The Discovery of the Asylum: Social Order and Disorder in the New Republic

by David J. Rothman

This reissue of a classic study addresses a core concern of social historians and criminal justice professionals: Why in the early nineteenth century did a single generation of Americans resort for the first time to institutional care for its convicts, mentally ill, juvenile delinquents, orphans, and adult poor? Rothman's compelling analysis links this phenomenon to a desperate effort by Jacksonian society to instill a new social order as it perceived the loosening of family, church, and community bonds. As debate persists on the wisdom and effectiveness of these inherited solutions, The Discovery of Asylum offers a fascinating reflection on our past as well as a source of inspiration for a new century of students and professionals in criminal justice, corrections, social history, and law enforcement as they shape arguments for the reform of prisons and mental hospitals.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Sociology, American History, Mental Health, Disability, Politics

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1971

Reviews

[Rachel Oelbaum · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pretty much wrote my dissertation for me

[Cat · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed reading this book, though it did take me a while to read through it. Rothman advances an argument to explain why America turned to instituionalization of different classes of people during the Jacksonian period. His basic thesis is that medical elites feared the growing democratization of American society and therefore advanced the idea that institutionalization could make unproductive citizens productive and simletaneously serve as a model for the rest of the society.
In Rothman's model, the "Discovery of the Asylum" was both a progressive and deeply conservative event. This conflict is never resolved, and was ultimately at the root of the great failure of the rehabilative model of insitutionalization in the post civil war period. Rothman persuaively argues that by the 1880's, the idea that individuals could be rehabilitated by the process of instituionalization had been abandoned in favor of a "custodial" model.

Rothman looks at the examples of poor houses, pentientaries, orphanages and insane asylums to explicate his thesis.

Fans of Foucault's "Discipline and Punishment", Goffman's "Asylums" and Sykes "The Society of Captives" should find this book enthralling.

Highly recommended

[Dave · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant book indeed. The argument is essentially this: Institutional care arose for convicts, orphans, the mentally ill, and poor in the early nineteenth century because Jacksonian society perceived a "loosening" of the social order (i.e. family, church, and community bonds). The anxiety manifested itself in the way the institutions were set up to operate: "The felt need for order and discipline affected psychiatrists, wardens, and superintendents had a root outside the asylum...in a society deeply apprehensive about the prospect of disorder."


Buy this book and read it!!!!

[Robert Oeser · Rating 4 out of 5]

An in depth look at the development of the concept of asylum (penitentiaries, insane asylums, workhouses, almshouses and reformatories) from the Jacksonian era to the time after the Civil War, with extensive references to contemporary reports and statistics. The asylum began as a reform movement and in a relatively short period of time those in charge abandoned their lofty goals and became custodians, a situation that, I daresay, continues today.

[Danny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rothman does an excellent job examining the rise of different types of asylums in the Jacksonian era in U.S. history. He is very clear that the building of penitentiaries, insane asylums, almshouses for the poor, and reformatories for juvenile delinquents were built both for humanitarianism and social order. Those who built these asylums genuinely believed that these "deviant" individuals could be reformed and brought back into society. Definitely a well written book, and a worthwhile read.

[Yisu Z. · Rating 4 out of 5]

一本历史社会学的佳作，讲述了疯人院（asylum）在十九世纪美国形成的过程。作为训诫、纠正社会底层的过失人士（delinquent，穷人疯子小偷小摸等等）的社会制度，如何在社会剧烈变动的背景下创造出了一种对身体、精神、行为的改造（correction）。即作为传统制（家庭、监狱）度反面，也是补充。尤其是秩序、纪律与服从。

[Czarny Pies · Rating 4 out of 5]

This outstanding history of American efforts to develop new, more effective mental health institutions was a very worthy winner of the Albert J. Beveridge Award in 1971. It was a major work of an exciting new wave of American historiography which over the next 40 years would elevate American historical writing to a level equalled no where else in the world.

American social history was has been particularly outstanding during this period. The basic approach is to combine the brilliant theory of the French with the Anglo Saxon on drawing conclusions based on a balanced review of the facts.

For this book the big French Theory belonged to Foucault who had argued in Madness and Civilization that a society's social institutions such as hospitals, prisons, asylums and orphanages are the creations of a society's culture or collective mental state.

Taking this idea, Rothman closely examined the correspondence, memorandum and other recorded discussions surrounding the building of several innovative insane Asylums constructed during the Jacksonian era. Rothman noted that the Americans of the generation believed that it was there duty to try to improve the world. At the same time, they believed in the innate goodness of man as proposed by Rousseau. They believed that man's natural inclination was towards the good. If society intervened to help men follow their natural instincts to be good, the whole society would improve and everyone would achieve goodness.

Accepting the common notion that criminals and lunatic asylums tended to perpetrate of even increase the undesirable behaviour, because the inmates found themselves living a social environment peopled by either criminals or mentally ill people. Because man was naturally good, his tendencies towards crime must have come the environment in his family home.

The logical conclusion drawn from all of this was that the new institutions must be designed that the inmates never meet their colleagues as their meeting would only reinforce undesirable behaviours. Because the bad family upbringing had transformed them into criminals, it would be necessary to ban family visits.

The result was that the experiments where extraordinarily cruel. The inmates never saw each other living in complete isolation. Family visits were banned to prevent relatives from further corrupting the inmate. After 10 years, the mangers of the asylums were willing to admit that their methods were not working. They reversed themselves. They provided clothing for their children, kept them at home during the winter.

[Ashley · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's hard to believe that this book originally appeared in 1971! It's over 40 years old and holds up incredibly well. I found Rothman's arguments about the development of the asylum, alms house and/or work house, penitentiary, and orphanages both interesting and useful. Rothman argues that historians should consider these institutions along a continuum and rejected the tendency for medical historians to look only at the asylum and legal historians to look only an penitentiaries, for example. Instead, he lays out the ways that all these institutions developed in response to a particular set of social issues that concerned Americans during the Jacksonian era. He also outlines the ways in which these various institutions were more alike than different-- they all focused on quiet, isolation, and order. However, all became more custodial than curative/reforming by the 1870s.

The bulk of the book focuses on the period before the Civil War and he really glosses over the period from about 1850 to 1870. Perhaps that's because the war was so unlike any other time in institutions, that it's not useful (it would also make the book enormous!). However, given the recent turn to trauma studies in Civil War scholarship, I found myself wanting to know more about the ways that the war and soldiers (or the presence of their orphans, widows, etc) changed these institutions. Likewise, Rothman's book is so focused on the institutions that he does not spend much time talking about the ways that race or gender play into the experience of living in one of the institutions. He does acknowledge the role that nativity played in incarceration, but he ignores gender and race almost completely.

He opens and concludes the book with an interesting conversation about how the development of these institutions was not inevitable. Much of his projected focuses on de-naturalizing the asylum or prison. While I'm not quite sure that he achieves that goal, he certainly forces the reader to think about what purpose these places served, how that role changed, and why the institution is a convenient solution to complex problems.

This is not an easy book to read and is not intended for a general audience. However, anyone with some basic background in the early republic and the history of health or law could probably pick it up.

[Luke · Rating 3 out of 5]

My reading this year is circling a thread of incarceration and race, so I lucked out that a friend is teaching a grad course on the history of mass incarceration - this book is the foundational text I chose to join in on. Treats the early 19c invention of several institutions equally, despite the title: reformers bent on curing Crime, Poverty, Insanity by separating these populations from negative influences and instilling order and discipline. Rothman mostly lets the theories and justifications of these often utopian and liberal planners stand on their own, but contrasts them with the colonial precursors (of in-home care and community responsibility to their own) and points out the ways these new institutions failed to live up to their promises but remained useful to the states as populations and migration grew up to the civil war.

[Beth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Classic study of the institutionalization movement of the 19th century and a sharp critique of reformers during that era.

[Anna Nowinski · Rating 2 out of 5]

History of the institutionalization of the united states. Dull writing.

[Cerebralcortext · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a fascinating look into the origins of total institutions in America. The title and subtitle of the book do not lie: David Rothman expounds clearly and at length on every aspect of the systems the members of the New Republic devised. The book is largely organised by analysing in detail the archaeology of colonial practices, penitentiaries, asylums, almshouses, and reformatories, with each institution introduced by its assumptions and intent, followed by its de facto implementation. At the heart of this remarkable study is a warning that claims of all-encompassing social panaceas should rightly invite skepticism. In the advent of these institutions we see how perceptions and nostalgia translated a relatively benign situation into one of great anxiety in the Jacksonian era, as commentators and observers mourned a moral past that existed only in their fantasies. They saw all around them a degenerate and uncomfortable new reality which they blamed for everything—increased ambitions in a land of plenty bred instability and ill mental health; an influx of foreigners led to crime. In the statistics they gathered, they saw what they wanted to see. They then concocted solutions that promised much but achieved little, regressing within two decades into parodies of their original purposes. But to be fair, they did so with the best of intentions, desiring to fulfil Enlightenment ideals and implement more humanitarian measures. This cautionary tale should guide policy making today, remaining relevant as we tackle the myriad paradigm shifts of the 21st century. The same pitfalls lie before us; we would do well not to fall for alarmist interpretations or over-optimistic prognoses.

Despite my rather glowing review, I’ve taken off a star due to the repetitive nature of the study. Rothman repeats many of the same points over and over again. It strikes me that it might have been prudent to have combined the intellectual and theoretical undercurrents into one chapter rather than having one for each institution. While that may have sacrificed some depth, it might in turn have afforded him the space to explore more deeply the peculiarities of each institution. However, the benefits of his approach is to highlight their broad similarities and to venture towards an explanation for why confinement became associated with reform to many travails. So I take off this star fully aware that this is merely a personal preference and not so much a critical issue.