ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bridget Cleary was brutally burned to death by her husband in the presence of her father and several close relatives in rural Ireland in 1895. The story has attracted public attention for more than a century now, for numerous reasons. AIMS: The issue of psychiatric illness in this tragedy, and the role of fairy mythology in belief systems in 19th Century rural Ireland are reviewed, particularly in relation to providing explanations for physical and psychiatric illness, along with learning disability. METHODS: Reference was made to a wide range of sources featuring the burning of Bridget Cleary. RESULTS: There is some evidence to suggest that the actions of Michael Cleary and other key protagonists were influenced by Capgras syndrome and folie a plusiers. CONCLUSIONS: Delusional belief in fairy mythology may have coloured the psychological make-up, motivations and behaviour of some of the people involved in the killing of Bridget Cleary.
Subject(s)
Homicide/psychology , Mythology/psychology , Spouses/psychology , Adult , Capgras Syndrome/history , Capgras Syndrome/psychology , Female , History, 19th Century , Homicide/history , Humans , IrelandSubject(s)
Capgras Syndrome/history , Delusions/history , Parent-Child Relations , Adult , Child , Female , History, 19th Century , Humans , MaleSubject(s)
Paranoid Disorders/history , Capgras Syndrome/history , France , Germany , History, 19th Century , Humans , Male , Psychiatry/history , Terminology as TopicABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: to trace the evolution of hypotheses concerning Capgras' syndrome. METHODS: The data consist of slightly over 60 studies published between 1866 and 1994 which were selected in terms of their innovative nature and relevance to the clinical description of the syndrome and to psychodynamic, neurological and neuropsychological interpretations. RESULTS: Two partially overlapping major stages can be identified in the evolution of hypotheses regarding the mechanisms of the syndrome. The 1st, beginning in 1923, is characterized by the predominance of psychodynamic interpretations. The 2nd, resulting from the observation of organic dysfunctions in a high percentage of cases, is distinguished by the advent of neurological interpretations, and by a few mixed hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this review highlights the broad diversity of viewpoints concerning the syndrome. It will be used as a basis for the following study, which is designed to show that it is possible to test each of the viewpoints experimentally.
Subject(s)
Capgras Syndrome/history , Capgras Syndrome/etiology , Capgras Syndrome/psychology , Europe , History, 19th Century , History, 20th Century , Humans , Neurocognitive Disorders/etiology , Neurocognitive Disorders/history , Neurocognitive Disorders/psychology , Psychoanalytic Theory , United StatesABSTRACT
En 1923 el psiquiatra francés Joseph Capgras describió un cuadro clínico cuyo síntoma central era la firme creencia del paciente de que personas muy conocidas, generalmente familiares, habían sido reemplazadsa por dobles, impostores. Los pacientes reconocían su exacta similitud fisonómica, si bien negaban su identidad. Se describe una mujer de 59 años, diestra, sin historia psiquiátrica o neurológica previa, que luego de un accidente cerebrovascular isquémico cerebral posterior derecho (RM cerebro) refiere compartir algunos momentos de su actividad diaria con su marido, y más tarde con otra persona de igual fisonomía (que en realidad era su marido) a quien se refería como "el otro Manolo" o el "muchacho". En la evaluación cognitiva mostró una hemi-inatención izquierda, trastornos visuoperceptivos y visuoconstructivos, alteraciones mnésicas y severos fenómenos perseverativos. Desde su descripción original esta patología fué considerada como una manifestación exclusivamente psiquiátrica. A principios de la década del 70 comenzaron a publicarse trabajos que la asociaban a daño cerebral orgánico, referido casi siempre a lesiones hemisféricas derechas. Se relacionó a los desórdenes en la representación afectiva o de familiaridad o a fallas en el procesamiento perceptivo preconciente, ligados a una base paranoide como disparadores de este síndrome (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Capgras Syndrome/diagnosis , Capgras Syndrome/history , Agnosia/etiologyABSTRACT
En 1923 el psiquiatra francés Joseph Capgras describió un cuadro clínico cuyo síntoma central era la firme creencia del paciente de que personas muy conocidas, generalmente familiares, habían sido reemplazadsa por dobles, impostores. Los pacientes reconocían su exacta similitud fisonómica, si bien negaban su identidad. Se describe una mujer de 59 años, diestra, sin historia psiquiátrica o neurológica previa, que luego de un accidente cerebrovascular isquémico cerebral posterior derecho (RM cerebro) refiere compartir algunos momentos de su actividad diaria con su marido, y más tarde con otra persona de igual fisonomía (que en realidad era su marido) a quien se refería como "el otro Manolo" o el "muchacho". En la evaluación cognitiva mostró una hemi-inatención izquierda, trastornos visuoperceptivos y visuoconstructivos, alteraciones mnésicas y severos fenómenos perseverativos. Desde su descripción original esta patología fué considerada como una manifestación exclusivamente psiquiátrica. A principios de la década del 70 comenzaron a publicarse trabajos que la asociaban a daño cerebral orgánico, referido casi siempre a lesiones hemisféricas derechas. Se relacionó a los desórdenes en la representación afectiva o de familiaridad o a fallas en el procesamiento perceptivo preconciente, ligados a una base paranoide como disparadores de este síndrome
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Capgras Syndrome/diagnosis , Agnosia/etiology , Capgras Syndrome/historySubject(s)
Capgras Syndrome/history , France , History, 19th Century , History, 20th Century , Humans , Psychiatry/historyABSTRACT
Over the last eight decades a plethora of psychodynamic explanations have been invoked to account for the Capgras delusion. While often ill-founded and convoluted, these formulations have, until recently, dominated many theoretical approaches to the phenomenon. Generally post hoc and teleological in nature, they postulate motives that are not introspectable and defence mechanisms that cannot be observed, measured or refuted. While psychosocial factors can and often do play a part in the development, content and course of the Capgras delusion in individual patients it remains to be proven that such factors are necessary and sufficient to account for delusional misidentification in general and the Capgras delusion in particular.