What is lobotomy and why was it performed?

This psychiatric procedure resulted in severe and unfortunate consequences for many patients. Here we tell you everything you need to know.

Lobotomy, better known for its depiction in films than for its history, was a real practice. At the time it revolutionized the field of psychiatry, but It is currently obsolete and highly condemned.

How does a surgical operation go from revolution to horror movie material? That’s what we’ll explore here. Don’t miss anything, as there are many factors, medical and social, that influence this story and they all deserve mention.

Lobotomy: surgery to minimize psychiatric disorders

Lobotomy is a surgical intervention that It consisted of inserting a sharp object through the eye socket and causing an injury to the frontal lobe. The objective was to reduce the symptoms of certain psychiatric disorders (schizophrenia, depression or obsessive disorders) at the expense of a reduction in cognitive abilities or changes in personality.

This term became popular when doctor Walter Freeman imported the technique to the United States in 1936. In reality, The first person to practice it was Antonio Egas Moniz, in 1935, who called it leucotomy. because he injected alcohol into bundles of white matter that connected the frontal lobe with the rest of the brain. Moniz was a renowned Portuguese psychiatrist and neurosurgeon.

Due to this innovation in the field of neurosurgery, Egas Moniz won the Nobel Prize in 1949.

How was lobotomy performed?

To perform this operation it was necessary to make two incisions in the eye socket, in the medial area of the eyelid. A sharp object was introduced through them, passing through the thin layer of bone that separates the orbital space from the frontal lobe. Once the object was introduced into the brain tissue, it moved to both sides to cause the injury and disconnect this lobe from the rest of the brain.

Consequences for patients

EpilepsyDementiaBrain abscessesIntracranial hemorrhageAlterations in behaviorAlterations in emotionality and personality

The case of Alice Hammatt stands out here, who was lobotomized against her will. Despite showing signs of improvement in his depression in the moments immediately after his operation, 6 days later he showed language difficulties, disorientation, and agitation. Despite this, the press reported it as an absolute success.

Added risks to the procedure

Walter Freeman was responsible for popularizing transorbital lobotomy throughout the United States. As was said before, This modality did not use a sterile environment or general anesthesia, so the postoperative periods were even more disastrous. With the media on his side, the showman achieved a significant impact on public opinion with this practice.

It is important to note that the majority of patients did not receive follow-up. By not showing characteristic symptoms (or even improving their ailments) in the first days after the intervention, it was considered an absolute success and they moved on to the next one.

Disappearance of “brain operation”

Over time, studies on the effectiveness of this “brain operation” revealed the true figures of this practice, which many described as “no more subtle than a gunshot to the head.” A mortality rate of 15% was found. and that a third of lobotomized patients suffered serious long-term consequences.

This progressive revelation was joined by representations of transorbital lobotomy in the audiovisual media, which reflected the reality of the patients and modified public opinion. The final point was the appearance of psychotropic drugs in the 1950s, which became a much more effective treatment for serious mental illnesses.

The power of simple and comfortable

Nowadays, someone might wonder what was so appealing about having an ice pick stuck in your eye and your brain scratched. In those times, apart from the stigma they carried on their backs, patients were thrown into psychiatric hospitals where their condition, far from being addressed, worsened due to the mistreatment they received.

This surgery was presented as the easy alternative, giving the impression that the “shrink shops” could be emptied. The minimal favorable results were taken as unique evidence and the victims could say little in their defense. Aided by the media, Freeman managed to spread this idea so much into society that it was not until the 1990s that it was completely abandoned.