Talk:Walter Freeman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

This is absolutely horrifying to read. 69.129.36.131 19:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

We state that Freeman lost his medical license when a patient died. I'm finding several sources that state that he only lost surgical priviledges at a hospital. -- Pakaran 01:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The loss of license is just another of the many urban myths about Freeman. I've removed it. -- Antaeus Feldspar 21:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

There is another eminent neuroscientist/biologist/philosopher named Walter J Freeman. I added a note at the bottom so people will not be confused if looking up this person

Contents

[edit] Instruments?

The article states Freeman gave up the ice pick in favor of the leucotome, before eventually developing the orbitoclast. My understanding is that the leucotome was never used in the transorbital procedures, so I don't think it is accurate to say he used it in place of the ice pick. The leucotome was similar to a coring knife and was used in the earlier lobotomy procedure pioneered by Moniz. It was designed to penetrate completely through the patient's brain, then a wire loop could be extended and the instrument rotated about the long axis in order to cut tissue.

Leucotome certainly does refer to the core-cutting instrument used by Moniz. Unfortunately, many papers and books also use the word "leucotome" to refer to simple icepick-like shafts and orbitoclasts. It is annoyingly imprecise.Fluoborate (talk) 20:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Procedural differences

I believe the content of the article has confused some details of the two very different lobotomy procedures used by Freeman. The earlier procedure, pioneered by Moniz, was more invasive and required a trained surgeon. In this earlier procedure a hole was drilled on opposite sides of the skull, then the leucotome was passed in one hole and out the other, going completely through the brain. The cases of instruments breaking off in patients' brains occurred when Freeman added sweeping motions to this procedure.

The other procedure more immediately associated with Freeman was the transorbital procedure, the so-called ice pick lobotomy. I don't believe there were any cases of instruments breaking off during this procedure, nor was the leucotome ever used in this type of lobotomy.

Since I don't have any definitive sources in front of me, and because my recollection might very well be incorrect, I've refrained from making any changes to the article. I read excerpts from Freeman's own papers where he described the earlier procedure in detail, but I can't seem to find them now. I believe they were posted on www.lobotomy.info, but that site seems to be down. Can anyone clear this up? 71.75.170.119 02:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] James Watts

I've created a starter page on Watts. Please help flesh it out with any information and references you have. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SquareWave (talk • contribs) 19:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Interesting notes and questions

Did Freeman ever use a real, kitchen icepick on a living person? "The Lobotomist" says he used one on a cadaver, but it doesn't say whether he got a bona fide surgical instrument before his first live patient.

I believe he had a stronger instrument custom made by a Washington-area toolsmith, who had made some other surgical instruments for him previously. I recall reading that at some point in "The Lobotomist". --168.215.132.137 (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it is interesting how Freeman justified cutting both sides at once. He gave three reasons: Having two leucotomes in the brain at once keeps the brain from moving laterally inside the skull during the sweeping, cutting movement - one leucotome serves as the anchor while the other cuts. Inserting them simultaneously ensures the lesions are symmetrical (I can't see how symmetry is all that important, if you can't even see what you're cutting). And finally, it makes the procedure faster (like it needed to be any faster. One observer said it took Freeman six minutes a patient, including the time to snap before and after photos).

All that said, I think Freeman had very good intentions. He was very misguided, though, and he thought he was going to cure the world of mental illness and become famous for doing so.Fluoborate (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I think he began with good intentions. I don't think he ever had ill wishes for his patients, but as his fame waned, he seemed unwilling to consider less invasive options ans seemed unwilling to recognize that it wasn't a cure-all for any and all behavioral difficulties.--RLent (talk) 17:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
He basically put all his eggs in the lobotomy basket, he staked his entire career on the procedure. I think had he more generally advocated biological psychiatry, of which lobotomy was just one (very ephemeral) treatment, rather than focus almost entirely on that one procedure, his reputation would be very different today. In some ways he was partially vindicated in that the biological nature of the mind is now widely accepted. SquareWave (talk) 16:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)