"Sybil Exposed", Debbie Nathan - Book Review
by Felicity Lee
For discussion visit IGDID.com
by Felicity Lee
For discussion visit IGDID.com
Nathan's intent to convince us that she is the 'expert' falls way short in her book 'Sybil Exposed'.
When I finished this book, one scene stood out in my mind. On page 361, she approaches ISST-D president/psychotherapist Kathy Steele to tell her of the 'extensive evidence' of 'Connie's' ignorance, and ethical misconduct that she had discovered during her research for this book. Kathy Steele responds, "I don't know what difference it makes." She urges Nathan to look at recent studies that scientifically demonstrate Dissociative Identity Disorder and the relationship to child abuse. Nathan stubbornly insists that she 'looked' at the studies, and 'they turn out to suffer from the same limitations as the older work.' What? Can you imagine this little investigative reporter pulling at Kathie's sleeve telling her such a thing?
Nathan's writing style, not unique, but colorful - takes you for a ride with her - at least in the intro. She compares herself to Flora Schreiber - yearning for success as a journalist - a woman in a man's field, looking for that 'big' story - the book that would have her wearing mink coats. The introduction held my interest shortly. A few 'sexy stories' of abuse. Most interestingly, I could sense her jealousy of Flora Schreiber. I could 'hear' the excitement in her voice as she retold the 'sexy stories', and as she told how well she knew this book would sell.
BTW - don't bother buying the book. I can cover it here - save your the money.
Chapters one through 19 are BORING - I did actually fall asleep. She rambles through a kind of re-telling of the story of 'Sybil' - recreating characters: "Connie", "Shirley", and "Flora" -stripping them of their full names titles - discrediting them.
She tells a story of three women who got together and decided to make a bunch of money by drugging this poor girl, hypnotizing her, helping her create many personalities, and then, writing Sybel - perfectly timing its release so the dumb women of America who were just 'finding' their way out of the kitchen and into the workplace would be enticed by the sexual stories and new found attention of therapists would buy billions of copies. In chapter 19, she kills off Schreiber.
Then, suddenly - chapter 20 - "Contagion". Okay, now I am awake. A new book? She moves from topic to topic with no sense of why - periodically tying in the story of Sybil. She begins with Dr. Wilbur's continued contributions (all negative), to discussing the history of the ISST-D, to rambling on about crimes against children being investigated, and the FBI finding no evidence. Then.. from multiple personality disorder to Ritual Abuse and suddenly, we are in 1987 and talking about the DSM and some generalizations to Sybil's story that I think were meant to tie all these pieces of information together. Hang on to your hat - we are still in chapter 20.
Moving on to trauma hospitals and therapists treating people with multiple personalities using the same horrible unethical methods used on Sybil - to a sudden - out of nowhere - surprise from Nathan -
Guess what? Sybil never even had multiple personalities, but pernicious anemia. She surmises how embarrassed Dr. Wilbur would be had she known that. As if Nathan is again the 'expert' - as she seems to view herself throughout the book.
On to chapter 21 - hoping for some kind of organization here. Forgot all about Sybil by now. Nope. This chapter called "Containment" takes us to 1992 and a discussion of cult investigations. Where does this come from? Not sure.
Suddenly, the False Memory Syndrome Foundation is introduced - I assume to contain the problem of people reporting child abuse that she sees as a huge problem in the world. Then, we move into law suits, therapists afraid to treat patients with DID, trauma centers sued and closed. The only connection I could find was the message that people diagnosed with DID who report child - especially ritual type abuse are liars, encouraged by incompetent therapists and trauma hospitals - who should be sued and/or removed from practice. The survivor is the perpetrator and the abuser the victim - today - and in her 're-telling' of Sybil. A message she pushes home throughout the rest of the book - though not very clearly.
The reader - if still thinking clearly, wonders if Nathan realizes that child abuse is alive and well. Survivors struggle with many symptoms including multiple personalities. Can she give them a bit of dignity? Have they not been hurt enough? They are the victims, not the perpetrators.
Does Nathan dare to step out and say there are NO child abuse survivors? What exactly is she saying?
Still in the "Containment" chapter we are flung from MPD being 'abolished', ISST-D changes their treatment guidelines, offering bits of 'research suggests' and bountiful tidbits of her own points of view, clearly ignorant of any factual data - losing any reader unaware of 'behind the scenes' politics of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and mental health professionals who treat survivors of child abuse.
But, have no fear - you are brought back in the last chapter where she finishes the story of Sybil. She dies - a symbolic chapter - k*ll Sybil - k*ll the research, the funding, the education, the chance for people who need good mental health care to ever be taken seriously again - if Nathan had her way.
Yet, she writes:
"Connie Wilbur called herself a scientist, but science warns against professing certainty, especially about something as subjective as the study of human behavior. If Sybil teaches us anything, it is that we should never accept easy answers or quick explanations. Knowledge in medicine changes constantly, and anyone unprepared to welcome the changes and test them is not to be trusted." pg. 364.
How can we learn more about multiple personalities and how the brain processes trauma, when public attention is drawn by a book like this to mock those who need care? If good trauma centers are getting closed? Survivors scared or mocked - silenced and embarrassed. I would say that according to Nathan's statement, it is her and others' with her point of view - those unprepared to welcome the changes in the area of trauma and dissociation and test them who are not to be trusted.
I admit - Nathan is a great writer - she uses language well - don't believe everything you read -
