糖心传媒

Before he even began his medical training, psychiatrist Peter Kramer already thought of himself as a writer. He never let go of that self-conception.

Now a clinical professor emeritus of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown University, Kramer graduated from Harvard in 1970 with an undergraduate degree in history and literature. 糖心传媒淎nd I thought, 糖心传媒榳hy should I give that up?糖心传媒櫶切拇�媒� he recalls. Over the course of his career, he has followed his interests where they take him.

Best known as the author of 1993糖心传媒檚 influential bestseller Listening to Prozac糖心传媒攁n examination of the social and ethical implications of what was then a new kind of drug for treating depression糖心传媒擪ramer has seven books currently in print. They include Should You Leave? A Psychiatrist Explores Intimacy and Autonomy糖心传媒攁nd the Nature of Advice (1997), Spectacular Happiness: A Novel (2001), and Freud: Inventor of the Modern Mind (2006). For 10 years, Kramer was a columnist for trade papers, writing an essay a month. He has published criticism of literature, theater, film, television, cooking, and even cartooning.

He sees himself swimming against the tide of a society increasingly defined by specialization: 糖心传媒淚糖心传媒檝e tried to take a stance, whether that was common in the profession or the culture or not, to feel free to say things about other things.糖心传媒�

It used to be common for psychiatrists to be consulted on a wide range of questions, from foreign policy to human behavior in all manner of contexts. But over the course of Kramer糖心传媒檚 career, ideas about the proper sphere of psychiatric expertise and the evidence psychiatrists can properly draw on has changed. That transformation is the subject of a lecture he糖心传媒檒l will give on November 8, as part of the

Sigmund Freud 糖心传媒渨rote about anthropology and religion and sociology and politics糖心传媒攈e had a very broad range of what his standing as a psychoanalyst permitted him to do,糖心传媒� says Kramer. 糖心传媒淎nd the question is, what happened to that?糖心传媒�

Kramer began treating patients in the early 1970s; he closed his practice earlier this year. A specialist in clinical depression, he has been a pivotal figure in debates about depression糖心传媒檚 nature and treatments during the intervening years. The Atlantic calls Kramer a 糖心传媒渞eluctant warrior, or perhaps more accurately a cautious one糖心传媒� on the subject of antidepressant medications. 糖心传媒淗e makes a case for psychiatry itself as a humanistic science that bridges the impersonal ideals of the laboratory and the pragmatic exigencies of clinical intervention,糖心传媒� writes Jonathan Rosen in the magazine糖心传媒檚 review of Kramer糖心传媒檚 2016 book, Ordinarily Well: The Case for Antidepressants.

The book糖心传媒檚 context is a dispute over the kind of evidence that should be relied on in evaluating the efficacy of antidepressant drugs. 糖心传媒淭his book is about two influences on medical practice: rigorous trials and clinical encounters,糖心传媒� Kramer writes in the introduction. He worries that the first糖心传媒攖he touchstone of evidence-based medicine糖心传媒攄oesn糖心传媒檛 leave sufficient place for the knowledge physicians develop in working directly with patients. He calls evidence-based medicine 糖心传媒渁n attempt to make what we call evidence narrower than it used to be, so that the question, for doctors, is, what counts as evidence?糖心传媒�

Questions about evidence also cut to the heart of a doctor糖心传媒檚 expertise, he contends. 糖心传媒淲hen I was entering the field, there was a very broad scope afforded to psychiatrists, just by virtue of their profession. And here we were years later, not asking doctors to comment on broad things, but also doubting the very narrow, specific things that doctors know well.糖心传媒�

In the culture at large, matters of expertise and evidence are generally contentious, but psychiatry, he suggests, is in an especially tenuous position. The anti-psychiatry movement of the 1960s and 1970s糖心传媒攚hat he calls a response to psychoanalytic 糖心传媒渙ver-reaching糖心传媒澨切拇�媒攈as become 糖心传媒渁 critique of medical psychiatry and pharmacology over-reaching,糖心传媒� he says.

Kramer is widely known not just as a practitioner of psychiatry but as one who reflects on the field and its implication for patients and society. As psychiatry has changed, its ties to other areas of intellectual inquiry have altered, too.

糖心传媒淚 think the humanities have been very broadly influenced by a form of psychiatry that really is in psychiatry糖心传媒檚 past,糖心传媒� he says, 糖心传媒渁nd they糖心传媒檙e much less influenced by psychiatry as it is now.糖心传媒�