Britain treatment and diagnostic regimes stressed the importance of class difference and shell shock was often linked to cowardice. These issues were not of overriding importance in the Belgian army. In the longer term shell shock became, and remained, a topic of political and social concern in Britain whereas in Belgium men suffering from kloppe (extreme fear) tended to be forgotten and the topic has not excited much popular interest or scholarly attention. Yet despite these differences one overarching theme remains clear, namely that despite the extensive experience of war neuroses during and after the First World War, there still remains a fierce stigma about the mental wounds of war.

[Research and treatment of war neuroses at the Clinic for Nervous and Mental Diseases at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow before World War II in the context of psychiatry in Europe]. / Badania i leczenie nerwic wojennych w Klinice Neurologiczno-Psychiatrycznej Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego w Krakowie przed II wojna swiatowa na tle psychiatrii europejskiej.

The aim of this article is to offer an overview of the research into diagnosis and treatment of war neuroses at the Clinic for Nervous and Mental Diseases at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow before the outbreak of World War II. It also includes a profile of the work of Prof. Jan Piltz, the then director of the Clinic, and his major scientific achievements. The publications cited in the article date in the main from the period of World War I, and comprise clinical analyses of the consequences of stress suffered at the front as well as a description of the ways in which they were treated. These are presented alongside other major findings related to war neuroses being made in Europe at the time. The article draws attention to the very modern thinking on treatment of war neuroses, far ahead of the average standards of the day, evinced by Prof. Piltz and his team. The most important innovative elements of their treatment of these conditions were the fact that they perceived the cause of the neurosis to lie in previous personality disorders in the patients, their recommendation of psychotherapy as the main method of treatment, and their emphasis on the need for further rehabilitation following the completion of the course of hospital treatment. They also paid significant attention to the importance of drawing up individual therapy plans for each patient.

Documented suicides within the British Army during the Crimean War 1854-1856.

We have little understanding of the increased active duty military suicide rates found in the United States, and little understanding of what is historically normative for combatants. Therefore, we examined historical records on suicides among the British Army during the Crimean War for the years 1854-1856. There were 18 documented suicides in the British Army during this period. Calculating an accurate annual suicide rate per 100,000 is impossible because it is unclear how many of the 111,313 military personnel were in country for each of the 2 years of the war. However, the range is conservatively estimated between 8 and 16 per 100,000, with the likely answer somewhere near the middle. This suggests the possibility that increasing suicide rates among active duty military may be a modern U.S. phenomenon.

German battle casualties: the treatment of functional somatic disorders during World War I.

World War I witnessed the admission of large numbers of German soldiers with neurological symptoms for which there was no obvious organic cause. This posed a considerable challenge for the military and medical authorities and resulted in an active discussion on the etiology and treatment of these disorders. Current historiography is reliant on published physician accounts, and this represents the first study of treatment approaches based on original case notes. We analyzed patient records from two leading departments of academic psychiatry in Germany, those at Berlin and Jena, in conjunction with the contemporaneous medical literature. Treatment, which can be broadly classified into reward and punishment, suggestion, affective shock, cognitive learning, and physiological methods, was developed in the context of the emerging fields of animal learning and neurophysiology. A further innovative feature was the use of quantitative methods to assess outcomes. These measures showed good response rates, though most cured patients were not sent back to battle because of their presumed psychopathic constitution. While some treatments appear unnecessarily harsh from today's perspective and were also criticized by leading psychiatrists of the time, the concentration of effort and involvement of so many senior doctors led to the development of psychotherapeutic methods that were to influence the field of psychiatric therapy for decades to come.

[Friedrich Mauz: T4 assessor and military psychiatrist]. / Friedrich Mauz - T4-Gutachter und Militärpsychiater.

Friedrich Mauz is one of the medical perpetrators of the second tier whose biography is difficult to comprehend. Autobiographies from three different political systems exist - Weimar Republic, the Third Reich, and postwar Germany in which he constantly reinvented himself. While after 1933 he suddenly emphasized his participation in the civil war turmoil during the early period of the Weimar Republic and his patriotism, he then depicted himself after 1945 as an apolitical person characterized by Württemberg pietism who inwardly rejected the Nazi State but had found himself prepared to accept "all sorts of humiliating concessions." He claimed that he had always remained true to his scientific code of conduct and had distanced himself from psychiatric genetics. In point of fact, Mauz was among those exonerated in the denazification trial in 1946 and was able to pursue his career in the Federal Republic of Germany. However, if the sources are read against the grain, a different picture emerges. Mauz's career stalled in the 1930s, not because he had been politically offensive, but because his scientific work was flimsy and considered lacking originality, particularly since he had chosen constitution research and psychotherapy as his main fields of interest, which were overshadowed by research in genetic psychiatry in the 1930s. Mauz tendered his services to the Nazi policy of genetic health, served as a medical assessor in proceedings based on the "Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring," permitted himself to be recruited for the T4 program as a medical expert, even participated in the deliberations on a future "Law on Euthanasia," and as a consulting psychiatrist for the German Armed Forces contributed to military medicine.

Herbert Spiegel, MD, a man for all seasons: early personal and professional development, 1914-1946.

Herbert Spiegel, MD, was a pioneer in American psychiatry and the field of hypnosis, which he first started using as an army psychiatrist posted at Fort Meade, Maryland. He served as a battalion surgeon during the invasion of North Africa and later in the Tunisian campaign. On the battlefield, Spiegel used hypnosis for quick symptom resolution and pain control. He was wounded in action on May 7, 1943, and was awarded a Purple Heart for his courage and bravery. When Spiegel was evacuated back to America, he began writing about short-term treatment strategies based on cognitive restructuring, hypnosis, and other clinical techniques. This article details his early life and career.

Casualties.

Privation and disease have mainly killed soldiers until very recently. Now that enemy action predominates, faster and better control of bleeding and infection before and during evacuation spares ever more lives today. This essay focuses on psychological war wounds, placing them in the context of military casualties. The surgeon's concepts of 'primary' wounds in war, and of would 'complications' and 'contamination', serve as models for psychological and moral injury in war. 'Psychological injury' is explained and preferred to 'Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder', being less stigmatizing and more faithful to the phenomenon. Primary psychological injury equates to the direct damage done by a bullet; the complications - for example, alcohol abuse - equate to hemorrhage and infection. Two current senses of 'moral injury' equate to wound contamination. As with physical wounds, it is the complications and contamination of mental wounds that most often kill service members or veterans, or blight their lives.