Providentia

After The Volcano Erupts

More than 500 million people worldwide live within exposure range of an active volcano and children are a vulnerable subgroup of such exposed populations. However, studies on the effects of volcanic eruptions on children’s health beyond the first year are sparse. A new study published in the European Journal of Psychotraumatology examines the effect of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption on physical and mental health symptoms among exposed children in 2010 and 2013 and to identify potential predictive factors for symptoms. Using a population-based prospective cohort study, data was collected on the adult population (N = 1615) exposed to the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption and a non-exposed group (N = 697). The exposed group was further divided according to exposure level. All participants answered questionnaires assessing their children´s and their own perceived health status in 2010 and 2013. Results showed that exposed children were more likely than non-exposed children to experience respiratory symptoms (medium exposed OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.07–2.03; high exposed OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.03–2.24) and anxiety/worries (medium exposed OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.67–3.45; high exposed OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.81–4.27). Both genders had an increased risk of symptoms of anxiety/worries but only exposed boys were at increased risk of experiencing headaches and sleep disturbances compared to non-exposed boys. Within the exposed group, children whose homes were damaged were at increased risk of experiencing anxiety/worries (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.13–2.32) and depressed mood (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.07–2.24) than children whose homes were not damaged. Among exposed children, no significant decrease of symptoms was detected between 2010 and 2013. Conclusions: Adverse physical and mental health problems experienced by the children exposed to the eruption seem to persist for up to a three-year period post-disaster. These results underline the importance of appropriate follow-up for children after a natural disaster.

For the abstract

Carl Tanzier's Obsession

It does seem amazing that the bizarre story of Carl Tanzier and Maria Elena de Hoyos isn't better known.  Even with the strange directions that obsessive love can take, this case definitely stands out.

While it's still difficult to separate fact from fiction in Carl Tanzier's life considering all the unlikely stories he told over the years, we do know that he was born on February 8, 1877 in Dresden, Germany. Although his claims of having nine university degrees and being an expert authority on different branches of science seem a little implausible, early records do suggest that he worked as an x-ray technician for a while (just not very successfully). His marriage to Doris in 1920 was followed by the birth of their two children and an unsuccessful attempt to emigrate to Australia.  Karl eventually sailed to the United States in 1926 and settled in Zephyrhills, Florida where a sister was already living.  Doris and their children joined him there but the marriage didn't last long. 

By 1927, Carl had managed to relocate to Key West, Florida and changed his name in the process. Now "Count" Carl von Cosel (he claimed to be descended from an old German aristocratic family), he somehow managed to get a job in the tuberculosis ward at the U.S. Marine Hospital.  Some accounts described him as being a radiologist there which seems hard to believe considering he had no medical credentials at all.  Existing hospital records had him listed as being an x-ray technician and a bacteriologist who worked with the critically ill tuberculosis patients.  In his spare time, he was an amateur inventor who created complicated electrical devices and "miracle cures" in his home laboratory.

Whatever his plans for the future, everything changed when Carl von Cosel met the woman of his dreams...

In April, 1930, Carl von Cosel first laid eyes on Maria Elena Milagro de Hoyos.  A beautiful 20-year old woman from an old Spanish Cuban family, she was brought to the hospital after being diagnosed with tuberculosis.  Carl would later claim that he had instantly recognized Elena from the dreams that he had been having for years about a "dark haired woman".  He saw no problem with her grim diagnosis or the fact that she was already married to another man, Carl von Cosel was determined to have Elena any way he could. 

Given the lack of modern antibiotics, tuberculosis was usually fatal (and the disease had already killed several members of Elena's family).  When the well-spoken von Cosel approached Elena and offered to treat her with his (self-proclaimed) medical expertise, Elena and her family were too desperate to refuse.  The doctors at the hospital had already given up hope and Elena seemed destined for an early death. Whatever the family's impression of Carl's approach to medicine, they had to admire his persistence.  The experimental treatments that he tried on Elena included strange electric shock machines and x-ray devices that he brought to her home as well as different potions that he made just for her.  The ingredients are still a mystery but reportedly included various exotic herbs and even flecks of gold.  He also plied Elena with expensive gifts and proposed marriage often.  Elena always refused since she was still married to her husband Luis (despite their separation).

Elena de Hoyos died on October 25, 1931.  With her family's permission, Carl von Cosel paid for the funeral and arranged for Elena's body to be interred in a lavish mausoleum that he had constructed in Key West Cemetery. Elena's body was placed in a metal coffin and Carl even equipped the crypt with a telephone so he could communicate with her.  The mausoleum also featured an airship (no, I don't know why, either).  He continued to visit the mausoleum on a nightly basis for two years before the visits stopped.  By this time he had lost his hospital job and moved to a remote shack but the full extent of his bizarre obsession with Elena didn't become apparent until 1940.  

After hearing some very bizarre rumours about Carl von Cosel, Elena's sister Florinda began to investigate and found that the body was no longer in the crypt.  She guessed that Carl was responsible and tracked him down to his shack.  Whatever Florinda suspected already about Carl didn't prepare her for what she found when he kindly invited her inside.  As Carl himself would state later, during his regular vigil in the crypt he began to hear Elena's voice begging him to rescue her from the metal coffin.  In April 1933, he stole Elena's body and took it to his shack where he used his chemical knowledge to preserve the corpse.  In the years that followed, he lovingly tended Elena's body and even reconstructed part of her face with wax as it decayed.  He also replaced her eyes with glass and made her a wig from her own hair.   Carl lovingly described his plans to bring Elena back from the dead using his electrical equipment (including a million-volt Tesla coil). 

After Florinda fled from the shack, she notified the police and Carl was arrested. Despite initial attempts to have him declared unfit to stand trial, a full psychiatric evaluation determined otherwise.   In the meantime, the bizarre case made newspaper headlines across the country.  Elena's preserved body was put on display at a local funeral home and more than six thousand people came out to see her in just a few days.  There was also a surprising amount of public support for Carl.  Not only did he attract numerous visitors to his cell, but two friends posted  bail and arranged for his release. 

When the case came up for a preliminary hearing on October 9, 1940, the only charge that the authorities could lay against von Cosel was "wantonly and maliciously destroying a grave and removing a body without authorization".  Since the statue of limitations for the crime had already expired (two years was the maximum and he had taken the body six years before), Carl von Cosel was eventually released.  While later sources claimed that he had also inserted a tube into her vagina to permit sex with the corpse, no allegations of necrophilia were made at the trial.

Elena's body was autopsied and later buried in an unmarked grave to prevent any further tampering.  Carl Tanzier (he went back to using his old name) returned to Zephyrhills and lived on his own.  Amazingly, his wife Doris continued to support him financially although they never officially reconciled.  Carl wrote his autobiography and became an American citizen in 1950.   He also created a life-sized wax effigy of Elena's corpse that he tended faithfully and often showed to tourists (he supported himself by selling postcards featuring Elena's death mask).  Karl Tanzier died on July 3, 1952 but his body was only discovered three weeks after his death.   Despite claims that he somehow managed to retrieve Elena's body, no human remains were found in the effigy.   As for his long-suffering widow, Doris, she died in 1977. She never remarried.

Visitors to the Ripley's Believe It Or Not Museum in Key West, Florida can still see the replica of Elena that Carl made.   Their story has since become a part of Key West's colourful history and has even been memorialized in music, television problems, and horror novels.  And who says romance is dead?

 

The Freud-Frink Fiasco

Despite becoming a household name later in his life, Dr. Sigmund Freud was not well-known outside of his native Austria during the first two decades of the Twentieth Century.  Along with his relative anonymity, he also had money woes courtesy of the soaring hyperinflation occurring in Austria and Germany following the First World War.   Not only was he having trouble supporting himself and his family, but promoting the psychoanalytic movement he founded was increasingly difficult as well.    Even his medical practice suffered as many patients found themselves unable to afford years of psychoanalysis.

Efforts to expand psychoanalysis to North America through a 1909 American tour helped raise his profile slightly.   Still,  Freud had misgivings about American innovators twisting the purity of his theories.  He dreaded the idea of psychoanalysis becoming “Americanized”, especially considering how puritanical Americans were about sex.    Freud even turned down generous offers for further American lecture tours due to his concerns about the “notoriety” involved.  While he managed to publish English-language versions of many of his works, (featuring introductions from prominent psychologists such as G. Stanley Hall),  he fought continually with his publicist Edward L. Bernays (who also happened to be his nephew).   Although the royalties from the translated books brought in some revenue, it would be many years before he became financially independent. 

All of which may have played a role in the peculiar case of Horace  Westlake Frink…

One of Sigmund Freud’s first American disciples, Horace Frink was a founding member of the New York Psychoanalytic Society and the author of one of the first American books on psychoanalysis, Morbid Fears and Compulsions.  He even traveled to Vienna in 1921 to undergo psychoanalysis from “the master” himself as part of his training as a psychoanalyst.   But Frink had problems in his own right since he suffered from episodes of depression and hypomanic behaviour (which would likely get him a diagnosis of bipolar disorder today).   Despite these symptoms, Horace Frink seemed well on his way to becoming Freud's chief American disciple when he began psychoanalysis with Freud.

It was during the course of this psychoanalysis that a brewing scandal was uncovered.  Though Frink was married with two children of his own, he was also having a sexual affair with one of his former patients, Angelika Bijur.  Bijur was a New York heiress who was married to a much older man, Abraham Bijur, and the prospect of breaking up both marriages over this relationship was naturally frightening for the two of them.  This was especially true for Frink since it would have meant losing contact with his children.   Horace Frink and Angelika Bijur both became patients of Freud as a way of avoiding divorce. 

Which, as it happened, was precisely what Sigmund Freud advised for them.   Completely ignoring Frink's depressive episodes, and the possibility that he was a borderline psychotic,  Freud focused on his sexual frustration issues instead.   Drawing on Frink's history of serious emotional losses (including losing his mother to tuberculosis at an early age), Freud concluded that Frink was an unconscious homosexual.    This was a pet theme for Freud and he tended to focus on unconscious homosexuality and the Oedipus complex with many of his male patients.    Not only did he recommend that Frink divorce his wife, but he also told Bijur to divorce her husband as well.  He even went so far as to tell her that Frink would likely develop homosexual problems is she didn’t do as he advised.    The fact that Angelika Bijur was also independently wealthy (she had paid for her own therapy as well as Frink's) may have influenced Freud as well.

Ironically, the problem, and the potential media disaster, of Freud’s role in the breakup of two marriages neatly solved itself.   Frink’s wife died of pneumonia in 1923 (whether or not the trauma of her divorce from Frink contributed to her death is open to question).   As for Abraham Bijur, who was furious at Freud for interfering in his marriage, he died of cancer in May, 1922.  The timing of Bijur’s death was extremely fortunate as far as Freud was concerned.   Not only did it make the divorce from Angelika unnecessary, but it also ended Bijur’s planned media campaign against Freud.  Before his death, Bijur had written a  letter denouncing Freud which he intended to run as an advertisement in several New York newspapers.  Though the letter was never published, Bijur’s denunciation of Freud and his anguished question of whether he was a “savant or charlatan” would likely have destroyed the good doctor's reputation  in the United States if he had lived just a little longer.

As for Horace Frink, his mental condition continued to worsen, likely aided by guilt over his first wife’s death.   Despite his marriage to Angelika on December 27, 1922, Frink's mental state deteriorated and ultimately led to his being institutionalized.  He and Anjelika were divorced in 1925. 

Throughout the entire fiasco, Sigmund Freud continued pressuring both Horace and Angelika for money to support the psychoanalytic movement.  In one letter he wrote to Frink in 1921, he suggested that his patient’s failure to acknowledge his own homosexuality was linked to his need to contribute to Freud’s psychoanalytic fund.   When Angelika later told him that her marriage to Frink was falling apart,  Freud sent a telegram which said, “Extremely sorry.  The point where you failed was money.”   As a result, Anjelika abandoned the psychoanalytic movement and felt personally betrayed by Freud.

 With further therapy under his old mentor Adolf Meyer, Frink managed to recover to the point of regaining custody  of his children and becoming a stable father to them for years.   Despite hopes for a professional comeback, Frink was expelled from the American Psychoanalytic Society, largely because Freud had lost confidence in his ability to continue as a psychoanalyst.    As a result, Frink and his children were forced to rely on the money they had inherited from his first wife and the divorce settlement he had received from Anjelika.    While he later remarried,  Frink eventually suffered a relapse along with serious heart disease.   He experienced a final psychotic break and died of heart disease at the age of fifty-three.

Though Horace Frink had become disillusioned about psychoanalysis, he continued to hold Freud in high regard.   When asked about him shortly before his death, Frink commented that Freud was a great man, "even if he did invent psychoanalysis."   As for Sigmund Freud,  he apparently viewed Frink's mental breakdown as a justification for his anti-American attitudes.   Since Frink had been his choice to lead the psychoanalytic movement in the United States,  Frink's mental instability helped reinforce Freud's mistrust of Americans as a whole.  As he would comment in 1924, "My attempt at giving them a chief in the person of Frink which has so sadly miscarried is the last thing I will ever do for them, had I to live the one hundred years you set down for the incorporation of psychoanalysis into Psychiatry."   The role he played in destroying Frink's first marriage and his later tragedy seemed conveniently overlooked.   As it was, the most embarrassing details of the whole affaor would not come out for decades after Freud's death.

Did the prospect of gaining a wealthy patron override Freud’s judgment concerning what was best for his patients?   Although Abraham Bijur's convenient death saved Freud from public scandal over his role in breaking up two marriages, Sigmund Freud seemed not to have learned any real lesson about the need to separate clinical judgment from his own financial needs.   His desperate search for money during the 1920s seemed to have taken him in some strange directions but the bizarre episode with Horace Frink and Anjelika Bijur represents one of the most serious ethical breaches of his professional career.    Though Sigmund Freud was still years away from attaining the iconic reputation he would enjoy by the middle of the 20th century, much of that fame depended on keeping his biggest disasters out of the public eye.

The Hasheesh Eater

There seems little doubt that the hardy cannabis sativa plant was a  major agricultural crop for much of its early history.  Widely cultivated across much of Europe due to the need for strong cloth and industrial rope, Great Britain's navies ruled the seas due to the strong hemp ropes and sails they purchased from from hemp-growing countries such as Russia. 

With the continuing demand for hemp, it also became a major cash crop in the British colonies in what is now the United States and Canada.  First introduced to New England in 1629, hemp crops became a major part of the New World’s economy and was actually accepted as legal tender in some places.  George Washington was one famous early colonist who grew hemp and many of his diary entries in the years leading up to the American Revolution describe his careful notes on proper hemp cultivation.   While there is no evidence to show that he ever used his hemp crops for recreational drug use, a little “quiet enjoyment” would certainly have been an option for him and his fellow hemp growers.

Though virtually all of the cannabis trade focused on industrial and medical uses, there were still a few hardy psychonauts who dared to write about  their experiences with using it as a recreational drug.   Fitz Hugh Ludlow was one of America’s earliest drug pioneers whose detailed writings about the altered states of consciousness attained under the influence of cannabis and hashish had few parallels in the era in which he lived.

Born and raised in New York during the middle of the 19^th century as the son of an abolitionist preacher, Ludlow first discovered hashish through an article by travel author Bayard Taylor.   First experimenting with chloroform, Ludlow progressed through ether, morphine, and whatever other intoxicant he could discover  “until I had run through the who gamut of queer chemicals in my reach.”

By 1855, Ludlow was introduced to cannabis courtesy of his doctor who had purchased a supply as part of his medical practice.  Though the doctor insisted that it was only to be used for treating tetanus, Ludlow’s own research led him to the various writings of the Club des Hashischins  and discovered that what his doctor had purchased was better known as hashish.   After sneaking some of his doctor’s supply, Ludlow began experimenting with different dosages until he discovered that he was truly “stoned.”

This seminal moment had enough of an impact for Ludlow to write about it in depth:

“Ha! what means this sudden thrill ? A shock, as of some unimagined vital force, shoots without warning through my entire frame, leaping to my fingers’ ends, piercing my brain, startling me till I almost spring from my chair. I could not doubt it. I was in the power of the hasheesh influence. My first emotion was one of uncontrollable terror— a sense of getting something which I had not bargained for. That moment I would have given all I had or hoped to have to be as I was three hours before.”

Continuing with the experiments which he later published in his 1857 book, The Hasheesh Eater, Ludlow was euphoric in describing how his experiments transformed his mood. 

“No pain anywhere— not a twinge in any fibre— yet a cloud of unutterable strangeness was settling upon me; and wrapping me impenetrably in from all that was natural or familiar. Endeared faces, well known to me of old, surrounded me, yet they were not with me in my loneliness. I had entered upon a tremendous life which they could not share.” 

Using language that seems reminiscent of the writings of some of the drug gurus of the 1960s, Ludlow talked at length about his psychedelic experiences.  “I dwelt in a marvelous inner world,” he wrote in one chapter.  “I existed by turns in different places and various states of being.  Now I swept my gondola through the moonlit lagoons of Venice.  Now Alp on Alp towered above my view, and the glory of the coming sun flashed purple light upon the topmost icy pinnacle.  Now in the primeval silence of some unexplained tropical forest I spread my feathery leaves, a giant fern, and swayed and nodded in the spice-gales over a river whose waves at once sent up clouds of music and perfume.”  

Along with publishing his experiments in his book, Ludlow also wrote a widely-read article in Putnam’s Magazine and largely attributed much of his literary creativity to the influence of cannabis.   Writing that, ““[M]y pen glanced presently like lightning in the effort to keep neck and neck with my ideas,” Ludlow often complained that his mind was racing so quickly that he couldn’t write at all.    He also described his life as “one prolonged state of hasheesh exaltation.”  

Despite his early advocacy of cannabis and hashish, Ludlow would come to regret his experimentation.  Eventually denouncing cannabis as “the very witch-plant of hell, the weed of madness”, he concluded his book by giving the following warning:

“Hasheesh is indeed an accursed drug, and the soul at last pays a most bitter price for all its ecstasies; moreover, the use of it is not the proper means of gaining any insight, yet who shall say that at that season of exaltation I did not know things as they are more truly than ever in the ordinary state?.... In the jubilance of hashish, we have only arrived by an improper pathway at the secret of that infinity of beauty which shall be beheld in heaven and earth when the veil of the corporeal drops off, and we know as we are known.”

While actual cases of cannabis and hashish addiction are rare, Ludlow’s psychological dependence on his drug experiments apparently motivated him to crusade for better treatment of opium addicts later in his life.   Though the notoriety over The Hasheesh Eater ensured his place in the American literary scene, health problems stemming from his chronic battle with addiction overshadowed Ludlow's his attempts to gain better treatment options for addicts.  

Fitz Hugh Ludlow’s writings also inspired addicts from across the country to write him for advice.   Along with answering the enormous number of letters he received, Ludlow also visited local hospital wards in New York City to provide counseling to the addicts he found there.   Despite his own limited means, he often donated money to families of addicts, many of whom were on the verge of starvation.  

But overcoming his own addiction was one battle he couldn’t win.   As one friend would later write of him, “Alas, with what sadness his friends came to know that while he was doing so much to warn and restore others from the effects of this fearful habit, he himself was still under its bondage. Again and again he seemed to have broken it. Only those most intimate with him knew how he suffered at such periods.”  

Traveling to Europe in 1870, Ludlow’s health worsened due to pneumonia and a body generally weakened by years of chemical abuse.   While on his deathbed, he wrote the following epitaph for himself:  “I am struggling for the sake of my angels in human form to stay a little longer," he wrote to a friend from his deathbed. "My sufferings are very bitter, but, oh! what love, what wisdom in them hovers round my bed; and, oh! how full of gratitude my soul is. Who am I that such devotion, such unutterable patience and self-abnegation gather round my bed?"    He died on September 12, just one day after his 34^th birthday.  

Ironically, despite Ludlow's own crusade on behalf of drug addicts, one of the most visible results of his book's popularity was a renewed interest in cannabis and the rise of cannabis products such as "hasheesh candy."   By the end of the 19th century, many American cities had "hashish parlors" though that was likely as much due to the popularity of cannabis in Europe as it was to Ludlow's book.  Still, whatever he had intended, Ludlow's writing gave cannabis a greater respectability than ever.

Today, Fitz Hugh Ludlow's book is still regarded as a seminal classic though many modern historians question his claims of hashish addiction and even suggest he was prone to exaggeration for literary effect.   As cannabis slowly emerges from decades of prohibition in most places, Ludlow's own surreal description of his cannabis use has found supporters in both the pro- and anti-legalization camps.  Still, his psychedelic writing about the hashish experience has rarely been matched, before or since.

In many ways, Ludlow was both a pioneer and a prophet.    A fitting role perhaps for a man who sought to experience visions.

After Workplace Violence Occurs

Exposure to physical workplace violence is one of the most serious threats to employee safety. A new study in the journal Psychology of Violence  examines whether physical violence at work increases the risk of health-related absence from work and is associated with a greater risk of health-related absence from work in certain subgroups defined by gender, age, and educational level.  The study draws on data from a health and morbidity survey from 2006 merged with register data for each year in the period from 2006 to 2015 (n = 14,250). Rare event logistic regression models were used to examine physical violence at work as a predictor of health-related absence from work. Results: Physical violence at work predicted health-related absence from work several years after being exposed. In the 10-year follow-up period, individuals who had been exposed to physical workplace violence had 1.67 times higher odds of health-related absence than nonexposed individuals. The study also showed that exposed women, persons above 40 years of age, and individuals with a higher educational level had higher odds of health-related absence from work than their nonexposed counterparts. Employers and workers’ organizations should take action to support and help victims of physical workplace violence so that they may avoid future absence from the labor market. Victims of physical workplace violence are not affected by the incident only in the exposure year; they remain affected up to 8 years after. 

For the abstract

How Trial By Media Can Undermine the Courtroom

When security guard Richard Jewell discovered a suspicious-looking backpack as part of his routine search of the Centennial Olympic Park grounds prior to the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, his quick thinking helped save countless lives.  After notifying police, Jewell helped evacuate the park grounds before the backpack, which contained a powerful pipe bomb, could explode.   Despite the efforts of Jewell and other guards, over one hundred people were killed but the death count was far lower than it might have been.   Still, despite being initially hailed as a hero, Richard Jewell found himself being subjected to "trial by media" after the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that he was a "person of interest" in the bombing.   While the FBI investigation went nowhere, Jewell continued to be roasted by the media and even became the  butt of repeated jokes by comedians such as Jay Leno who referred to him as the "Una-doofus."   While Jewell was eventually vindicated, he later sued numerous news agencies for their biased coverage with most of these cases being settled for unspecified amounts.

While cases of "trial by media" are hardly uncommon, especially after high-profile crimes, the long-term damage resulting from this kind of publicity is often impossible to measure.   But how does this kind of media exposure affect the outcome of criminal trials?    Even though the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, along with similar laws around the world, are meant to guarantee the right of all defendants to a "fair and impartial jury". ensuring this can be impossible at times.   Not only are jurors expected to base their decision solely on evidence presented at trial, but the principle of impartiality means that they cannot have any prior opinions about the case they're deciding, including whether or not the defendant is guilty.   

Still, as previous research has demonstrated, news stories about recent crimes are typically skewed and one-sided, often based on the assumption that the defendant is already guilty.   To make matters worse, these stories often include prejudicial information that is rarely allowed during the actual criminal trial.    This kind of evidence can include the accused's past criminal history (whether or not it's relevant to the case),  sensationalized descriptions of the crime, and inflammatory statements by arresting officers or prosecutors.   Add in the often emotional interviews with relatives of the deceased in the case, most of whom openly state their belief that the accused is guilty,  and most people with an interest in the case typically have their minds made up before the jury is even selected.

To read more, check out my new Psychology Today blog post.

Want to Do An Exorcism? There's an App For That!

There seems no doubt that exorcism is a growth industry these days.

Not only are exorcists working for the Catholic Church reportedly overwhelmed with all the exorcism requests they have been receiving, but most mainstream churches are reporting the same.    Fundamentalist religious leaders worldwide are also claiming to cast out demons supposedly responsible for a wide range of complaints, including physical disease and homosexuality.   And then there are the "demonologists" (yes, that is a thing), who claim to be able to cast out demons without having any formal religious credentials.    As I said, it's a growth industry these days with nothing that even remotely resembles government regulation.  

To keep up with the demand, and to help avoid the often-hefty fees many exorcists charge for their services, some enterprising developers have come up with digital apps that allegedly allow users to cast out demons on their own.   According to a new report by the business website Compelo, there are already four apps that can be downloaded for use on iPhones and Android phones and more are likely already on the drawing boards.  With more than 66,000 downloads so far, there's no disputing their popularity.   Here are some of the leading candidates:

• Exorcism - certainly the most popular exorcism app with more than 50,000 downloads, Exorcism was created by a Spanish developer and already boasted a 4.5 rating with hundreds of reviews attesting to its effectiveness.   Along with information on exorcism and a litany of prayers to be used against demons, this app also contains an image of a St. Benedict's medal.  According to the description given, "this application introduces us to the world of exorcism and its basic concepts and provide protection prayers."    While the reviews fail to provide real details, the barrage of 5-star reviews attest to the satisfaction of its users (no word on actual effectiveness given, though).
• Exorcism and Deliverance -  Billed as a "FREE Catholic Android app providing info on how to handle demonic attacks", this app isn't quite as popular as Exorcism but still boasts over 10,000 downloads and a 4.5 rating on the Google store site.   Along with various deliverance prayers to be used by priests and the laity for defense against evil, it also features what is allegedly the formal Rite of Exorcism used by Catholic priests as well as information about "signs/symptoms of demonic attacks" and tips about how to "prepare for the spiritual battle."   While the reviews are generally positive, a few reviewers warn about the dangers of using the exorcism rite without proper authorization.  
• Exorcism Against Supernatural  -  Obviously not written by a native speaker of English, the description of the app says it can "help you performing real Latin exorcism with audio and text tips.   Professionally recorded high quality Latin pronunciation of the exorcist with mysterious music background from our studio".   Despite a 4.2 rating, this app has only been downloaded 1,000 times and the reviews are generally not that informative.  
• Ghost- Detection and Protection -  While not an exorcism app as such, the description states that the app "contains all information about ghosts.  You can be a Ghost detector after reading this app.  You can protect yourself from ghosts by this app."   Offering "the best from the world of astrology and darkness,"  the app is said to feature "tricks to save you from ghost evil spirits, their detection and protection in emergency situations.    Despite a 4.1 rating, 1,000 downloads, and generally positive reviews, some reviewers express misgivings about this app (including disappointment that it doesn't feature a "ghost detector").   

As you can see, exorcism and demonology apps seem to be popular these days and there are many more that aren't as highly rated.   While apps such as these aren't likely to put professional exorcists out of work any time soon they do reflect the very real fears about demonic possession and spiritual attack that people seem to have.   Fueled by the numerous exorcism movies and television shows that continue to present these possessions as real, the demand for exorcism services, both from professionals and wanna-bes, is only going to increase in the years to come.

 

 

 

Do Mental Patients Have Right to Euthanasia?

"I'm 29 years old and I've chosen to be voluntarily euthanised. I've chosen this because I have a lot of mental health issues. I suffer unbearably and hopelessly. Every breath I take is torture…"

After a long legal battle, including repeated assessments by psychiatrists who opposed her decision to commit suicide, Aurelia Brouwers was finally allowed to end her life in an assisted suicide on January 26 of this year.   

While assisted suicide is legal in the Netherlands where Brouwers lived, almost all of the 6,585 euthanasia deaths occurring there in 2017 were of people suffering from terminal diseases.   But 83 of those deaths were, like Brouwers, suffering from mental disorders which was non-terminal in nature.  

Under Dutch law, assisted suicide can only be approved if a medical doctor certifies that the applicant's life "unbearable with no prospect of improvement" and that there is "no reasonable alternative in the patient's situation."   In Aurelia Brouwers' case, her request for euthanasia was repeatedly denied by her medical doctors.   This led her to appeal the decision to the Levenseindekliniek - the End of Life Clinic - in The Hague.   Not only is this clinic the place of last resort for people whose request for euthanasia was denied by other doctors, but it was also where 65 of the 83 deaths approved for euthanasia due to incurable mental illness were carried out.

Once final approval was received, Aurelia Brouwers became the subject of considerable media attention.  For the last two weeks of her life, she was followed by a television news crew as part of a planned documentary on her case.   This meant recording scenes in which she made peace with family members,  rode her bicycle through the town where she lived, and even as she planned her funeral.   It also included following her as she visited the crematorium she had chosen for the final disposition of her remains and as she marked off each day she had left on a whiteboard in her home.

She showed no reluctance as she described her decision to die.  "When I was 12, I suffered from depression. And when I was first diagnosed, they told me I had Borderline Personality Disorder," she said in a final  media interview. "Other diagnoses followed - attachment disorder, chronic depression, I'm chronically suicidal, I have anxiety, psychoses, and I hear voices...."I'm stuck in my own body, my own head, and I just want to be free.  I have never been happy - I don't know the concept of happiness."   She also acknowledged making numerous suicide attempts on her own.  "I think I tried about 20 times. I was critical a few times, but I often got to hear that my heart and lungs were so healthy. The doctors said, 'It's a miracle, she made it."  

And the people around her had no difficulty seeing that she was in pain.  Sander Paulus, the RTL Nieuws journalist who spent much of her last two weeks with her didn't hesitate to describe her as troubled.  "She was really not as stable during the day," Paulus said. "You just felt there was a lot of pressure in her head. She didn't speak that well any more - except when we talked about euthanasia. She was very clear on that." 

When her final day came,  she simply drank the lethal combination of medications given to her by her doctor and lay down to die.   But the legal turmoil of her case continues to provoke debate in the Netherlands.   Even though Dutch law allows for euthanasia so long as the patient's decision to die is "voluntary and well-considered,"  many psychiatrists fiercely oppose extending this same right to the mentally ill.    Doctor  Frank Koerselman, a psychiatrist who is one of the leaders of the movement against euthanasia for mental patients, insists that psychiatrists should never comply with a patient's desire to die.  

"How could I know - how could anybody know - that her death wish was not a sign of her psychiatric disease?", Dr. Koerselman asked recently.   "The fact that one can rationalise about it, does not mean it's not a sign of the disease," says Dr  Koerselman says.  He also adds that psychiatrists working with these patients play a special role in keeping patients alive, "It is possible not to be contaminated by their lack of hope. These patients lost hope, but you can stay beside them and give them hope. And you can let them know that you will never give up on them."  

Though Aurelia's struggle is over, the controversy she leaves behind will linger much longer.   Who can say if this is the legacy she wanted?

  Listen to Linda Pressly's report, Euthanasia - Aurelia's story  on the BBC iPlayer

 

The American Doctor and the Whitechapel Murders

While most Americans were likely not that interested in the grisly details of a series of murders taking place in London's Whitechapel district back in 1888, that likely changed with a rather bizarre news story that made headlines in November of that year.   According to the news story, based on details sent by cable from London, police had arrested an American citizen living in the city on suspicion of being involved in the Whitechapel murders as well as  assorted other morals charges.   What was even more amazing was that the American in question was fairly well-known in the U.S., a rather flamboyant "Indian Herb doctor" named Francis Tumblety.

While his actual origins remain obscure, "Doctor" Francis Tumblety is believed to have been born in Ireland during the 1830s though his entire family, including ten siblings, all immigrated to Rochester, New York soon after his birth.   After leaving home at the age of seventeen, Tumblety soon distinguished himself with a shameless gift for self-promotion.    Just a few years after leaving home, he had set himself up as a medical doctor (despite the lack of anything resembling a formal education).    Billing himself as an "Indian Herb Doctor", Tumblety managed to set up practice in numerous cities (usually skipping out just ahead of the law).   

And he didn't limit himself to any one country either.  One of the earliest news stories I could find on him was in the Montreal Gazette in 1857 when he was charged with attempting to induce a miscarriage in one of his patients.   According to testimony, he personally administered the unknown substance to the young girl in question (quaintly described as "enceinte" in the news story).  He personally poured the fluid into her mouth in the presence of witnesses and then promised that the pregnancy would disappear in just a few days.   Unfortunately for Tumblety, the patient, as well as the witnesses in the case, were allied with the police as part of a sting operation to put the good doctor out of business.    

But Tumblety managed to beat the charge with the help of his able defense attorney as well as written testimonials from satisfied customers who insisted that they had been cured of assorted diseases such as scrofula   A letter posted in the papers on October 30 dismissed the entire case against him as a "work of malice and wicked design which we trust will be frustrated."    Still, whether due to lingering doubt over his medical skills or simply because he had grown bored with Montreal, he soon relocated to Toronto.   Once there, he quickly opened his practice with great fanfare and a letter to the newspaper in the form of a testimonial that listed the names of dozens of satisfied customers.  

Whether due to pressure from legitimate doctors and police or simply because of homesickness, Tumblety soon relocated to Buffalo, New York where he, once again, made newspaper headlines by suing George Percival, the proprietor of the Canterbury Music Hall for libel.   Apparently, one of the farces Percival had presented for his customers had been named, "Doctor Tumblety's First Patient" and had been reportedly intended to ridicule his professional reputation.    The newspaper story reporting on this case went on to describe Tumblety as a "very handsome man" but added that he was "eccentric and odd in his manners, appearing at times as an English sportsman with tremendous spurs attached to his boots and accompanied at times by a pair of gray hounds lashed together and at other times in full Highland costume."     Percival, for his part, insisted that the farce wasn't based on Francis Tumblety at all and had been presented in other cities with no problems (which was apparently true).  

Whatever the outcome of the case, Tumblety did stay in Buffalo long given that the next news story I was able to find on him had him practicing in Brooklyn just two years later.   This time however, he was the one on trial after a patient charged him with fraud after the good doctor sold him a remedy for arthritis that didn't work as promised.   By then, his reputation as a quack had definitely caught up with him and newspapers were openly denouncing him as a fake.   One piece from May, 1865 referred to him as "an illiterate fellow, with a small share of brains but plenty of impudence, sometimes called "cheek" to carry him through the world."   The story also added that "whatever he knew of medicine, he picked out of twenty-five cent yellow cover medicine works."   

But that was just the beginning of the good doctor's problems.   Not long after that particular news story was run, Tumblety was arrested and taken to Washington, D.C. on the orders of Secretary of War, Edward Stanton.  Following the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln on April 15 of that year, there were numerous arrests of people who had been implicated in the assassination plot.   For whatever reason, Tumblety was caught up in the hysteria due to his supposed association with one of John Wilkes Booth's co-conspirators.   For good measure, he had also been implicated in a supposed plot by Confederate sympathizers to spread yellow fever through various Northern cities.   

Though Tumblety was soon released due to lack of evidence, the publicity over his supposed involvement in these various plots was enough to damage his medical reputation (such as it was).  He also accused Edward Stanton of confiscating  some valuable securities, though nothing came of this either.   He tried to fight back by writing a leaflet describing his "kidnapping" and resulting ordeal but hardly anyone read it (though it's still available online).    He soon dropped out of sight aside from repeated arrests for vagrancy with time served in workhouses across New England.  But nothing could hold down the "Indian Herb Doctor" for long and he eventually managed to re-open his medical practice in Pennsylvania.   The news item advertising his new business boasted of his extensive travels through Europe and even included an excerpt of a testimonial supposedly signed by Abraham Lincoln himself.   

This new business apparently didn't last long because the next news story I could find on him placed him in Liverpool, U.K., just three years later.   Billing himself as the "American Doctor" Tumblety boasted of a practice that included various prominent Europeans including Charles Dickens, Napoleon III of France, Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, etc.   Naturally, his advertisements also included all of his American patients, including Abraham Lincoln, Generals Sherwood and Lee (presumably he worked for both sides during the Civil War), and Horace Greeley.      

Not that this saved him from legal problems, including his suspected role in the death of at least one of his patients.   This is what likely led to his returning to the United States and his 1881 arrest for pickpocketing in New Orleans.   There is also evidence that he was homosexual and had frequent affairs with men on both sides of Atlantic, something that led to frequent arrests on morality charges.    It also may have played a direct role in his becoming a suspect in the Whitchapel murders of 1888.   

Even before he became a "person of interest" in the killings, Tumblety had already been arrested on an unspecified morals charge (probably relating to homosexuality which was illegal at the time).   Adding in the fact that Tumblety lived in the area of the killings, was a known misogynist with a particular distaste for prostitutes,  and the pressure on Scotland Yard to make an arrest, it was likely inevitable that the good doctor would be pulled in for questioning.  But, once again, it was the newspaper publicity surrounding his arrest that made him seem guilty (at least in the United States).   With headlines such as, "Is He The Whitechapel Murderer?" in newspapers back home, nobody seemed inclined to believe his innocence  though the actual evidence against him was minimal at best.   

And, of course, the newspapers also did their best to play up all of Tumblety's  his displays of wealth despite not having any visible income (except possibly from his pimple cream -  his most popular item), his quirky lifestyle, his bizarre mode of speech,  and odd way of dressing.   They also mentioned his past history of medical malpractice, including suggestions that he had fled Nova Scotia where he allegedly killed a patient with the wrong medication.    The newspapers also mentioned his arrest on a morality charge in London as well as his long history of association with "young men and grown-up youths" (leaving readers to assume the worst).    Since Tumblety had also come under police investigation time and again, many of the officers who had investigated him over the years were interviewed as well.   Though no actual violence was ever turned up, the officers quoted rarely had anything good to say about him.   One even went so far as to say, "Knowing him as I do, I should not be in the least surprised if he turned out to be Jack the Ripper."

But Tumblety's case never went to trial.   Since the police had no hard evidence against him, he was allowed to post bail and he promptly fled the country in late November, 1888.   This date is significant due to the fact that Mary Kelly, last known victim of the Whitechapel murders, was killed on November 9, not long after Tumblety's release.  Also, though this is likely a coincidence, the Ripper killings stopped after Tumblety left England.   Though Scotland Yard was likely embarrassed at losing Tumblety, the British press hardly took notice since there were still other suspects to be investigated.   Eventually however, the trail petered out and no arrest was ever made.

As for Francis Tumblety, he eventually returned to New York City though the notoriety from all the press he had received would dog him for the rest of his life.   He died in St. Louis, Missouri in 1903 at the age of 82.   It probably says a lot about his success as a quack doctor that he left behind a substantial estate (about $140,000 in 1903 dollars) that sparked a major legal battle among his heirs.   He was eventually returned to Rochester, New York, where he was buried in Holy Sepulchre Cemetery.

Though he largely faded into obscurity after his death, Francis Tumblety's name became front-page news again in 2002 with the publication of a new book linking him to the Ripper killings.  Written by retired constable Steward Evans, along with co-author Paul Gainer, the book was titled, "Jack the Ripper:  First American Serial Killer" and makes a case for Tumblety actually being guilty of the killings.   While the case Evans builds is largely circumstantial, including Tumblety's personal quirks, his misogyny, and his once displaying a collection of human body parts, including the uterus of a prostitute, and the book still makes for in intriguing read.   Ultimately though, the book is no more conclusive than any of the other books purporting to "solve" the Whitechapel murders (none of which ever name the same suspect).   

So, was Francis Tumblety the Ripper?   Probably not considering he had no known history of violence before or after 1888.   To this day though, Tumblety's name is still included in every list of potential Ripper candidates.   Which likely isn't the kind of immortality this flim-flam artist would have wanted.

 

 

The Psychologist and the Wolf Girl

On October 22, 1926,  the New York Times ran a memorable headline on the bottom of the front page:  "2 Little Wolf Girls in "Den" With Wolf Cubs; Rescued, 1 Dies; 1 is Humanized Slowly."    According to the story, which was based on a report in London's Westminster Gazette,  two "wolf girls" had been found living in a wolf's den in a remote part of Bengal (then a part of India but now divided between India and Bangladesh).   

The girls had been found by the Reverend Singh of Midnapore after hearing rumours from local villagers about "demons" being in the jungle.   The girls, aged two and eight, were described by Singh as "exceedingly fierce, running on all fours, uttering guttural barks and living like wolves."    While the younger girl died shortly after being rescued, the older girl was given the name, "Kamala" and was raised at the orphanage.  Kamala was described as exhibiting "savage ways" including eating with her mouth in a dish and tearing off her clothes even after they had been "sewn on her."  While she eventually learned a few words, Singh said that she was still "weak mentally and neither cries or laughs."   She also avoided the other children in the orphanage and preferred to remain with the dogs.  

When Kamala's story finally received international attention, many remained convinced that the "wolf girl" was a  hoax.   Members of one "well-known London club" even got into a fistfight over the controversy and Professor Julian Huxley at King's College in London suggested that Kamala's case was "just feasible."   Still, it took a more impartial report by a bishop visiting Singh's orphanage to get better information about her.    According to Bishop Pakenham-Walsh, unwanted female children in that part of India were often left exposed and a she-wolf had apparently "adopted" one of thee infants to raise as her own cub.  For whatever reason, the wolf apparently repeated the experience six years later when a second girl was adopted as well. 

In his account, the bishop described Kamala as "of normal size.  and there is nothing peculiar about her except that she sits animal-like and does nothing for hours together. Her face has a vacant appearance, but when she says one of the thirty words she has learned . . . she smiles sweetly and has a pleasing face."   Press reports compared the surviving girl as being similar to Rudyard Kipling's Jungle Book character, Mowgli.  Questions were also raised about whether she could ever be socialized.   While there have been previous account of feral children being returned to civilization, including the famous Victor of Aveyron, none of them had ever been successfully taught language. 

To complicate the question further, it soon turned out that the two girls had been rescued years earlier in 1920.   The Reverend Singh and his wife had apparently kept Kamala's origins a secret for six years out of fear of how she would be affected by the publicity her story would bring.   As Singh himself would later state,  "if the rescue story became public, it would be difficult for us to settle them in their life by marriage, when they attained that age."  He and his wife also feared that publicity"would lead to innumerable visits and queries, which would be a great drain on our time."    The only reason the story reached the newspapers at all was that a letter by the bishop fell into the wrong hands.

What this meant was that much of the evidence relating to the time the two girls spent in the wild had been lost by the time the case began to attract serious scientific scrutiny.   As it was, Kamala's health began declining (possibly due to the relentless media exposure) and she died in 1929, just three years after her story first broke.  By that time, Singh had already turned down an opportunity to take Kamala to the United States so she could be examined directly.    With her death, all that the scientists had to work with were Singh's own first-hand observations.

There was certainly little documentation available on Kamala and the younger girl.  Not only had Singh failed to get affidavits from the hunters who had been with him when the girls were rescued (to verify the wolf-den story) but there were no medical reports either.   Singh had apparently refused to allow medical doctors to examine the two girls at the time of their rescue despite his apparent concern over their condition.   Some controversy also developed over whether it had been Singh who had discovered the girls as he claimed or whether they had been rescued by local villagers.   

By the late 1930s, anthropologist Robert Zingg had been granted permission by Singh to publish his diary about the wolf girls.  While Zingg insisted that the case was "well-documented", other scientists had since dismissed the entire idea that children could be raised by wild animals.  Since Singh was an untrained observer with a poor command of English, Western researchers tended to regard him as being too credulous to be taken seriously.    In 1942, Zingg published his own book, Wolf-Children and Feral Man.  Co-written with Singh, the book was basically a defense of Singh's original account along with pictures of both wolf girls and a full reprint of an 1833 translation of a book on Kaspar Hauser.    Whatever Zingg's intention, his book was not taken seriously.  Even eminent anthropologist Ashley Montagu wrote that, while he would like to have believed the story, "no scientist can accept as true any statement of a fellow-scientist or the statement of anyone else until it has been independently confirmed by others."   Other scientists would not be so polite with their scorn.

Which brings us to Arnold Lucius Gesell.    One of the founders of the Yale Clinic of Child Development (now the Yale Child Study Center), Gesell is now recognized as a pioneer in the field of child development.   An author of numerous manuals for teaching "deficient children" as well as a leading authority in special education, Gesell was very much a prominent authority in his field.  He also wrote popular books about infant development and behaviour as well as advice about child-rearing, all of which made him a household name (think of him as the "Doctor Spock" of his day).  Parents often relied on Gesell's guides to infant development to monitor how their children were progressing compared to the norms laid out in his books and videos.  When news about the wolf girls first came out,  Gesell followed the story closely and also stayed in contact with Reverend Singh and Robert Zingg to learn all that he could.

It was this fascination that led Arnold Gesell to publish his own book about Kamala in 1941.   The book, Wolf Child and Human Child, was meant to combat the skepticism over Kamala's case and to clear the way for Zingg's own publication (which had been delayed in publication due to resistance from other scientific skeptics).   Describing Kamala's story as "the most singular and perhaps the most remarkable which has ever been told of any human child",   Gesell had serious difficulty covering the numerous gap in Kamala's story and even admitted that he had "to summon imagination and even invent a few conjectures to fill the gaps of actual knowledge."    For Gesell, "filling the gaps" involved drawing on his own extensive research with other children to explain Kamala's abnormal development.  He even made numerous comparisons to Mowgli and his relationship with the "Mother Wolf" to describe how Kamala became more human on her return to civilization. 

Beginning with a chapter describing Kamala's birth, Gesell described Kamala's entire "life cycle" and how she was eventually "weaned from wolf ways."   He even included a chapter on "Heredity and Culture"  and the influence of Kamala's birth mother, the she-wolf, and Mrs. Singh whom he regarded as the three primary female figures in her life.   About the care that the two wolf-girls received from the she-wolf, Gesell became downright lyrical in his description:  

"She licked and cleansed her cubs; she kept the floor tidy; she warmed them when necessary with her shaggy hide. For weeks she rilled her breasts for them; and weaned them to flesh by chewing it for them and by preparing tidbits from the kill. She permitted them to leave the den when they were about two months old, but not until they were ten to twelve months old and had shed their milk teeth did she permit them to shift for themselves." 

As for some of the mysteries surrounding Kamala's story, including the possibility that she had been deliberately abandoned by her birth parents,  Gesell did little but touch on them briefly.  In writing about the trauma of Kamala's removal from the wolf den, the death of her young "sister", and the later attempts by the Singh's to socialize Kamala, Gesell produced no new information but relied exclusively on Singh's diaries.   As for Kamala -whom he never saw- Gesell described her as "a potentially normal child, who in spite of extremely abnormal isolation retained to the end distinguishing marks of normality."  

Gesell also dismissed suggestions that Kamala and her "sister" may have had pre-existing medical problems that led to them being abandoned.   Though Gesell had established some of the first assessment centres for children with intellectual disabilities, he insisted that the "available evidence strongly denotes that Kamala was born a normal infant and that she suffered no inflammatory illness or physical injury which destroyed the normal potentialities of her brain development. She presented no sensory defects."    The fact that Kamala had never been formally assessed by a trained professional and that no real information about her infancy was available was another issue that Gesell managed to dismiss.   He largely based his assumptions about her being normal on her successful adjustment to the wolf-den and then to how she functioned at the orphanage.

Working from the assumption that Kamala had developed normally, Gesell then used her later development to demonstrate his theories about child development.  Despite her early environment and apparent difficulties adjusting to living as a human, he concluded that "From the standpoint of genetic and of clinical psychology the most significant phenomenon in the life career of Kamala is the slow but orderly and sequential recovery of obstructed mental growth."

If the Reverend Singh voiced his own concerns about Kamala's development at the orphanage, Gesell showed no doubts whatsoever in his book.   He boldly argued that, "From the standpoint of genetic and of clinical psychology the most significant phenomenon in the life career of Kamala is the slow but orderly and sequential recovery of obstructed mental growth."   He also regarded her story as being a symbol of hope given that World War II was underway at the time.    Considering that nations were acting like wolves and committing countless acts of mass murder,  he argued that "the dignity and stamina of the human spirit are enhanced rather than clouded by the marvelous career of Kamala."    

Despite her death, Gesell insisted that her story was a case of heredity overcoming environmental problems (though he was likely too optimistic about that).   His obsession with Kamala's story seems hard to understand given that he was an otherwise careful scientist who had built his reputation on his work with thousands of children.   Devoting an entire book to a child he had never seen and only learned about through second-hand sources seems very unlike the Arnold Gesell that had become an eminent authority on child development.   It likely didn't help that he accepted so much of Singh's story at face value without being at least a little skeptical.   

Still, Gesell's eminence saved him from much of the vicious criticism that Robert Zingg received.   While Zingg would eventually be forced out of teaching due to the fallout from his book, Gesell largely put the controversy behind him.   Whether it contributed to his decision to retire a few years after his book on Kamala came out is hard to determine.

And a certain amount of skepticism is definitely needed considering later revelations about the case of the two wolf-girls.   Later anthropologists such as Ashley Montagu voiced their own doubts about Singh's story given the total lack of any supporting documentation.   Montagu also pointed out various inconsistencies in what Singh wrote about the girls, including his insistence that they both "howled" at certain times, despite the fact that this completely contradicts actual wolf behaviour.   He also noted the sheer implausibility of a she-wolf raising a child for seven years when real wolf-cubs would be able to fend for themselves by the time they are one year old. 

Other critics were even more scathing.   According to a 2007 book by surgeon Serge Aroles,  most of the details provided by Singh about the two wolf-girls were, if not a deliberate fraud, certainly distorted.    Not only had Singh's diary been completely written six years after Kamala's death but the "classic" pictures of the two wolf-girls showing them behaving like wolves were actually fakes.   Taken years after Kamala's death, the pictures were of two other girls in the orphanage who had been asked to pose as wolf-girls at Singh's request (these were the pictures prominently displayed in the books by Gesell and Zingg).   Several reliable witnesses also reported that Singh had beaten Kamala to force her to behave as a wolf-girl whenever he presented her to visitors. 

So why would Singh lie about Kamala?   The most obvious explanation was to raise money for his underfunded orphanage.  Not only did Robert Zingg convince Reverend Singh that the story of the wolf-girls would be financially valuable, but he also sent Singh a royalty payment of $500 after their book was published - money that was badly needed.   Though interest in Kamala's case petered out eventually, Singh and his wife had a clear motive to maintain the wolf-girl pretense as long as possible.   Aroles concluded in his book that the "wolf-girl" story likely obscured the real tragedy:  that Kamala and her "sister", like countless other female children in India, had been deliberately abandoned by their parents, possibly due to pre-existing congenital problems  (Aroles suspected  Rett syndrome in Kamala's case).  

Though the discovery of the two girls in a wolf-den is likely not implausible (since recorded cases of wolves "adopting" abandoned children have been recorded before), the actual amount of time they spent in the den will never be known for certain.   All that can really be established was that the Reverend Singh took in two girls who had been abandoned under extraordinary circumstances  and attempted to raise them to the best of his ability.  Whether he invented the wolf-girl story completely or simply exaggerated many of the details to drum up interest, he still managed to generate the international support that might have been completely lacking otherwise.

So, was Kamala a true "wolf girl"?   Perhaps.   In terms of investigating the possibility of feral children, the case has serious flaws however.   As for more down-to-earth issues such as child abandonment and neglect, people championing Kamala's case appeared to miss the point completely.  However long she spent in the wild (with or without a wolf caring for her), Kamala's impaired development reflects the problems seen in institutionalized and neglected children around the world.   That cases such as this continue to be reported even today reflects the critical need for better care for high-risk children.

Whether or not a wolf is involved.