Model Text: “A Case Of Hysterics”

A Case of Hysterics^[1]

The concept of female Hysteria was a medical recognition dating back to the 13th century that has been diagnosed by physicians quite liberally until recent times. The diagnosis and treatment of Hysteria were routine for hundreds of years in Western Europe, as well as the United States. Symptoms that indicated Hysteria were broad and all encompassing: nervousness, sexual desire, faintness, insomnia, irritability, loss of appetite, depression, heaviness in abdomen, etc. These symptoms

were said to be caused by a “wandering womb,” described as a kind of living creature that sought to disrupt biological processes, disrupt breathing, and cause disease.

The number of diagnosed cases of hysteria slowed as medical advancements proceeded, and in the early 1960s (coinciding with the popularization of feminism) the “disease” ceased to be considered a true medical disorder. In modern medicine, however, the treatment and diagnosis of female medical issues continues to be vague and potentially harmful due to lack of knowledge. Does the concept of female hysteria have continuity today?

Although the vocabulary has changed, it is clear that the practice of ignoring serious medical ailments based on sex remains prominent in the world of medicine. It is not uncommon for a physician to diagnose a woman with chronic stress or psychosomatic issues, and then later discover a disease like lupus, fibromyalgia, or polycystic ovarian syndrome, all of which are still commonly dismissed because it is likely the patient is experiencing the chronic pain in their heads. Because of sexism in the medical field, many women are receiving subpar healthcare. In my research, I will examine the past culture of Hysteria as well as the current state of misdiagnoses of women’s health issues and how this reinforces gender norms in today’s society; this will demonstrate the need for eliminating bias and sexism in medicine.

In my research process, I imagine I will encounter difficulties in finding detailed scientific research in the misdiagnoses of women’s health, despite having found multiple accounts on non-scientific platforms. I also anticipate a possible attitude of mistrust coming from the audience because of this topic; it is common nature to trust doctors blindly, as well as the norm in our culture to assume women are irrational and excessive. Finally, it will be difficult to attribute sexism and bias simply to the idea of misidentification of ailments. While this is common, sexism has also contributed to, plainly, a lack of research and knowledge of female healthcare. Therefore, willful ignorance plays a role in the imbalance between male and female medicine as well. I will mention this concept briefly in my essay, but continue to focus on the idea of frequent female misdiagnosis and how this perpetuates preconceived notions of feminine temperament in society.

Teacher Takeaways “The author takes the time to give historical context, and that is important for building the analogy referenced in the research question. However, the question itself, and the following discussion, lack some precision. What does ‘continuity’ mean here? What ‘notions of feminine temperament’ will be examined? Are they a cause or an effect of misdiagnosis? The author may already have a (hypo)thesis in mind, but the terms of the question must first be clarified. Still, the context and the discussion of gender theory and medicine indicate a researcher who is eager to synthesize information and join a larger discussion.”– Professor Fiscaletti