The Truth
'They told me to do it in the bed, that they would clean it up.' - Anonymous Chelmsford patientOnce patients were admitted, they would be injected with massive amounts of drugs and enter a state of pharmaceutically induced coma that could last for 10 days or more. The high dosage of drugs could lead to serious side effects such pneumonia, brain damage, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism.
Moreover, long periods of sedation would require experienced professionals to take care of the patients. Bailey promised the presence of expert care with trained nursing staff, yet, in truth, the nursing staff were “ill-prepared for their role” and lacked the required medical knowledge. Furthermore, Chelmsford was unequipped to deal with any medical emergencies should one arise.
There was also an appalling lack of care for hygiene in the ward. Eyewitnesses have stated that both male and female patients were “lying naked in the same ward, strapped to excrement-smeared beds” (Wilson 2003, 123) and could be left lying in their own urine for hours (Geason 2007, 3). Furthermore, there were numerous accusations that female patients had been sexually molested by the doctors.
The Lies
“[W]e were deceitful without actually lying to them. We would… put them to sleep… It was awful.” Matron Fawdry (Bromberger & Fife-Yeomans 1991, 138)Chelmsford operated with a blatant disregard to medical protocol, in which they made use of a ‘policy of deception’ (Bromberger & Fife-Yeomans 1991, 138). With most medical operations, the patients are usually asked to sign a consent form before undergoing treatment. Although Chelmsford made use of consent forms, they were a mere formality, and the treatment was administered regardless of the patients’ wishes, and often without their knowledge or consent (Daniel 1998, 45, Wilson 2003, 129). Most were unaware of the duration of the therapy and what it involved, as well as the side effects that it could potentially cause (Wilson 2003, 129).
The nurses, on direct order from the doctor, played an active role in deceiving the patients.
Matron Smith, who worked at Chelmsford for a period of time, made the following statement:
[I]f they refused to sign the consent form, then the instruction was that you gave them some medication to quieten them down… you would say, ‘I’ll give you this little injection now, it will calm you down…’ But of course that little injection was Sodium Amytal and… they were off on sedation.”
Matron Smith (1990 Vol 6 p. 76, cited in Bromberger & Fife-Yeomans, 1991, 138)
Although there have been several inquests, none were able to expose Chelmsford’s façade and the underlying corruption. This was because doctors went so far as to falsify death certificates in order to keep the operation a secret.
Pressures of Social Stigma.
Despite the extent of abuse and neglect suffered by the patients of Chelmsford Mental Hospital, relatively few chose to voice their concerns (Wilson 2003, 125), and for the rare few that did, their stories were, more often than not, dismissed by the local authorities. Moreover, some even returned to Chelmsford for further treatment (Wilson 2003, 128). In this section, we will explore the factors that contributed to the docility of the patients at Chelmsford.
The hesitancy exhibited by the patients of Chelmsford in reporting the situation could probably be explained by the social stigma experienced by mental patients, brought about by society’s tendency to make certain associations with mental illnesses. In psychiatric patients, their conditions become the primary attribute defining them in society, and as a result they are “reduced in the mind of others from being whole” (Goffman 1963, cited in Fife & Wright 2000, 51) and lumped together in a negatively-viewed social outgroup, thereby discrediting any of their claims. The internalization of such socially –inflicted labels would lead to self-doubt and degradation of one’s self-concept.
This was exactly what happened to the patients at Chelmsford. Most patients were hesitant in opposing the system as they doubted that what they experienced had actually transpired. Their lack of belief in themselves led them to disregard their experiences as part of their hallucinatory fantasies, and they would blame themselves for any bad experiences during the treatment (Wilson 2003, 128). Hence, upon finding themselves uncured after being released from Chelmsford, they would again return, hoping that it would be better this time around.
The few patients who resisted and voiced their opinions aloud were inevitably met with dismissal. Their status as psychiatric patients caused others to disregard their seemingly-implausible claims against Chelmsford and to write it off as just the ravings of another lunatic. Barry Hart, one of Chelmsford’s patients who actually attempted to bring the situation to light, was met with disbelief as solicitors viewed his claims as “outlandish” and “the product of a mentally disturbed mind” (Bromberger & Fife-Yeomans 1991, 108).
The Abuse of a Profession
'She seemed to be quite ill... [but] for some reason Dr Bailey just did not come.' Rosa Nicholson, trainee nurse at ChelmsfordCompared to other patients, psychiatric patients are extremely vulnerable as they “entrust their mind, and hence their whole identity” to their psychiatrists (Wilson 2003, 128), who must shoulder such responsibilities seriously. The nature of the relationship is such that the therapist may be viewed as a saviour and a model figure, and it is not unusual for the patient to idolise the psychiatrist, envisioning some special bond between them. This places the therapist in a position of power over the patient, and the abuse of such power would lead to disastrous circumstances for the patient. It is therefore the responsibility of the therapist to discourage the development of such feelings. However, the Chelmsford patients were not so lucky. Their physician was Harry Bailey, and he showed no remorse in taking advantage of the patients’ vulnerability. There were several reported cases in which Bailey turned his female patients into his “personal playthings”. He would claim that the psychological problems faced by the patients were a result of their “inhibitions”, and he was the one who could cure it (Bromberger & Fife-Yeoman 1991, 68). However, he would discard them soon after, leaving them more emotionally scarred then when they first approached him for help. Several patients may be led to commit suicide when in such situations. Their heightened shame and decreased self worth would mean that very few would complain, and Bailey again walked away without suffering ramifications for his actions. A patient of Bailey’s once stated:
‘I looked to him for my salvation [but it] wasn’t a very good place to turn to” (Wilson 2003, 128).
We will now explore the complex interplay between social and internal factors at Chelmsford by studying the cases of several patients.
A Patient's Nightmare
On the 28th of February 1983, Barry Hart checked into Chelmsford Mental Hospital to seek a treatment for his depression. Upon his arrival, he was asked to sign a consent form for ECT (Electroconvulsive Therapy) but refused and requested instead for further consultation with the doctor. Upon seeing the internal state of the hospital, he became extremely nervous and attempted to leave. That was when the nurses sedated him.
He woke up ten days later with “a tube in his nose [and] his arms… strapped to his sides” (Wilson 2003, 129). When, finally, his family managed to move him from Chelmsford to the local hospital, he had to be treated for “double pneumonia, pleurisy and a blood clot in his lung” (Wilson 2003, 129). He also found out that during the period of time that he had been unconscious, he had received ECT despite having not signed the consent form, which indicated the underlying corruption of the doctors and nurses at Chelmsford.
Social stigma made it so that it took Hart seven years before he could bring the case to court as nobody believed him, claiming that it sounded like “something from a film script” (Wilson 2003, 130).
Miriam Podio, a 26 year old woman, was seeing Bailey as he had diagnosed her to be schizo-affective. However, having Bailey as her psychiatrist caused her more harm than good. Under the influence of Tuinal, Bailey’s cure-all, the diary of Miriam Podio charted her downward spiral:
“[I feel] too weak to keep struggling… The only reason that has kept me going at all these months [is] my fear of being institutionalised and helpless.” (Geason 2007, 8)
Yet institutionalised she was, and her mother reported that nearing the end of her life, she had began to talk and respond like a baby.
Stevie Wright, singer and songwriter, had also been one of Chelmsford’s patients in a last-ditch attempt to rid him of his drug addiction. Needless to say, it was less than effective. Wright woke up in a ward, where men and women were lying naked on their beds, often in their own urine. Struck by fear and horror, he realised that he had to get out of there as quick as possible. He managed to escape the hospital, although he did not get very far before he was stopped and brought back to the hospital for more heavy sedation.
These cases demonstrate the amount of suffering and psychological trauma each patient had gone through under Bailey’s controversial treatments, and also highlights how social stigma against mental patients and corruption of the medical staff had only served to exacerbate the powerlessness of the patients to resist what was being done to them.
