Contribution of the psychiatrist to the management of crisis situations.

J. Meerloo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/AJP.109.5.352

IF: 17.7

1952-11-01

American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract:During the Second World War, a group of advisers to the different army headquarters in London constituted itself an Inter-Allied Psychological Study Group, to discuss common problems in times of emergency. Although I have been invited to give a report of my experiences during the last war, the points I am about to relate must be looked upon as a result of that very inspiring teamwork. In that group psychiatrists, psychologists, and sociologists worked together. Amid the tensions of that period, to which flying bombs contributed from time to time, the cooperation was nearly ideal. We came together, not only to exchange experiences, but also to find mutual aid in problems that proved often too difficult for our actual knowledge of facts. We had been asked for advice on questions in which we were not experts at all, while in straight professional circumstances our expert knowledge was many times denied. That often cut both ways. At the end of the war, with its confusing aftermath, there was a greater tendency to ask the psychologist for advice. Only gradually have we found our way through methodological quandaries, although several mistakes were made either by too pedantic action or by lack of restraint. I want to give a survey of what we thought our most practical function in crisis situations to be. One thing especially we tried to prevent: the compulsive scientific attitude with its use of sophisticated words. I remember so well an official discussion on the morale of the troops-an urgent problem during a certain phase of the war-when we clinicians were pinned down by typical laboratory scientists, who by dint of learned arguments convinced the officials that they should deliver 200