deinstitutionalization, in sociology, movement that advocates the transfer of mentally disabled people from public or private institutions, such as psychiatric hospitals, back to their families or into community-based homes. While concentrated primarily on the mentally ill, deinstitutionalization may also describe similar transfers involving prisoners, orphans, or other individuals previously confined to institutions. The transfer of individuals to families or community-home settings, which tend to be less restrictive than institutions, is thought to benefit individuals by allowing them to be active participants in their communities.

Institution and deinstitutionalization as concepts

Although there is debate among sociologists, an institution may be defined, very broadly, as a social group’s way of acting, thinking, or behaving, in which behaviours, customs, and practices become crystallized, or established. Institutions are distinctive, recognized, and sanctioned. In this sense, a psychiatric hospital may be understood to be an institution in that it embodies all of the customs and practices that accumulate around psychiatric care. Deinstitutionalization, then, occurs when a complex of customs, structures, and activities is modified or loses its reason for being. With regard to the mentally or physically disabled, deinstitutionalization is less the disappearance of institutions or specific assistive resources than the mutation of institutions and resources to meet new social demands and a new historical context.

Psychiatric deinstitutionalization

Concern about patients in psychiatric hospitals emerged in the 19th century, when signs of patient neglect in asylums became apparent. In the 20th century, overcrowding and patient abuse became serious problems, leading some to search for community-based alternatives to institutionalization.

Advances in psychiatric research and treatment discussed
More From Britannica
mental disorder: Deinstitutionalization

There were several principal factors in psychiatric deinstitutionalization in the 20th century. For example, there was an influx of psychotropic medications that better permitted the mentally ill to regain a life among others and to overcome what had been called “crises.” New medications raised the possibility of excursions, light physical activity (e.g., walking), and reimmersion in the community. The insane gradually came to be seen as mentally ill, experiencing “psychological problems” or “psychological suffering.”

The influence of psychoanalysis, which introduced a noninstitutional type of therapy, was also a factor in deinstitutionalization. “Madness” had been addressed in an institutional framework—that is, in a context in which institutionalization was supposed to cure, or at least relieve, it by means of its own internal dynamic—application, internal socialization, and work. The supposed curative effects of institutionalization were complemented by various techniques, such as electroshock therapy. In the 1960s and ’70s, institutional psychiatry had a vision where psychoanalysis had a recognized place. Ultimately, however, psychoanalysis contributed to the emergence of the concept of deinstitutionalization, since work on the psyche could be undertaken outside an institution.

Psychiatric deinstitutionalization was also influenced by the so-called antipsychiatry movement. From 1950 to 1970 the movement emphasized the role that social factors played in psychological disorders. It focused on social pathologies and on the deindividualization of mental illness (abandonment of individual values in an effort to identify with one’s society). At the same time, this movement held that connection to the community offered the best path toward amelioration and affirmed that institutional confinement was fundamentally harmful.

To these factors must also be added economic analyses. In the United States and France, for example, the thesis was advanced that the welfare state, by developing segregative models of social control, incurred excessively high and hard-to-justify costs.

Are you a student?
Get a special academic rate on Britannica Premium.

Despite those factors, there was strong opposition to deinstitutionalization. In certain environments there was panic at the possibility of former internees from psychiatric hospitals being present in public places. In the United States there was opposition from trade unions because of the risk of unemployment and intensive lobbying by professional associations professing concern for standards.

Furthermore, the effects of deinstitutionalization, which were reviewed in the 1980s, raised serious concerns. The overwhelming argument against suppression of the psychiatric institution was that deinstitutionalized persons were even more unhappy, ill-treated, and stigmatized than they had been in the institutional setting. Predictably, the defenders of deinstitutionalization readily responded that the deficiency lay in the fact that the community had not been given the means to receive and accommodate the mentally ill in its midst.

Forms of deinstitutionalization

In Europe, particularly in Italy and the United Kingdom, the forms taken by deinstitutionalization have been numerous and diverse, such as alternating periods in the institution and in the community, host programs in the institutions, and the creation of work cooperatives. Thus, the struggle against institutionalization has not necessarily been one of radical opposition—everything institutional or everything community-based. These efforts, in their various forms, may have permitted the extension of the deinstitutionalization movement into areas well beyond psychiatry.

Henri-Jacques Stiker The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

mental health

Also known as: mental health

mental health, capacity of an individual to think and behave in ways that support their ability to achieve well-being and to cope with distress while also respecting personal and social boundaries.

Since the founding of the United Nations, the concepts of mental health and hygiene have achieved international acceptance. As defined in the 1946 constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO), “health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” The term mental health represents a variety of human aspirations: rehabilitation from mental illness, prevention of mental disorders, reduction of tension in a stressful world, and attainment of a state of well-being in which the individual functions at a level consistent with their mental potential. As noted by the World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH), the concept of optimum mental health refers not to an absolute or ideal state but to the best possible state insofar as circumstances are alterable. Mental health is regarded as a condition of the individual, relative to the capacities and social-environmental context of that person, and includes measures taken to promote and to preserve that condition. Community mental health refers to the extent to which the organization and functioning of the community determines, or is conducive to, the mental health of its members.

Historically, persons affected by mental illness were viewed with a mixture of fear and revulsion. Their fate generally was one of rejection, neglect, and ill treatment. Though, in ancient medical writings, there are references to mental disturbance that display views very similar to modern humane attitudes, interspersed in the same literature are instances of socially sanctioned cruelty based upon the belief that mental disorders have supernatural origins, such as demonic possession. Even reformers sometimes used harsh methods of treatment—for example, the 18th-century American physician Benjamin Rush endorsed the practice of restraining mental patients with his notorious “tranquilising chair.”

Early institutions

The history of care for the mentally ill reflects human cultural diversity. The earliest known mental hospitals were established in the Arab world, in Baghdad (918 ce) and in Cairo, where such individuals were often described as the “afflicted of Allah.” Some contemporary African tribes benignly regard hallucinations as communications from the realm of the spirits; among others, Hindu culture shows remarkable tolerance for what was considered to be bizarre behavior in Western societies. The Western interpretation of mental illness as being caused by demonic possession reached its height during a prolonged period of preoccupation with witchcraft (15th through 17th century) in Europe and in colonial North America.

So-called madhouses, such as Bedlam (founded in London in 1247) and the Bicêtre (the Paris asylum for men), were typical of 18th-century mental institutions in which the sufferers were routinely shackled. Inmates of these places were often believed to be devoid of human feeling, and their management was indifferent if not brutal; the primary consideration was to isolate the mentally disturbed from ordinary society. In British colonial America, persons affected by mental illness frequently were auctioned off to be cared for (or exploited) by farmers; some were driven from towns by court order, and others were placed in almshouses. Finally, in 1773, after more than a century of colonization, the first British colonial asylum for the insane was established—the Eastern State Hospital (also known as the Eastern Lunatic Asylum or the Public Hospital of Williamsburg), located in Williamsburg, Virginia.

In the 1790s the French reformer Philippe Pinel scandalized his fellow physicians by removing the chains from 49 inmates of the Bicêtre. At about the same time William Tuke, a Quaker tea and coffee merchant, founded the York (England) Retreat to provide humane treatment. Benjamin Rush, a physician and signer of the Declaration of Independence, also advocated protection of the rights of the insane. Despite this progress, more than half a century of independence passed in the United States before Dorothea Dix, a teacher from Maine, discovered that in Massachusetts the insane were being jailed along with common criminals. Her personal crusade in the 1840s led to a flurry of institutional expansion and reform in her own country, in Canada, and in Great Britain. About the same time, interest in mental health and psychiatry expanded in areas of health and social sciences, and periodicals emerged, such as the American Journal of Insanity (later renamed the American Journal of Psychiatry).

While these pioneering humanitarian efforts tended to improve conditions, one unplanned result was a gradual emphasis on centralized, state-supported facilities in which sufferers were sequestered, often far from family and friends. Largely kept from public scrutiny, the unfortunate inmates of what were being fashionably called mental hospitals increasingly became victims of the old forms of maltreatment and neglect.

Are you a student?
Get a special academic rate on Britannica Premium.

Developments in the 20th century

The modern mental health movement received its first impetus from the energetic leadership of a former mental patient in Connecticut, Clifford Whittingham Beers. First published in 1908, his account of what he endured, A Mind That Found Itself, continues to be reprinted in many languages, inspiring successive generations of students, mental health workers, and laypersons to promote improved conditions of psychiatric care in local communities, in schools, and in hospitals. With the support of prominent persons, including distinguished professionals, Beers in 1908 organized the Connecticut Society for Mental Hygiene, the first association of its kind. In its charter, members were charged with responsibility for the same pursuits that continue to concern mental health associations to this day: improvement of standards of care for persons affected by mental conditions, prevention of mental disorders, the conservation of mental health, and the dissemination of sound information. In New York City less than a year later, on February 19, 1909, Beers led in forming the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, which in turn was instrumental in organizing the National Association for Mental Health in 1950.

While philosophic and scientific bases for an international mental health movement were richly available, Beers seems to have served as a catalytic spark. Charles Darwin and his contemporaries already had shattered traditional beliefs in an immutable human species with fixed potentialities. By the time Beers began his public agitation, it was beginning to be understood that developing children need not suffer some of the crippling constraints imposed on their parents. A newly emerging scientific psychology had revealed some of the mechanisms by which the environment had its effects on individual adjustment, fostering hopes that parents and community could provide surroundings that would enhance the growth and welfare of children beyond levels once thought possible. In this spirit, the mental health movement inspired the early establishment of child-guidance clinics and programs of education for parents and for the public in general.

Psychiatric and psychological developments during and after World War I provided fresh impetus to the movement. Over the same period, the European development of psychoanalysis, initiated by Sigmund Freud in Vienna, placed heavy emphasis on childhood experiences as major determinants of psychiatric symptoms and led worldwide to increasing public awareness of psychological and social-environmental elements as primary factors in the development of mental disorders.