From asylums to deinstitutionalization and after: an analytic review

Abstract

Background: After a period of institution-based mental health care, in which the asylum system was the way in which the mental patients were treated, deinstitutionalization brought a set of significant changes and transformations in the conceptualization of mental illness and, by extension, the traditional therapeutic settings in which those in most need were assisted. However, this shift in the psychiatric domain was not only accompanied by valued achievements, but also by difficulties and challenges, as has been evidenced today. Aim/objective: The aim of this paper is thus to examine the pros and cons of the closure of asylums, and the subsequent implementation of deinstitutionalization over the 60 years or so of such important transformations in the field of psychiatry. Methods: In considering this question, I examine in detail recent works of literature based on scholarly knowledge. In addition, I identify various issues involved, as well as ways of confronting these so as to attempt to overcome the difficulties they present. Results and conclusions: As I show here, the changes in the treatment and care of the mentally ill after asylum and deinstitutionalization brought a new air of hope to patients and their families, but also had undesirable effects. The paper also considers how mental health professionals today try to solve these effects on behalf of patients and society as a whole.