The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case

According to the product description of SYBIL EXPOSED, "Nathan gives proof that the allegedly true story was largely fabricated."

Although Nathan did a good job of constructing a narrative of how and why she believes the book SYBIL came to be, neither the patient (Shirley Mason aka Sybil, the psychiatrist (Wilbur), nor the author (Schriebner) are alive to defend against Nathan's interpretations of their interactions and their motivations to produce the book.

On p. 396 (Kindle), Nathan states that Wilbur "used her medical credentials to aggressively promote a diagnosis [multiple personality disorder] that, ultimately, hurt women far more than it helped them . . ."

As a journalist Nathan has a right to use her research findings to impugn the motives of Dr. Wilbur; however, she offered no research to support her contention that the diagnosis "hurt women far more than it helped them."

Wanda Karriker, Ph.D.
Author, Morning, Come Quickly

This book, while valuable, does a great disservice to patients and professionals who struggle with issues surrounding multiple personality disorder/dissociative identity disorder. Ms. Nathan builds a powerful case for the fact that "Sybil" was largely a fabrication--a combination of exaggeration and sensationalism. She has done a great deal of research and, as distressing and disappointing it is to discover that such a seminal work is a fraud, it's valuable to have this type of expose presented to the public.

Anytime a "factual" book is exposed as a fabrication, doubt is cast on the existence of whatever the book is describing. Ms. Nathan contributes to this doubt, as she calls into question the validity of the diagnosis of MPD/DID, the validity of the concept of recovered memory, and the long-lasting impact of early childhood trauma on consciousness and perception of reality. It's true that many irresponsible therapists and others have asked children (or adults under hypnosis) leading questions, implanting the suggestion that perhaps they had been hideously abused. But it's also true that there are irresponsible practitioners of all kinds, and their irresponsibility does not raise questions about the condition they are misdiagnosing. For example, bipolar disorder is a real condition, well-documented and well-established. There are some healthcare practitioners who misinterpret the ordinary mood fluctuations of everyday life as "bipolarity" and incorrectly treat individuals who do not suffer from the condition. But this doesn't mean that bipolar disorder doesn't exist. Similarly with MPD/DID, and with the process of recovering traumatic childhood memories. There are indeed unscrupulous, biased or well-intentioned but ignorant practitioners who slant their questions based on answers they expect to receive and receive just the "answers" they are expecting. But does that mean the disorder doesn't exist, and is nothing more than a "fad" created by a coterie of ill-informed and misguided psychiatrists?

Ms. Nathan also seems to believe that if child abuse cannot be confirmed by community or family members, it didn't exist. An earlier reviewer pointed out that child abuse is all too frequently ignored and covered up. Again, it may well be the case that Sybil's abuse was either fabrication or exaggeration. But the book implies that the failure of Connie and others to uncover hard facts about the abuse necessarily means that the abuse didn't take place. This does a great disservice to children who have been abused, but whose communities and families did not step forward to stop it, ignored clear signs, and turned a blind eye.

One of the points the author makes is that the proliferation of the diagnosis of MPD/DID implies that it is a "fad." This is also a mistaken idea. Often, a condition that has previously been unknown or misdiagnosed rises in prevalence because now the condition has been identified. This is how science advances. For example, there is a rare eye condition called ocular lymphoma. It was almost unheard of until recently, when scientists identified the condition . Now, there are many more cases being diagnosed. One reason for the increase in diagnosis is that with advancing research, this condition was identified and scientists in the "ivory tower" hospitals began to educate community-based ophthalmologists about what to look for when they saw patients who had "benign floaters" that never went away. Now that these ophthalmologists knew what to look for, more cases were diagnosed--and more lives were saved.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this book is that it minimizes the existence and long-term impact of child abuse. It implies that an adult cannot remember preverbal trauma, and that if an event is recalled in adulthood, it is false and has been the product of a manipulative therapist. This is a throwback to an earlier era when it was thought that children would "forget" and "get over" trauma and tragedy, but the vast trauma literature does not support this antiquated point of view. (I refer readers to the work of Bessel van der Kolk, a trauma expert at Harvard. I also refer people to the classic books on trauma, such as Waking the Tiger, The Body Remembers, and Trauma and Recovery). Therapists must learn how to responsibly help clients heal from the impact of child abuse. This means that when a child remembers abuse, acts it out in play, or reveals it through direct body-centered therapy, the abuse isn't dismissed as fantasy and is addressed therapeutically.

.

Yeah, because everyone has to go through the same amount of trauma and respond the same exact way. People are complex and so is the brain, we are not all going to experience abuse the same way with the same symptoms, it doesn't mean they are lying, it means they are different.

Sybil. It is one of those names that seemingly can't be spoken aloud without everyone thinking of the young woman with the 16 multiple personalities who was the subject of a bestselling book and a television movie starring Sally Field. Every psychology student in America has read the book and/or seen the movie, analyzed the case and discussed it at great length. It is likely one of the most well-known psychological cases in American history...and it was very likely all a ruse.
The information brought to light in Debbie Nathan's book is both fascinating and morally reprehensible. Dr. Connie Wilbur, Sybil (real name Shirley Mason) was victim of unbelievably unethical and irresponsible practices including electroshock, drug abuse and over-prescription, hypnosis, injections of Pentothal (aka "truth serum) despite Dr. Wilbur knowing that they could lead to false memories, leading and suggestive questions, and implanted memories. Dr. Wilbur was so consumed by her own ambition and desires that she refused to see the obvious - Sybil was faking. As you read it becomes clear that the abuse she claimed to have suffered didn't happen. At one point Sybil even wrote a letter confirming her personalities were faked but Dr. Wilbur refused to accept the truth.
Sybil was broke after the loss of both parents and was financially and emotionally dependent on Dr. Wilbur. It's not a stretch to say that Dr. Wilbur had also become excessively involved with Sybil as well.
The book is very well-researched and well-documented. Nathan took great care in presenting the facts behind the Sybil case and treatment honestly and accurately rather than manipulating them to fit her own agenda as Dr. Wilbur seems to have done during the original case. There were moments throughout the book where I had issues with Nathan's writing style, for example: she introduced the background of the author, Flora Schreiber, but then continues on discussing only Sybil and Dr. Connie Wilbur. The timeline was a bit disjointed in places and readers must be careful to pay attention while reading but it isn't a book that readers will quickly lose interest in anyway.

It's a well-researched book on a very polarizing topic - is MPD a legitimate condition and did Sybil really have 16 personalities? People will either love or hate this book.

Disclaimer: Sybil's real name is Shirley Mason. For the purposes of this review I referred to her as "Sybil" only because that is the name used in the original book and film.

This book was thorough and well-researched, but ultimately suffers terribly because of author Debbie Nathan's laundry list of personal biases. Anti-semitism (such a references to Sybil author Flora Rheta Schreiber's "hooked nose"), racial othering, and politically incorrect language are rampant ("n*gger" makes a quoted appearance on the first page, and is followed by everything from "retarded" to "Indian" to "fairy" in the author's narration). Despite the book's purported feminist slant, there are many instances of sexism from the author—notably her repeated critiques of Schrieber's weight, psychiatrist Connie Wilbur's late-in-life plastic surgery, and both women's relationships with men. Most shockingly, despite the book's main topic of mental illness, Nathan is incredibly insensitive to the issue, frequently using derogatory, non-medical words like "crazy" and "lunatic" to describe the mentally ill and "normal" for those without mental illness.

Overall, the book is informative about the history of Sybil, but lacks objectivity and is bogged down incredibly by the author's constant, offensive interjections about the people, events, and facts involved.

I was expecting a well written and objective look at the evidence surrounding Sybil (both the person and the book).

Instead this was poorly researched and contained many opinions on psychology which are contenscious and not supported by the facts. The author has tried really hard to make a case against Sybil but it was simply unconvincing.

I have read a number of similar books and whilst I haven't always been swayed by the author's views I have normally found some interesting points and factual evidence...not in this case. Very disappointed.

"Connie Wilbur called herself a scientist, but science warns against professing certainty, especially about something as subjective as the study of human behavior. If Sybil teaches us anything, it is that we should never accept easy answers or quick explanations. Knowledge in medicine changes constantly, and anyone unprepared to welcome the changes and test them is not to be trusted."

When I initially read Sybil in the late 1970s, I was shocked and horrified. That is nothing compared to how shocked I was after reading this book.

Dr. Connie Wilbur was one of the first female psychiatrists in American history, having received her medical degree in 1939. She was Shirley Mason's (Sybil's) therapist for over a decade and a driving force behind having Multiple Personality Disorders (MPD) or what is now called Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) declared an entry in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Despite being listed in the DSM, there is still quite a bit of controversy about diagnosis of the disorder.

Nathan's book will add another argument for those psychiatrists and laypeople who are doubtful about a diagnosis of DID. Dr Wilbur's 'evidence' and 'research' on DID is shown as startling unethical, inconsistent, and shockingly disturbing for the field of research, but especially research on a psychiatric disorder. If there is such a disorder formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder, Wilber's lack of ethical research practices places unfair doubt on those who suffer from the disorder. If there is no such disorder, then Wilber's research has helped to perpetuate an entire industry of a misdiagnosed individuals, untold financial costs, and family and friends' lives ripped apart.

If you are looking for salacious details and shocking revelations about Dr. Wilbur, Flora Schreiber and Sybil, including details about her life and disorder - this book has them. However, what I see as the most important message in this book is in the quote that I opened this review with.

To make the narrative all the more cautionary, may I suggest the following change:

"Knowledge in...[science]...changes constantly, and anyone unprepared to welcome the changes and test them is not to be trusted".

Caveat - I am not a therapist, nor doctor but just a curious grad student conducting my own (non-medical) research. The unethical manner in which Sybil was treated and the research was conducted shook me to the core. I also do not believe or disbelieve the validity of MPD/DID.

**Edited to change "psychologist to psychiatrist".

October 19, 2011, Statement from Dr. Patrick Suraci
I went to the Special Collections Library at John Jay College of Criminal Justice to verify statements made by Debbie Nathan in her book SYBIL EXPOSED.
1. On pages 99-100 Nathan writes: "Connie would carry her apparatus to Shirley's apartment and climb in bed with her. She would clamp the paddles to Shirley's temples, twirl the dials, and press the buttons. Connie's gadget was an old electro-convulsive machine she had retired years earlier."
Nathan cites the evidence for this in her "Notes: Chapter 8, No.38.. FRS Box 37, Files 1081, Tape 124." In this document on January 26, 1955, Shirley writes about "electric shock" along with her other treatments. There is absolutely no documentation of Nathan's outrageous claim.
2. On page 232 Nathan writes: "...She (Shirley Mason) died quietly in her home, surrounded by nurses, on February 26 of that year. She was seventy-five years old. It was early evening when she died." In my book SYBIL in her own words: The Untold Story of Shirley Mason, Her Multiple Personalities and Paintings. On page 261 I write:
"The penultimate time I phoned Shirley's home was on February 26, 1998, at 12:07 PM. In the background I heard her weak voice pleading to Roberta, `Tell him I'm sorry. I'm sorry.' Roberta informed me that Shirley was too sick to speak on the phone. I mumbled, `Please tell her that it's okay, it's okay. I'll call later.' ...
"When I called later that day at 3:01 PM Roberta stunned me with the news than Shirley had just died." This error in Ms. Nathan's book is symbolic of her lack of knowledge about Shirley Mason and other comments she makes show her ignorance about Flora Schreiber and Dr. Corneilla Wilbur because she never knew any of them.
Dr. Suraci has the telephone records of that day, February 26, 1998.

After all these years, the made-for-television movie with Sally Field stands out as particularly memorable. I was in middle school at the time, and the movie was the talk of the school after it aired. The horrific scenes of child abuse were shocking. In this book, which purports to expose the truth behind the story, author Debbie Nathan wonders why we believed the story and speculates that it may have had to do with the changing roles of women at the time. Women may have been "split" between traditional roles and the greater freedom becoming available to them.

I can only speak for myself as to why I "believed" the movie and later the book. And, of course, I have the excuse that I was quite young.
There did not seem to be any reason not to believe the story. After all, mental health professionals were "experts," and to this day we commonly hear them referred to as such in the media. While ignorant, uneducated parents were actually raising children, these experts, with their years of training, understood the many ways that parents were screwing up their children. It seemed perfectly plausible to me that a child who underwent a horrific experience would choose to block that experience from her conscious mind, burying it. Splitting into different selves to escape horrific abuse seemed plausible. Facing the trauma, remembering it, with the help of a compassionate therapist would seem to be the first step to recovery. Joanne Woodward played the part of the heroic psychiatrist who "cured" the patient at the end, as all the personalities integrated into one. The psychiatrist certainly seemed like someone to admire at the time - a strong, smart woman in the position of authority in a once male-dominated field.

Now, Debbie Nathan informs me, much of what I believed about this case was not true. Apparently, from what I have read from other reviewers, she is not the first to "expose" the truth of this case. I knew that the idea of repressed memories had become controversial, but I did not follow the issue closely and haven't given much thought to Sybil in many years. Therefore, this book was eye-opening to me. Here is the reality of the case, according to Ms. Nathan:

---The psychiatrist drugged the patient for years to help her "remember."
Sybil (whose real name was Shirley) was repeatedly injected with pentothal. This drug can cause patients to say some rather bizarre and untrue statements. The psychiatrist asked very leading questions of the patient while she was drugged to elicit answers that fit into a the narrative the psychiatrist had already decided upon. "One record of an early Pentothal therapy session suggests that Shirley produced torrents of what the old military psychiatrists had recognized as dreamlike, false-memory garble" (page 93).

---The psychiatrist irresponsibly drugged the patient to the point where she had difficulty functioning in daily life. "Within two years of starting therapy with Connie in New York, Shirley had turned into a drug addict" (page 102). After four years the situation was worse.
"Now, after hundreds of hours of therapy and countless pills, shots, and machine-induced convulsions, she was a thirty-five-year-old junkie who spent most of her time in bed and who, when she did get up, checked her mailbox for money from her father, or walked the streets muttering to herself. When Jean Lane called to say hello, Shirley sounded so drugged that conversation was difficult" (page 105).

---Sybil wrote a letter to the psychiatrist confessing that she had made up much of what she had been telling her and had been playing a role.
"I do not have any multiple personalities... I do not even have a 'double'... I am all of them. I have been essentially lying" (page 106).
The psychiatrist responded by telling the patient that this was a form of "resistance" to treatment.

---The psychiatrist's career depended on having this extraordinary case of multiple personalities. She became a celebrity because of it, and she was not willing to admit or consider alternatives once this narrative had been established. "Shirley was the most important patient in her entire professional career, not to mention in the history of psychiatry. Connie was discussing the case with psychiatry students and with world-famous doctors like Sandor Lorand. She was preserving the tape-recorded narcosynthesis interviews she was doing with Shirley, and speaking about the case at conferences. She had no wish to give all this up" (page 107).

---Flora Schreiber, the writer who collaborated with the psychiatrist and patient to write the best-selling book did considerable research and could not corroborate much of the story. Although Sybil's mother was supposedly a deeply disturbed woman who defecated on her neighbors'
lawns and participated in lesbian orgies in the woods, no one who lived in the town had seen evidence of this. Despite her doubts, the writer went ahead with the story and portrayed the mother as a monster.

As a result of this famous case, many mental health professionals were inspired to look for repressed memories. They ended up planting false memories into the minds of their patients, leading to false and devastating accusations against many families. And, if Sybil's story is false, her deceased mother was greatly slandered, turned into a mythical monster when she may just have been an imperfect mother.

Debbie Nathan has provided enough evidence to persuade me that the story of Sybil is much different than what it was originally presented to be in the book and movie. She has persuaded me that the psychiatrist used very questionable methods. Still, I am giving this book 4 stars because I am torn. Having been duped by the initial Sybil narrative, I do not want to be duped a second time into believing every aspect of Ms. Nathan's version of events.

The three women that she focuses on - patient, psychiatrist, writer - are all dead, unable to answer. The fact is, it may be impossible to ever really know what went on in Sybil's head. The book's jacket says that Ms. Nathan specializes in writing about several topics, including "sexual politics and sex panics, particularly in relation to women and children." While I think no one should be accused based on the recovery of repressed memories, I do think that there is a serious and widespread problem of sexual abuse. Concern about this issue should not be dismissed as a "panic." Are there cults that ritualistically abuse children? Ms. Nathan dismisses the idea as part of the panic, noting that the FBI has investigated and been unable to find evidence. I do not know if they exist, but with so much craziness in our society, and the existence of child pornography rings, I don't think it is totally out of the realm of believability.

An aspect of the book that I do not like is the subtle putdowns that are included in Ms. Nathan's descriptions of various women in the story. For example, in describing Sybil's mother, she writes, "In 1923 when she was almost 40 - old enough to be a grandmother, and with her hair that was prematurely and strikingly white - one of Mattie's pregnancies finally went to term" (page 9). She does not actually say there is anything wrong with being an older mother, but it is clearly implied.

Writing about Flora Schreiber, the author of Sybil, Ms. Nathan states, "She was starting to feel like an aging, anonymous scholar. Her squarish face was getting squarer. Her hooked nose hooked lower. Her cigarette habit had evolved to the chain-smoker level. Her tendency to walk around with food stains on her dress - and now, ashes - was growing more pronounced. The 1940s ended and she'd never in her life had a boyfriend, much less a famous one" (page 70). "At age thirty-seven Flora lived in Manhattan with her parents. She was single and childless - a spinster" (page 113).

She writes extensively about the Seventh Day Adventists, again not overtly criticizing them, but implying they were backward and repressive. On page 10, she refers to the "bleak little Adventist Meetinghouse." One of the reasons that Protestant meeting houses were "bleak" is that the various faiths emphasized simplicity over ostentatious display. Ms. Nathan describes how the adherents were discouraged from reading magazine stories about celebrities and film stars. "These stories, with their focus on actresses, vanity, and romance, were poison for Adventists" (page 12). Well, considering how obsessed young women are today with how they look and with all the attention given to the Paris Hilton's of the world, maybe those backward Adventists had a point.

I suppose the debunking of the Sybil myth and repressed memory syndrome in general is not an easy pill for some of us to swallow. There is a long history in our culture of not believing individuals who were, in fact, victims of rape and other types of abuse. There is also a long history of women in general being viewed as not quite credible, as being so emotional that their view of reality is not reliable. What this author is telling us is that numerous women who believe they have multiple personality disorder and who think they have uncovered repressed memories of abuse, are not to be believed. I will admit that it is not easy for me, as a feminist, to tell another woman that I do not believe her, that what she believes is reality is, in fact, a great distortion. I am uncomfortable with dismissing women's symptoms and ailments as a form of mass hysteria, because it fits so neatly into the stereotypical view of women as hysterical rather than logical.

However, over time and hearing the many criticisms of repressed memory syndrome, I must admit that there is reason to question the process by which a patient enters therapy remembering no abuse and is led to "uncover" memories of abuse by a therapist with preconceived ideas about what is probably causing the patient's distress. As for what is really happening with women who claim to have multiple personality disorder, I do not know.

I suggest that readers of the book also consider a larger question: why do we elevate mental health professionals to the status of "expert"?
Certainly we can focus on just the one psychiatrist who treated Sybil as being irresponsible. But what of psychiatry in general? Freud dominated American psychiatry for many years. Educated, enlightened people accepted the new religion. Mothers were blamed for everything.
What about all the harm that was done to society in general by these false ideas?

Are we any better off today? Do we blindly accept what the modern day M.Dieties say about mental illness being linked to chemical imbalances and biological brain disorders? Do we swallow their pills and medicate our children simply because we continue to believe, blindly, that they are the "experts"?

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG -[...]
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3162/6324 - Release Date: 05/14/13

I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It is a well researched and well written book that reveals the incredible truth behind the Sybil story. Compelling reading (regardless of whether or not you ever read the original book or saw the movie).

This book is biased and warped, not worth reading. This book was written to make money. Debbie Nathan writes in a sensational way, and while the author claims it is well documented, the book's "research" is slanted. For example, she never mentions the book "Sybil in Her Own Words." She also assumes that most women are feminists, something that may be true in the circles Nathan travels in though not in real life. Nathan seems to have her own agenda--hinted at by the tastelessness of her language and her remarks on daycare scandals and "Michelle Remembers," a book written by a French Canadian patient subjected as a child and teenager to ritual abuse. (These remarks jar the naive reader into a more critical view of Nathan's so-called objectivity.) When "Sybil" was turned into a screenplay for TV--starring Joanne Woodward and Sally Field--and viewed by millions--the screenwriter added some shocking fictional details.I believe that most viewers of the TV film were misled into believing that it was completely accurate.(In contrast, Sybil stated that the book "Sybil" was correct in all its details.) Ironically, Nathan gives an example of the pot calling the kettle black by her failure to present all the facts, not just those that support her unstated but clearly present agenda.

I was relieved that the grotesque abuse described in the original book never happened. Then, I was angry with "Sybil's" real "bad mother," Dr. Wilbur, for the combination of ignorance, opportunism, and projection which kept "Sybil" physically and mentally ill nearly all of her adult life. (I felt sympathy for Flora Rheta Schrieber, the author of the original book, because she was just an ambitious writer trying to make a living.) "Sybil Exposed" is a cautionary tale about why the road to true women's liberation doesn't go through the tangled forest of victimhood. Thank you, Debbie Nathan.

I know an internationally respected psychologist who knew Connie Wilbur personally for a long time. Dr. Wilbur asked for help to write the book, Sybil, because so little was known about DID and she wanted people to understand it better so people like Sybil could get appropriate help, as many are misdiagnosed and misunderstood for years and get all the wrong treatments. She worked tirelessly to help mental health professionals understand this disorder till she died, and many have gotten the proper treatment they never would have otherwise because of Connie Wilbur's efforts. Nathan builds up this conspiracy and yet she can't talk to these people she is creating motives for because they're all dead. How convenient for her. She can twist things any way she likes and none of them can speak for themselves. She is the one using the story of Sybil for personal gain. This book isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

The fact that the author decided to use the FORMER name of what we now call Dissociative Identity Disorder. There's a long history of the reality of this Disorder. If you want a REAL look of Sybil this is a MUCH better book: [...]

Furthermore these types of books make it so those people with this disorder who are seeking help, will continue to go untreated, or scorned.

Overall Sybil Exposed succeeds admirably. "Sybil", in Debbie Nathan's research, includes not just Shirley Mason (aka Sybil), but the principal board members of Sybil, Inc. (Shirley's term). They consisted of: Shirley Mason -- patient, Dr. Connie Wilbur, -- psychiatrist, and Flora Schreiber -- journalist and author of the popular book on Sybil. Nathan appears to have done a remarkably careful job of documenting the complex relationship that each woman had with the other over the long timeframe during which the story of Sybil and her multiple personalities occupied the center of their lives. Ms. Nathan provides vivid accounts, based largely on Dr. Wilbur's notes, of how Sybil came to be diagnosed with multiple personality disorder (MPD), and how MPD captured the attention of the psychiatric profession itself. Especially compelling, if not chilling, is Nathan's account of Dr. Wilbur's effort to drug and question Sybil until she got the results sought: specifically, an explanation of Sybil's MPD that pointed to Sybil's sexually abusive mother as the ultimate cause. All the while, Nathan manages not to lose sight of the development of psychiatry as a field, and especially its growing reliance on barbiturates in the late 1930s.

The central point of the Sybil case is that the diagnosis was a fraud. During the so-called treatment sessions, Dr. Wilbur would recklessly inject Sybil with a variety of stupor-inducing drugs and then persistently ask leading questions of Sybil and her various personalities until Sybil admitted to being sexually abused by her mother as a child. That abuse, Wilbur posited, caused the proliferation of personalities in Sybil. Never mind that, over time, Wilbur could find no external evidence to substantiate Sybil's allegations or that, at one point during her therapy, Sybil herself actually confessed to fabricating the personalities. Neither recantation, nor the absence of evidence could deter Dr. Wilbur's conviction in the MPD diagnosis and the pivotal role played by Sybil's mother, Mattie Mason. And, if her partner in crime, Flora Schreiber, had initial doubts as a journalist, those doubts were ultimately swept away with the prospect of a bestseller.

Ms. Nathan is careful and lucid in all but two parts of Sybil Exposed: the opening and very closing pages. Here Nathan claims that Sybil's fans, and especially her female fans could relate to Sybil because of the "frustrations" endured by ambitious women before the dawn of the feminist age" (xix), and because Sybil's many fans "felt so damaged by the cruelties of traditional family life that they could not trust their own mothers, much less their memories (p 236)." Sybil, Nathan contends, became "a language of our conflict, an idiom of distress."

It's hard to find any support for those contentions in Sybil Exposed. To claim that Sybil had broad appeal for the reasons Nathan proffers is pure speculation in an otherwise prudent text. Finally, Nathan's end-of-the-book, last minute attempt to rescue Dr. Wilbur by concluding that "All of her professional life she had made extraordinary efforts to assist women in healing and fulfilling their dreams" (236) is to substitute sentimental cant for good sense. With Sybil, Wilbur violated the fundamental physician's oath to do no harm. For women interested in the serious pursuit of science she provided an example that stands as a roadblock to be surmounted rather than a life to be emulated.

Although Debbie Nathan has read mountains of research about Sybil, whose real name was Shirley Mason, it seems to me that she begins with a bias against Multiple Personality Disorder, which never really disappears from her writing. The main premise of Ms. Nathan's book is that Shirley's psychiatrist, Dr. Cornelia Wilbur, forced Shirley to remember events that did not occur. Ms. Nathan claims that because Dr. Wilbur used overdoses of drugs on Shirley, the girl came up with "false memories."
I think Sybil Exposed is a great discredit to Shirley Mason, who lived most of her life in treatment for Multiple Personality Disorder, now called Dissociative Identity Disorder. She was a recluse because of her mental problems and the fame produced by the book Sybil, written by Flora Rheta Schreiber in 1973. Shirley Mason died on February 26, 1998, but her courage lives on, despite Ms. Nathan's efforts to discredit her.

In the book Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case, Debbie Nathan embarks on an investigation to uncover the life and story of the real identity of "Sybil". Her investigation uncovers a web of deceit and unethical practices that center around the lives of three women-an unscrupulous female psychiatrist, an ambitious female author, and an easily manipulated patient who may have been taken advantage of.

Debbie Nathan provides a minor historical context of the mental health profession's treatment of women-it's neglect, lack of formal ethics and over diagnosis of hysteria by male medical professionals. Nathan provides an argument that Shirley Mason, the patient also known as Sybil, was an impressionable woman who was oppressed by the rigid rules of her religion and suffered from unexplainable health problems. Nathan's claims suggest that the entire story about her multiple personalities was manufactured by an ambitious female psychiatrist who provided addictive drugs to Shirley and implanted false memories of abuse that never actually happened.

`Sybil Exposed' has left me with even more questions and confusion, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Was Sybil even abused by her mother? Why wasn't Debbie Nathan ever able to confirm any cases of abuse? Were Shirley/Sybil and her psychiatrist having a relationship? Why did they live together? Did Shirley/Sybil even have any multiple personalities? How were they able to suddenly disappear the moment that her psychiatrist told her that she needed to be cured so that the book could be written? Was Shirley/Sybil taken advantage of by her psychiatrist, cured by her psychiatrist, or was she in on the scam all along? Do multiple personalities even really exist??

Although the book is a bit slow in the beginning as it provides a background of Shirley Mason's religion (i.e., Seventh Day Adventist) and provides a biography of the central characters in the book (Shirley, the psychiatrist and author), the storyline picks up and is an overall interesting and mysterious story. It's a must read if you enjoy biography, nonfiction, mental illness, science and issues of feminism.

An interesting but deeply flawed book. Debbie Nathan, while doing phenomenal research, is quite biased in interpretation of the facts. Her thesis is that Multiple Personality Disorder, now Dissociative Identity Disorder, is an iatrogenic disorder, i.e. caused by the therapists - which totally ignores all the physiological research in the disorder at the Nat. Institute of Mental Health. She would have you believe that therapists flocked to this disorder to make more money, politicians hyped child sexual abuse causes for publicity, and that therapists have fled from the diagnosis. She cites the troubled False Memory Syndrome Foundation as a valid source of information. She ignores the corroboration of abuse histories via witnesses, confessions, photographs and cites the FBI's disbelief in Satanic rituals. Had she interviewed the State and Federal Park police re evidence of such rituals, she would have gotten a very different answer.
That said, it is an interesting view of the evolution of psychiatry from heavy chemical experimentations to insulin shock to electro-convulsive shock therapy. Certainly, her research into Dr. Cornelia Wilbur portrayed a brilliant therapist who certainly violated boundary issues even of that day and time. Her portrayal of Flora Shreiber, the writer of Sybil, was fascinating in the evolution of biographical writing, dressing up facts with a heavy dose of fiction. I wasn't convinced that Sylvia (aka Sybil) Mason's symptoms were all due to pernicious anemia. Nathan downplayed her fugue states and other dissociative symptoms. In her description of all three women, Nathan's portrait of Sylvia is the least convincing.
Nathan's thesis that the public fascination with "multiplicity" was simply a metaphor for the fractured life of women at that time misses the deeper issue - which is that the "Self" of either gender is no longer understood as a unitary entity but that we all have a repertory company of contextual "selves" within us. The difference between the normal from the pathological condition of multiplicity is defined by the presence of amnesia as one moves from one self to another. It is a truth that all diagnoses carry cultural assumptions; it does not make them any less valid but rather they need to be understood as limited by the state of knowledge at that time.

I read Sybil Exposed because I am a writer working on my own book about DID and wanted to hear all perspectives. This book was a grave disappointment. Although the author claims to be a journalist and the work is supposed to be a work of investigative journalism, it doesn't even come close. I had sincerely hoped that Ms. Nathan would have left her judgement, bias, and opinion behind when she started to write, but they scream out at us from every page. While her research appears to be extensive, I am left not really knowing whether she is credible or not because her own ideas and supposition stand in the way of what may (or may not# be the truth.
This book did contribute to my own thoughts about the DID diagnosis, and about authors who write well-intentioned books. Real #and truly individual, not subject to criticism by someone who doesn't know what she's talking about) and not necesssarily all truth, fact, and objectivity.

I thought the historical narratives of the three women's lives the only good part in this book. It's so obvious Nathan despises these three women she's never met, especially Dr. Wilbur and that she has an agenda. She cannot know what was in Shirley's mind yet she's pretty descriptive with Shirley's thoughts during childhood. Her lack of research into some of the claims in the book Sybil is glaringly obvious. How does she know Mattie Mason was NEVER diagnosed as a schizophrenic. How does she claim to know the conversations between Dr. Wilbur and Mr. Mason? Is she clairvoyant? Why does she try to make the reader disgusted with practices performed by DR. Wilbur, i.e. "notice the size of the huge needle" Ahem yeah they used those back in the 30's and 40's. Medical procedures and techniques have advanced since leeches were used.

This book is just basically pieces of truth with the author's opinion woven into them. She takes facts out of context and makes them seem like we should all be disgusted or aghast at medical practices from the 20's, 30's and 40's.

Many of Shirley's childhood friends have confirmed Mattie Mason's relieving herself on neighbour's property, that she was mean and cruel to Shirley, that she ridiculed her and took Christmas gifts from her, peering into the neighbours windows at night. That she angrily pounded the piano keys and pedals, that she was loud and rude and brash and that she was odd. That she laughed like a witch. Back in the 20's and 30's no one knew anything about child abuse yet Nathan believes because no one reported it, it didn't happen.

Her outing Shirley as a lesbian in love with Wilbur and Wilbur in love with Shirley was the last straw for me. This book was disgustingly bad, a work of fiction and only confirmed for me that Shirley did have MPD/DID. Don't waste your money buying it.

I really wanted to beleive that the story of Sybil is true, but after reading Sybil Exposed it seems clear to me that the story of Sybil written by Flora Rhetta Schreiber may not be completly true. Debbie Nathans research is very convincing and it does make sense to me that a story like Sybil could have been easily exaggerated. I feel that Sybil was someone who really needed help. She was diagnosed wtih MPD, and that is all anyone cared about. She didn't get help tailored to her as an individual to really see what was wrong and how she felt. Maybe if her doctor had tried to see who she was as a whole person instead of focusing so much on her other personalities she would have been better able to help her. I also feel that people involved didn't make enough of an effort to keep her anonymous. We may never know the absolute true story of Sybil, but I thought that this book was very interesting from cover to cover. Once you read it you can make up your own mind.

Sybil Exposed by Debbie Nathan was so much more than I expected! Do you remember Sybil? You know, girl with 16 different personalities? You probably read about her in psychology class or maybe even have seen the Sally Fields movie?

If you haven't read Sybil, I highly suggest you do so (I reviewed it recently!), and then I suggest you grab Sybil Exposed as a sequel. Just so you know, if you haven't checked out Sybil yet, you can still read this review because it's not going to give away Sybil spoilers.

Debbie Nathan dives into research about one of the most famous cases of multiple personality: Sybil. She uncovers facts that show that the nonfictional story of Sybil is a fabrication.

And while this might not seem like it would be interesting to all of you, it was very readable and high interest. Nathan delves into the pasts of the three main characters of Sybil: Sybil herself, Dr. Connie Wilbur the doctor, and Flora Rheta Schreiber the author.

If you're a nonfiction/psychology buff, then this book should top your reading list.

As a side note, I was reading Goodreads reviews about Sybil Exposed and came across this one from "Sybil's closest living relative." She tried to make Debbie Nathan sound like a liar, but Debbie was awesome: she shot back without insulting, and stuck to the facts. Seriously worth checking out the conversation.

Have you read about this famous case of multiple personalities? What do you think?

Thanks for reading,

Rebecca @ Love at First Book

Despite what the "exposed" in the title might imply, Ms. Nathan's book manages to treat the three women behind "Sybil" with compassion. The introduction sets the tone for the book by taking a step back and examining the cultural context of Sybil, musing on why its subject had such an impact for a generation of TV viewers (and readers), and asking us to remember what these three women were facing in terms of their individual quests for -- for lack of a better term -- personal fulfillment. Nathan doesn't absolve them of responsibility, but -- while regaling us with shocking detail after detail -- does ask us to consider with sympathy why these women might have made each of the decisions they did, all of which added up to create a massive fraud.

Nathan is not out to debunk MPD, though she seems to think it's done more harm than good. The APA has done its own fine job of backpedaling on the diagnosis, to the safer ground of DID (Dissociative Identity Disorder), which leaves room for dissociative disorders that manifest as multiples, but discourages mental health professionals from inadvertently leading their patients down the "alters" road. I don't see an agenda in Ms. Nathan's book, apart from telling a really damn good story, putting in its proper context, and making readers think.

I'm the kind of non-fiction reader who keeps a bookmark in the footnotes section so I can judge an author's claims for myself, by considering the credibility of their sources. I was satisfied that this book presented credible and specific sources. At times, Nathan acknowledged her lack of facts, as in the story of Flora Schreiber's possible childhood molestation. Nathan essentially says here's what I know, here's what my journalistic instinct tells me, here's why it makes sense to me, but I just can't say for sure. That's the mark of a mature, confident writer, not a hack.

Ms. Nathan's book is simply outstanding research and writing that I could barely put down between reading sessions.

Sybil became popular, both in psychiatry and modern culture in the 1970's. Both the book and the movie made the complex disorder known as "Multipersonality" a phenomenon, though sensationalizing it, as well. Not only did it bring this disorder to the spotlight in mental health, it created a catchphrase and controversy, in spite of its horrific nature.

Psychiatry and psychology are not absolute, as the mind is a complex, hidden area. The memory is not always exact in time or place, being affected by many things. It deals with fact, feelings, and the shaded grey areas in between. The mind deals with the melding of both fact and feeling. Sometimes the mind remembers what the heart may have felt. History is recounted by what the mind remembers, sometimes losing things to interpretation, and sometimes colored by emotion, whether intentional or not.

For many years, the story of Sybil, as well as the ethics and motivations of her therapist have been questioned. This book is written by investigative reporters whose goal is to shed light on the truth of Sybil's case, as well as the disorder.

Letters and documentation were supplied by the family of Sybil to researchers of what is now known as "DID", Dissociative Identity Disorder. This disorder is still misunderstood and often misdiagnosed. The intent was to dispel myths, answering decades of questions and speculation.

Notes at the end of this fascinating book list the documents used and the resources that Debbie Nathan was privy to, in her writing of "Sybil Exposed". I have no doubt that Sybil and her case will continue to be controversial, as will DID.

Many others wrote plenty about the ludicrous assumptions and conclusions that Nathan draws in this book.
I won't bother to go through all of them; as they are so repetitively obvious.
No name a few:
The author claims that it is reasonable to use ONE case (granted, of possibly less than stellar therapy--though true to the times, in many ways); as supposed proof or disproof of a whole diagnostic criteria is bad enough. Along the same flawed logic, saying that if someone faked schyzophernia then the whole diagnosis is by definition nullified?
The author claims that ONE occasion of a patient saying that they don't really think that they have the problem they were diagnoses with; constitutes PROOF of not only that patient indeed not having the diagnosis, but the whole notion of the diagnosis being nill. Along the same line, an alcoholic claiming that he doesn't 'really drink' or 'doesn't really have an addiction' would not only mean that they are not alcoholics, but also that NO ONE is and that alcoholism doesn't exist.
The author never met the patient. Yet she seems to claim that she knows BETTER what sybil knew or felt or thought; than the people who KNEW her and spoke to her and interviewed her directly. Nathan's telepathic abilities are a marvel; but they do not constiture scientific proof.
Then again, Nathan is not a scientist. Yet she claims to debunk scientific findings about trauma, traumatic reactions, traumatic amnesia, and dissociation (which is, incidentially, part of the accepted presentation of PTSD).
She is not a mental health professional; either. But she claims to know better what should and should've have been done with Sybil AND what is being done behind the closed doors of supposedly all therapists who treat severely and chronically traumatized individuals--as well as the supposed motivations of these multitudes of therapists. As said prior--her telepathic (imagined?) abilities are a marvel; but they do not constitute fact.

If you want to read a fictional account of an interpretation of a story about a stroy--go ahead.
Non-fiction this is not.
Sadly, Nathan only exposes what seems like a combination of bad journalizm and an agenda to spin details to support her pre-supposition.

For actual scientific findings for the REALITY of dissociation, and the validity of dissociative identity disorder--as measured scientifically, bio-physically, psychobiologically, and all that other good stuff--I recommend a REAL scientific paper (this an open access article, so anyone can read it):

It is titled:
Fact or Factitious? A Psychobiological Study of Authentic and Simulated Dissociative Identity States

[...]

In it, the supposition that fantasy and suggestion underly Dissociative Identity Disorder is quite thoroughly statistically debunked. Instead, it actually shows that people with DID behave more like people who are very low on suggestion and fantasy scores. And that trying to mimic and simulate DID does not look--biologically, psychoneurologically, SCIENTIFICALLY--at all like real DID. It also demonstrates a very clear distinction of DID as NOT being scocially based or suggested.
If you really want to learn about the validity of DID (and the reality of what happens to children's brains when they are chronically overwhelmed)--check out the REAL facts.

This book has the potential to be very destructive in the lives of people who live with DID. There are many people that suffer from this disorder and some of the biggest issues of people who suffer from DID is other people's denial. The work of healing from this disability is hard enough, but when you have people like D. Nathan doing "research" and then claiming that DID does not exist, it makes many people's lives more difficult. There may be a lot of controversay over the "truth" about Sybil, but this book takes it beyond that and that is where I question the author's moral and ethical reliability.
I also find it heartbreaking that this is all being dug up after the death of the woman whose life everyone is now discussing. When she was alive, her story was not quesioned in this way. None of the people most involved in this tale is alive to defend or clear this up. That makes me wonder, why now?
The author may get notarity, but at what cost to others?

i read this book after reading Sybil. though it does seem to have research put into the book it seems more so that it rambles on about the history of MPD and how it is impossible for her to be abused as a child. i found this book hard to get into and read, though it isn't that long. how ever it does do a good job of showing that Dr. Wilbur needed to do more fact checking and throws doubt onto the case of "Sybil" I am just as confused and conflicted about MPD as i was before i read either book.

this woman knows nothing of MPD/DID. she seems to see the world through rose tinted glasses! i don't even think she has talked to anyone who suffers with this disorder. i was dx'd with MPD/DID a few years back by 3 different specialists and can tell you living with multiples is hard at times. maybe she should speak to someone with MPD/DID before she decides to discredit anyone else
unforunatly there is no way to give a negative rating as this would definatly be in the minus numbers

This book is shocking and sad and far more believable than the original Sybil turned out to be. I agree with some of the naysayers here who believe Debbie Nathan goes too far in completely discrediting MPD. While it looks like "Sybil" may not have been a victim of the disease, I'm not prepared to say that no one, anywhere, has suffered from it. HOWEVER, there is something wildly inappropriate about the way Dr. Wilbur encouraged Sybil's dependence. Patients with far less severe maladies would be damaged by having a shrink blur all lines, encourage calls at all hours, take vacations together ... Some on this board have complained that Shirley Mason is diminished or belittled by this book. I disagree. She is portrayed as a sick girl who wanted help and was courageous enough to keep seeking it. It's unfortunate that she fell under the spell of a doctor who had a diagnosis and was just searching for a patient to fulfill it. Shirley was exploited, first by Wilbur and then by FLS. Child abuse is a real tragedy, depression keeps countless people from fully enjoying life. Saying I appreciate this book doesn't mean I don't get that, or that Nathan doesn't seem to realize it. It means that Sybil was a marketing creation and Shirley Mason's life was a heartbreaking tragedy.

this woman knows nothing of MPD/DID. she seems to see the world through rose tinted glasses! i don't even think she has talked to anyone who suffers with this disorder. i was dx'd with MPD/DID a few years back by 3 different specialists and can tell you living with multiples is hard at times. maybe she should speak to someone with MPD/DID before she decides to discredit anyone else
unforunatly there is no way to give a negative rating as this would definatly be in the minus numbers

This book is shocking and sad and far more believable than the original Sybil turned out to be. I agree with some of the naysayers here who believe Debbie Nathan goes too far in completely discrediting MPD. While it looks like "Sybil" may not have been a victim of the disease, I'm not prepared to say that no one, anywhere, has suffered from it. HOWEVER, there is something wildly inappropriate about the way Dr. Wilbur encouraged Sybil's dependence. Patients with far less severe maladies would be damaged by having a shrink blur all lines, encourage calls at all hours, take vacations together ... Some on this board have complained that Shirley Mason is diminished or belittled by this book. I disagree. She is portrayed as a sick girl who wanted help and was courageous enough to keep seeking it. It's unfortunate that she fell under the spell of a doctor who had a diagnosis and was just searching for a patient to fulfill it. Shirley was exploited, first by Wilbur and then by FLS. Child abuse is a real tragedy, depression keeps countless people from fully enjoying life. Saying I appreciate this book doesn't mean I don't get that, or that Nathan doesn't seem to realize it. It means that Sybil was a marketing creation and Shirley Mason's life was a heartbreaking tragedy.

I applaud Nathan for this laboriously-researched book that exposes the problematic issues behind recovered memories and problematic therapy / transference, etc.

As a victim of iatrogenic DID/MPD and false memories of SRA, I cannot adequately articulate how relevant this thorough expose is. Years ago, when I questioned my doctor's diagnosis (as well as subsequent horrific recovered memories that supposedly created my dissociation) - he used Sybil's original "true story" to validate my "condition" - insisting I fully invest in "remembering" more repressed trauma.

Had this book been written and available for reference back in 1990, It would've given me a great deal to consider and most likely could have spared me and my family, from years of agony and loss. I believe this publication should be required reading for students entering the mental health field.

Thank you Ms. Nathan.

I read some of this book, skimmed through it really because I had heard of it's reputation (at a book store, didn't buy it). I put it down in disgust. I myself had a traumatic experience in childhood, and although I remembered it, I still can not remember the whole event. I have missing gaps that I can not explain, and only remember the basic details. This personal experience of mine is very typical for victims of trauma. This seems to be something the author doubts, completely. She seems to think this is impossible. I can personally assure her it is not. I have ready many books on PTSD, and I fit into the literature pretty perfectly (although I do not have dissociative identity disorder). These include triggers for the depression I experienced after the trauma, and the triggers that brought on that depression.

I also was disgusted by the authors misrepresentation and generalizations of psychologists. I have had several psychologists over the years, and they were all great people, and helped my enormously. I can safely say that I fully recovered from PTSD within a year, maybe two (although disorders that manifested themselves after the trauma are still ongoing). They were not milking me for money, because my therapist told me that I didn't need him anymore, and I left him. I have other things I have to deal with, so I still see a psychiatrist, but I am only on low doses of medications and my prognosis is looking very good for the next couple years, with the strong possibility that I will not need medication. I have improved enormously over 9 years of treatment, and finally feel I am gaining my life back. Mental disorders, even one like depression, are completely debilitating. My depression was certainly VERY difficult for me to go through, and I still have trouble. I can only imagine what people with DID think of this journalists assertions.

Believe it or not, people go into the fields of psychology and psychiatry, or become therapists for altruistic reasons. I myself am thinking of doing that. They are not all greedy people who manipulate their patients for money. I have several friends that are skeptical of those fields, but if you read the research, it really is meticulous. Have you heard of the diagnostic criteria for something like Major Depressive Disorder? It is VERY specific. As the fantastic Neil deGrasse Tyson said, "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."

This author is only a journalist that is relying on pseudo-scientific (and ill-researched) reports to make a case about something she knows nothing about. She obviously is not qualified to judge the sources she relies on. This book just adds to the societal belief that psychology and psychiatry are hugely suspect. I have friends that are skeptical of psychology and psychiatry, and it almost offends me because I have benefited so much from the work of dedicated psychologists and a psychiatrist. I also have a friend that is completely non-functional without his medication (he has severe ADHD). Certainly, certain things about the field are not perfect. For example, ADHD and ADD are most probably over-diagnosed (the fact that common doctors can diagnose it doesn't help). My psychiatrist even believes that it is over-diagnosed. I personally believe I am on that spectrum, but it is not debilitating for me. Also, anti-depressants are not really wonder drugs (at all). The truth is, there are gaps in knowledge about these medicines and certain disorders. Certain things are hit and miss, and some things people pretend to understand when no one really understands. But to discount all the help that the field has done, and all the research that people have spent their lives on, is just ludicrous.

All of that just makes me doubt everything she says about Sybil. How can I trust someone that relies on such dubious information, and makes such basic errors in logical thinking? The answer is, I can't. And if you are doubtful about psychologists and psychiatrists, wait until you need their help and benefit hugely from it before judging. I am only doing so well, and have regained hope for my future because of the hard-working psychologists and the psychiatrist I go to.

For the truth I read Patrick Suraci's book "SYBIL in her own words: The Untold Story of Shirley Mason, Her Multiple Personalities and Paintings" which is also available on the store. The comment from Daniel Houlihan sounds strangely similar to Debbie Nathan's rants. He also makes the same mistakes she does. Peter Swales never wrote a book about the Sybil case. Mr. Swales did write a book "Freud, Fliess, and fratricide: The Role of Fliess in Freud's conception of paranoia" (1982). Mr. Swales did work with Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen on the Sybil case, but they parted ways, and Borch-Jacobsen went on to write "Making Minds and Madness: From Hysteria to Depression." It was published in Paris in French as Ms. Nathan points out and goes on to say that practically no one in America read it. However, Ms. Nathan does not tell us that it was published by Cambridge University Press in English in May 2009. Borch-Jacobsen's book is for sale on the the store web site for $118.00. Ms. Nathan also does not mention another book that attempted to disprove the original SYBIL book: "The Bifurcation of the Self" published by Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. in 2006. Incidentally this book is also available on the store for $74.95. These authors examined the same Schreiber archives which Nathan has distorted and added fictional tales to the documents which she cites. It's a shame that she and Mr. Houlihan are interfering with the store earning all that money.

People of a certain age will recall Flora Schreiber's book Sybil erupting onto the scene with the air of a new reality. A TV movie followed, which I recall watching in school (although memory is not reliable . . .) Debbie Nathan, a journalist with an analytic bent for whom I have a great deal of respect, has done wonderful work in this book. Her research was dogged and she puts together the real history of Sybil with knowledge, insight and sympathy. This book needs to be a text in any coursework involving multiple personality disorder.

I read the introdution, which usees incrediably biased language and makes inflammortory statements and sweeping genearalztions. The conclusions in the introduction are without fact or citiations, but are written as fact, which is not the way journalism works. The narrative and prose about women is incrediably condescending and sexist. I cannot believe that a woman who is writing a book charging her subjects with fraud and deliberate deception would herself engage in such shady practices and completely miss the hypocrisy.

Sybil Exposed is an interesting combination of well researched investigative journalism, deft story telling, and insightful social interpretation. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the original Sybil story, especially those who wondered if it could possibly be true, (author Debbie Nathan demonstrates that it was not}, and anyone interested in the history of psychiatry, and the way in which theories, experiments, and drugs have been abused. The lives of the 3 women, patient, psychiatrist, and writer are skillfully intertwined, and the story of how this hoax evolved is told with considerable compassion and care. Nathan locates the story in a historical context which makes it much more meaningful that a mere expose, and it's ramifications for the diagnosis of multiple personality and dissociative disorder has created some interesting debate.

The 411 by Maria
I was obsessed with this book and movie with Sally Field. As a big Sally fan and horrified that this had happened to someone just destroyed me. When I heard about this book, I had to read it. I had to know what was real and what was fabricated. I read the book so many times as a teen and saw the movie at least 50 times. To know I may have lost sleep over something that was embellished on just didn't sit well with me.

The author takes us on a journey to dissect the best selling book! It is a disturbing read but one that should be read especially if you were affected by the book or movie Sybil

This author deserves 5 stars for all the work she did to make this book easy to read, understand, and get fully rounded images of all the people involved in the making of this false book. She fills in all the blanks and tells you what happened with everyone- up to their death. Excellent read!

Debbie Nathan, who co-authored with Attorney Michael Snedeker a seminal work of American social history, SATAN'S SILENCE, has written a new book on her own entitled SYBIL EXPOSED, about the falsity of the sixteen personalities alleged to exist within the patient about whom a famous TV miniseries was made.

In the course of SATAN'S SILENCE, a spectacular display of scholarship and intellectual honesty, Nathan casually mentions, among other myths, that Dr. Cornelia Wilbur suggested the sixteen personalities to Sybil, whose real name was Shirley Mason. The thrust of SATAN'S SILENCE is the innocent day care workers and schoolteachers who were sentenced to multiple life terms in prison based on testimony extorted from children by ambitious social workers like Kee McFarlane, who saw a chance to get attention by creating an actual social and judicial mechanism for prosecuting ritual abuse cases.

Brilliantly, Nathan and Snedeker argue that the wild fantasies of the children were actually the fantasies of the police and social workers, projected onto the children.

Even more brilliantly, the two authors hark back to the interrogations of the Salem Witch Trials, the Blood Libels, even Ancient Greece, where similar episodes occurred.

The ten-year panic did not end until the children began to accuse the police and social workers of sodomizing them, making them eat feces covered with chocolate, taking them to locations where people and and animals were slaughtered, etc. At this point some doubt began to emerge among the authorities. However, some of the falsely accused teachers and day care workers remain in prison even now.

SATAN'S SILENCE is an extremely disturbing book which makes us realize how irrational a putatively rational society can become. And how primitive the reactions of apparently educated and rational people can be.

There is a clear link between SATAN'S SILENCE and SYBIL EXPOSED. Both books focus on mediocre people who see a chance to be in the limelight and perhaps to make money by exploiting a situation. in SATAN'S SILENCE it was the doctors and social workers who made themselves famous and respected by lying about the results they achieved with the children. in SYBIL EXPOSED it is Dr. Cornelia Wilbur, Shirley's psychiatrist, and Flora Rheta Schreiber, the author of the book SYBIL, who are the opportunists.

The diagnosis of Shirley Mason with multiple personality disorder was based on sketchy and possibly non-existent evidence. Dr. Wilbur saw the opportunity to become famous by proselytizing the disorder and getting it accepted (like lobotomy) by the credulous psychiatric community. For a long time she succeeded, until, like the authorities in SATAN'S SILENCE, those in positions of medical authority began to doubt her evidence.

Significantly, the technique of interrogation (reminiscent of the classic police third degree) is identical in both books. The subject is told, "We know you were abused, so you might as well tell us the truth. The other children have already told us." And with Shirley Mason, under heavy IV doses of Pentothal (which addicted her, by the way), "I know there are more personalities. You just have to work harder to overcome your resistance and bring them out." To please the interrogator and to stop the harassing, coercive questions, the child or the patient eventually says "Yes."

Meanwhile, Flora Rheta Schreiber, a frustrated magazine writer, in possession of the dubious materials provided by Wilbur, flipped a coin and decided to write a melodramatic book incorporating all the most improbable events of Shirley's story, in order to make money. The book became a bestseller, the mini-series with Joanne Woodward and Sally Field had huge TV ratings, and not a word of the story was true.

Dr. Wilbur went on promoting her theory of multiple personality in the face of increasing criticism until her death. Flora Rheta Schreiber lost most of the money she had made from SYBIL in the pursuit of another bestseller that ended up as a critical failure and incurred multiple lawsuits based on her creative use of facts. She died in 1988.

Ironically, Shirley Mason did far better in her life when she was not in contact with Cornelia Wilbur. She functioned normally as an art teacher, had her own apartment, etc. But each time Wilbur re-entered the picture, Shirley got sicker and became virtually incapacitated. (Her only real illness, by the way, was pernicious anemia. This disease created the minor symptoms which Wilbur inflated into sixteen -- more than sixteen -- personalities.)

Shirley, still clinging to the Seventh-Day Adventism she had embraced since childhood, died in 1998 of cancer. The sordidness of her story, the decades of her dependence on Dr. Wilbur (the two lived together for years), the exploitation of her illness (which was not multiple personality disorder), did not seem to affect her beliefs about herself and her doctor.

Debbie Nathan reminds us that SYBIL is still being taught in schools, just as many of the victims of the ritual abuse panic remain in prison despite the fact that they did absolutely nothing to the children. "A lie goes around the world while the truth is still tying its shoelaces," as the saying goes.

Of necessity SATAN'S SILENCE is the more imposing book, because of its vast scope and implications. SYBIL EXPOSED is a smaller story about two sleazy people who used a helpless mental patient to further their own careers. But the implications of both books are the same. They warn us that collective fantasy and superstition on the part of modern individuals and professionals are a real danger to society as well as to the many victims. We live in a world not so far removed from McCarthyism, not so far removed from lynching, not so far removed from xenophobia. "Civilized" modern society is more a shibboleth than a reality.

It could be argued, based on Freud's theory that "the government reserves violence for itself, like a monopoly, while forbidding it to the individual," that the entire political world around us, ruled by constant war and genocide, results from precisely the disorder that Debbie Nathan describes: a primitive streak in modern Man that is not acknowledged and therefore rampages further each year, while historians scratch their heads and wonder why this anomaly persists.

Both books are highly recommended for their thoroughness and remarkable intellectual honesty.

Finally, the the store reviewers who claim that Nathan is minimizing, denying or trivializing DID have not understood the book. Debbie Nathan is describing a patient who was mistakenly diagnosed with multiple personality by a psychiatrist who wanted fame and fortune. This does not mean that DID does not exist and is not an important disorder. To say that Nathan is denying DID is like saying, "Those who say the War in Iraq is wrong are not being fair to the Iraq veterans." Adding apples to oranges.

This is essentially a good book. I am the daughter of a psychiatrist and as such have been familiar with "unusual" disorders. I found the basic fact-sharing part of the book very interesting.

The bad news is that this book desperately needed to be spellchecked and edited by a real person, not a computer. There are several areas where a completely incorrect word is used, as sometimes happens when spellcheck isn't monitored. This ends up damaging the credibility of the book and its subject.

The author of this book is incredibly irresponsible. To press forward her own agenda, she twists and alters things to suit her needs, without any supporting psychological research to back it up. Its the most biased book I have ever read, and that says a lot. She refers to the house where Shirley grew up as the place where she "moped around" as a child. Whether you buy into Shirley's diagnosis of MPD and her treatment or not, Shirley's emotional dificulties were nonetheless very real. What an immature and insensitive way to refer to the mental suffering of a child.

There is another the store book on Kindle: SYBIL in her own words: The Untold Story of Shirley Mason, Her Multiple Personalities and Paintings [Kindle Edition] by Patrick Suraci Ph.D. that refutes this book quite adequately. It is a pity that anyone with an ax to grind against Dissociative Identity Disorder should get such publicity. I have heard Nathan talk on the radio in an interview and her information is just plain wrong and apparently based on personal ideas, not facts, as are found with Dr. Suraci's book.

Certainly, for such a quiet, frail individual, Shirley Mason left a large imprint during her life. While her case might have fueled modern interpretations of DID, the bigger significance of the story might be that child abuse does happen...and it's impact can be powerful (see the recent story on Darrell Hammond of SNL for example). While I have graduate training in both Clinical and School Psychology, my therapeutic realm is child, so I won't comment on DID or adult therapy issues other than to say that it is unfortunate that this case had such a broad impact. I say this because the case of Shirley Mason as presented in Sybil is so loaded with inaccuracies and exaggerations that a thorough review might lead some to be dismissive of other legitimate cases.

I know and have spent time with all three authors of recent books on Shirley Mason (Peter Swales, Debbie Nathan, and Dr. Patrick Suraci) and am referenced in all three books for different materials. I do have knowledge regarding Shirley Mason, but I would not claim to have the expertise of any of these individuals. However, I do know that significant elements and facts in the book Sybil were either incorrect or exaggerated. Debbie Nathan does well to explain most of these details. I might add, that she might have gone a little easy on these details (although I suspect that some seen as less significant might have met the editors cutting table). I will outline some specific concerns of mine in a response to Dr Suraci's review, which is a quest for Truth. NOTE: Might I note at this juncture that I had a most enjoyable day discovering the Chicken House with Dr. Suraci. He is a good, decent man worthy of respect; however, in this case the truth will mostly fall in the court of Debbie Nathan.

Lastly, Nathan draws some reasonable hypotheses in the book - given the data and case history. However, inferences are dangerous, and there are some that make me worry. I do think this case was meant to establish Wilbur as a giant in her field; otherwise, why would she include her name (which would invariably lead to the identity of Sybil). Likewise, I do think the end result of this book was bigger than any of the three women could have imagined. It probably was not as malicious and greedy as hindsight might make it seem. Therefore, I would discourage a wholesale attack on this field or this diagnosis, because there are legitimate victims of abuse who are receiving therapy much needed, and they and their providers do not need the rug completely pulled out from under them. Nathan's book is very compelling, so much so that overzealous readers might discard psychotherapy altogether. In my opinion, that would be a mistake. It is important to be informed and dispel myth, and this book is very important in that regard. But the debate should center on the merits of this case......just my humble opinion.

Questions for Dr. Suraci: #1 When you came to Mankato, you and I drove down to Dodge Center and Mantorville. I had noted that I was systematically looking for the location of the Chicken house based on elimination of agricultural blocks on a grid. I had looked in the dusty old deeds in the Mantorville Court house on several occasions: A point you note in your book. I do not question anything about your account, and in fact had a great chuckle at your noting of the Latrine Races they were having on main street of Clairmont. However, the Chicken House chapter of Sybil is loaded with errors, many of which you should be aware of - in that you were there. Sybil says that Thirza took over the deed of the house with white shutters as payment of debt and banished Walter and Mattie to farm land owned by his parents. The account in the book is nearly the opposite of the truth. As I sit here looking at the deeds on my desk, the White House with Shutters was owned by Walter and Martha until January 26, 1923 (the day after Shirley was born) when it was sold to NA and Mary. In April of 1923, NA and Mary sold their house (I would assume to live with Walter's family). The house with White Shutters on 1st street was sold back to Walter and Mattie on Jan. 25, 1935 (Shirley's 12th birthday) and it stayed with them until they sold it just before Shirley graduated high school. The farm land, which as you noted is still called the Mason 40, was owned by Walter (20 acres) and Martha (20 acres): Not by his parents as the book states. In 1933 the farm land deed was transferred to Thirza, provided she agreed to assume a $2000 mortgage. She sold the farm in 1955. Thirza was never deeded the house. Shirley's grandparents likely lived with them most of her childhood. Why does the book Sybil say essentially the opposite of what the legal records say?

#2 Page 269 of Sybil "Yes. Sybil must have told you it was a big hill. A child's imagination, you know. But the hill wasn't very high." "He had an almost comic way of wriggling out of facing reality." I was there, and Patrick so were you, and it was not a high hill.

#3 Page 274 of Sybil. Flustered, defensive, he replied, "I did what I could." Then he told Dr Wilbur about his having taken Hattie to see a psychiatrist at the Mayo Clinic...where she was diagnosed schizophrenic. This confirmation made the atrocities doubly believable as part of a schizophrenic's mode of behavior. Patrick, what concerns me here is that the Mason's left the area in 1942 and Martha died in 1948. Psychiatry was established at Mayo in 1949 with the residency program beginning in 1950. That section is bogus.....and very damaging to the field. That diagnosis was never made.

#4 Pages 38 and 278 of Sybil. In one of our early conversations, I told Peter Swales that one thing that bothered me in the book Sybil was that twice Sybil's IQ was noted as 170, "according to a standard intelligence test...". Having an extensive assessment background, I could not think of a standard test (S-B or Wechsler) that would go that high. Their ceilings are lower. Peter said he would send me the copy of the IQ test ordered by Cornelia for Shirley. He had pulled it from the Archive and copied it. It sits right now on my desk. The test was administered by Emanual Fisher, Ph.D. on 3/25/1960. Shirley was given a WAIS on which she got a full-scale score of 116. Patrick, why did Flora put 170 in the book twice instead of the 116 on the only test in her archive? There is no academic evidence to support superior abilities outside of art, where she was good, but not great. They kept playing the genius card in the book, but it does not play out in reality. I was invited to and attended the 60th High School reunion of Shirley's Dodge Center class. Six classmates attended and this was a point of discussion. The two top students in that class were there. All agreed that Shirley was an average student. She was not a genius nor would she have ever been moved up a grade.

#5 The Nuns in the house of assignation. It is true that Roy and his Martha lived in Rochester. However, the book suggests that Martha was pimping nuns and that Roy was having sex with them. However, Roy died in 1935 and his Martha died in 1950. There was not a significant population of nuns in Rochester during most of that time. The big convent was established around 1950. The nuns of Saint Mary's, many who have lived beyond 100 due to pristine lifestyle find this assertion preposterous and insulting. Where did this information come from?

I have been to Stiver's Grove and that lesbian sex scene with the young girls is ludicrous. It could not have happened as stated in the book. There are many, many problems - most noted by Swales and Nathan in their books. As LD Brooks has stated, if you are THAT CERTAIN that Sybil is correct, and Nathan is wrong, then go after her. However, it might be best to let this go. This case does not stand up.

I bought this book Fri evening and finished it Sat night. I could not put it down, its quite possibly one of the most fascinating psychological reads I have seen in years. It all made sense and seemed to me like the "perfect storm" of people came together and created one of the biggest hysteria's in recent times. Then to find out that Shirley Mason (Sybil) was quite possibly perfectly sane, but suffered from pernicious anemia was riveting.

I think the saddest thing about all this is that Shirley Mason's mother, Mattie Mason is the real victim in all this. This woman probably never harmed her daughter at all. Sadly she will go down in history as an sexually abusive monster. I only wish Connie Wilbur was alive today to see the harm her "treatments" did. But in her defense, the era she came out of knew little about psychological treatment and mental illness.

I really don't understand the negative reviews this book has gotten either. It was well written and well researched, furthermore IT MADE SENSE. Everything fit together. A few questions I am curious about were whether Shirley Mason or Connie Wilbur were actually lesbians. Also the drug use of Shirley Mason, did she continue using addictive psychotropic drugs (supplied by Wilbur) throughout her life?

Anyone that has any interest in psychology or practices in the field NEEDS to read this book.

Debbie Nathan is at best taking events out of context and at worst consciously perpetrating a fraud by twisting the meaning of the events she cites. This is not the first book she has written in an attempt to discredit cases of extremely horrific child abuse; she seems to be a journalist who has taken on the cause of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation.

I urge the reader to read (or reread) Flora Schreiber's book, SYBIL. There you will find much more information about the allegations that Nathan makes. For instance: the involvement of Dr. Herbert Spiegel and of Sybil's roommate, Teddy; the short-term use of pentothal near the end of the eleven-year analysis and how it helped to begin the integration process; the denial letter, in which Sybil wrote that she was making it all up--this was actually followed by another letter in which she explained why she had written the first letter and how she lost two days of time after it!

Dr. Suraci (see his review here)--who personally KNEW Sybil, Dr. Wilbur, and Schreiber--is having his own book republished. I would suggest that you save your money for that book instead!

this is an excellent and fascinating book. debbie nathan unearths the real story behind the best-seller SYBIL. she sheds light on the particularly bizarre set of circumstances that led to the publication - and popularity -
of the book. this is an excellent addition to a college or graduate-level course in journalism or American social history. students will find the details
of sybil's life in rural American, her religious background, and her journey to becoming one of the famous psychiatric patients in American history gripping
and revealing. nathan helps us understand sybil and her therapist, and her explanation is sympathetic and fair. this book doesn't mock or undermine sybil or her doctor, but instead
unearths the particular cultural context and social realities that led to the publication of SYBIL. although those born after 1975 probably didn't read SYBIL,
they will still enjoy learning about this odd moment in American history. those of us who read SYBIL - and believed it - should read nathan's book to learn more about the truth
and facts behind the fascinating (but fictional) book. nathan doesn't mock or demonize sybil or her therapist, but helps us think clearly and objectively
about the disturbing context of the their story.

As Shirley Mason's closest living relative, I was close to her for the 30 plus years through the saga of her life journey. In fact, I was with her the weekend prior to her death, at her request, and was one of the only people that was in constant contact with her all those years. I kept her identity confidential at her fervent request. Through all these years up until literally the day before she died, she verified the complete accuracy of the book, 'Sybil'. Many people called me for interviews. I refused all of them, and did not keep track of who called or dates of the calls. Debbie Nathan says that she has record of calling me. I am not aware of the names of any one that called me.. Knowing Dr. Connie Wilbur, and Flora Shrieber also, the book concerns me greatly. It is an attack on their credibility, their research, and their professionalism. And, the book is a complete attack on the person I loved, Shirley Mason.
Naomi Rhode, cousin of Shirley Mason

Debbie Nathan over and over proves one thing about the Sybil story in this book - that she believes she is an omniscient being when it comes to the three women involved. She understands their deceptions, their deepest fears and wishes, their rationales for behavior, their disguised motivations, their secret obsessions, their moral convictions, and ultimately their shared folie à trois. And most of all, she knows The Truth. The Truth that Shirley Mason was a poor woman who was tricked, tricked by her psychiatrist, by the sensational journalist that compromised all of her morals for money and fame, and by herself.

What the author doesn't prove is why we should take anything about this book at face value, when the majority of it is cherry picked data (how could it NOT be?) heavily influenced by the author's fallible human perceptions and confirmation bias (because not one of us is exempt from these things, especially when we extrapolate from hard evidence based on what we are hoping to find). Why we should take it seriously when her hypocrisy of doing exactly what she accuses the author of Sybil to have done - namely of writing a sensational book for money and fame about something she doesn't really understand for her own selfish reasons and spoiling the reputation of many people unable to defend themselves from her scathing accusations and "observations" of people she never observed or spoke one word to - is so blatant.

No, what she doesn't prove is whether the Sybil story is mostly true or mostly false. What she doesn't prove is the exact premise of the book.

About the last part of the book titled "Contagion" - where she attempts to draw straight lines from the Sybil story to the Michelle Remembers story to the Day Care/SRA "moral panic" to the book "The Courage To Heal" to the Dissociative Identity Disorder diagnosis being legitimized to tens of thousands of women being hurt and basically losing their families and sanity to the "iatrogenic" and/or "extremely over-diagnosed" syndrome. It is wishful thinking - and the obvious real ultimate goal of the book: to discredit these women (and men!) and their extremely dedicated doctors and supportive loved ones in the name of an agenda that False Memories are the real epidemic and not child abuse - that the real perpetrators are the victims and that the victims are the perpetrators.

Abuse survivors are used to hearing this - victim blaming - it is not different from the woman who gets raped being told she shouldn't have dressed like a slut or the child told he is being beaten for his own good. They will survive this book in the name of truth and human dignity and human suffering. What shouldn't survive is Debbie Nathan's reputation as a truthful or compelling journalist, of someone who should be listened to with the good faith we give people who have not proven to have a huge personal agenda they cannot or will not see past.

If you, reader, decide to purchase this book I implore you to do so on the basis of Debbie Nathan being an interesting (if sad) human specimen exposing her disordered thought processes to the world and not on the hope that you will have a better understanding of the Sybil story - because you won't.

Sybil Exposed is a long overdue antidote to the myths created by the a multi-media outlet blockbuster of a generation (or two) ago. While it was explosive when it came out, there was plenty of skepticism. Many felt it had a PT Barnum aura, and Dick Cavett's question on p. 175 (hoax?) was common. While the public was very interested, but not fully sold, this book shows that it was influential in the field of psychiatry.

Debbie Nathan does a great job of introducing the three women who literally created Sybil. First is Shirley Mason, Sybil's prototype; and then there is Dr. Cornelia Wilbur who created her; and Flora Schreiber who created her a second time. (A third creator, Stewart Stern, scriptwriter of the TV special on Sybil gets a mention.) Nathan unfolds the three stories such that you feel that you understand the people and how the Sybil phenomenon came to be.

There is an interesting portrait of the time and the state of psychiatry and journalism.

Dr. Wilbur was able to experiment with drugs, electric shock, even lobotomies, and fraternize with her patients without much scrutiny. (Not too many years earlier, Freud and Jung had intimate relations with their patients.) Wilbur has her patients in her home; she hires them, and in the case of Shirley/Sybil, shares vacations. Despite Wilbur's professional writing defining homosexuality as a mental disorder, her closeness to Shirley/Sybil suggests a lesbian relationship.

Flora Schreiber's style of journalism was perfect for the time. With more and more ad revenue going to TV, to keep their readership magazines got more sensational. An anecdote about Terry Morris, mother of political commentator, Dick Morris helps define this era of journalism. She served as president of Society for Magazine writers and wrote in a guidebook for magazine writers: "I have never permitted myself to become fettered by the "'facts'." Nathan shows that how in this environment, Schreiber's career flourished. The Sybil story could be seen as a logical step for where her writing was going. Just as Dr. Wilbur manipulated Sybil to fit her needs, Schreiber (and later, Stewart Stern) spotted the holes in the Wilbur-Mason story, and filled them to meet the needs of the publication.

This is a very good portrayal of what happened and how Sybil and the theory of multiple personalities was developed in the public mind.

Debbie Nathan's book, "Sybil Exposed", is meticulously researched and documented, yet immensely readable.

Not only is it a fascinating exploration of the lives of "Sybil", Connie Wilbur and Flora Schreiber, it is a history of a now-discredited cultural phenomenon: Multiple Personality Disorder.

Debbie Nathan explodes the myth of Sybil's multiple personalities and childhood abuse by unearthing a multitude of facts which contradict the fantastical popular novel's narrative.

We are given documented evidence of how Sybil's psychiatrist, Connie Wilbur, induced Sybil to act as if she had "alters", and how Wilbur willed into existence stories of Sybil's childhood "abuse".

Please note, Debbie Nathan does this in a way that is sympathetic to these women. They, along with author Flora Schreiber, had emotional and societal reasons to act the way they did.

I'm very impressed with Debbie Nathan's research. She has checked her facts thoroughly. Believers in MPD / Dissociative Identity Disorder and "Satanic Ritual Abuse" could learn a lot from this author's methodology, instead of accepting extraordinary claims at face value.

I would recommend this book to students who could learn from the book's research methodology and readability. The book is also a page-turner and would appeal to anyone who likes good non-fiction.

I had always believed the Sybil story (Sally Fields movie etc.) was real. Who didn't?? But this fascinating and admirably researched book shows us that it was hyperbole, imagination, suggestion, invention, opportunism -- anything but the truth. An extremely good read, with complex (and real) characters, and at the same time a frighetning reminder of how a phenomenon can be established as "fact" when it is anything but. I recommend to those interested in psychology and those interested in just plain good reads.

Author Debbie Nathan contends that the 1973 story of 'Sybil' (Shirley Mason) and her 16 personalities was largely fabricated by the patient, her psychiatrist (Dr. Cornelia Wilbur), and an imaginative journalist (Flora Schreiber). Wilbur's treatments subjected Shirley to 'years of anti-psychotics, psychedelics, uppers and downers, hypnosis,and Pentothal injections now recognized to provoke fantasies,' as well as electroshock therapy. Further, the relationship between Wilbur and Mason was colored by transference and countertransference (they lived and traveled together for years, Dr. Wilbur hired Mason to take care of her father-in-law and also forgave $30,000+ in therapy bills in return for being allowed to publish 'Sybil'), and assignments given Mason to read stories about evil mothers (allegedly the origin of Mason's personalities). These 'treatments' are now believed to have produced false-memory narratives at the core of the story; regardless, the story was marketed as a partnership involving all three of the women, and is believed to have caused an upsurge in the diagnoses of both dissociative identify disorders and a wave of investigations of reported sexual crimes against small children (30 were charged, no supporting evidence found).

Subsequent analysis of recorded conversations between Schreiber and Wilbur by Dr. Herbert Spiegel (a leader in hypnosis treatment who personally interviewed Mason several times) and academic Robert Rieber led both to conclude that Wilbur suggested multiple personalities to her client, whom they believed was simply 'hysteric.' Some of the stories were ridiculous - eg. a flight to Amsterdam to aid a refugee fleeing from the Nazis. Sigmund Freud had also rejected grown suspicious of using hypnosis, believing it made it too easy for doctors to 'encourage' patients to 'remember' events that never happened. A childhood memory of rape turned out to be recollection of a tonsillectomy instead. Also interesting - Mason improved considerably when separated from Dr. Wilbur for about nine years, earning a master's degree, living as an art teacher at a community college and owning her own house. Further, Flora Schreiber discovered major discrepancies between what Shirley had written in her diaries at the time the early abuses that supposedly caused her mental traumas occured, entries supposedly made in 1941 were made in ballpoint (not used in the U.S. until 1945),and nobody in Shirley's home town had any such recollections.

Publication of 'Sybil,' however, brought Shirley back to Dr. Wilbur, recurrence of her symptoms, spending most of her time in bed, and drug addiction. Dr. Wilbur, however, realized their relationship had to end when she moved away from Mason, told Shirley, and the dissociative episodes ended. Dr. Wilbur ended up teaching psychiatry at Lexingon, KY., while also taking eight residents as her patients, and generating a mini-upswing in multiple-personality diagnoses in the area.

Author Nathan also cites a 1958 letter by Mason kept in the John Jay College of Criminal Justice confessing to making up the numerous personalities for attention and excitement; Dr. Wilbur's response was that this showed progress in Mason's therapy. Readers should also be aware there is considerable controversy over whether psychotherapy, in general, is successful or not. Per Wikipedia, the American Psychological Association now recommends that Shirley Mason's case no longer be cited as a 'classic example' of multiple personality disorder.

Nathan believes that the real root cause of Shirley Mason's maladies was pernicious anemia - produces mood swings, hallucinations, withdrawal, and identity confusion; Shirley was hospitalized for this after leaving Dr. Wilbur's care, and had been successfully treated for this as well as a child - temporarily, until the injections were discontinued.

Bottom-Line: Emotional dependence (Shirley Mason), professional ambition (Connie Wilbur), and financial incentives (Flora Schreiber) were the real causes of 'Sybil's' decades-long multiple personalities. Hospitals have since closed their inpatient multiple personality disorder units, but the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociative Identity Disorder continues to give a Cornelia Wilbur Award for outstanding clinical contributions to the treatment of dissociative disorders (WSJ, 10/29/2011 - Carol Tavris).

I agree with Steve Almond that Debbie Nathan is one of the great unsung writers of our time and that this book is an amazing accomplishment. It is so well documented and carefully considered. I totally appreciate her brilliant synthesis of "investigative journalism and cultural criticism." An amazing analysis of 70s culture, women, the history and ongoing evolution of psychiatry (which is changing as we speak...), this book is a must read for any girl who grew up in the 70s, anyone who's had therapy--especially if it was billed as "psychoanalysis"--anyone who wondered in 1995 if being able to remember abuse suffered as a child would be the magic cure for their chronic depression, anyone who's read Malcolm Gladwell and is interested in cultural "contagions." Really, I think anyone would find this a good, fast, compelling read. Period. It's a great story beautifully written--what more do you want in a book?

Is the book perfect? Was every single word verified? Were it possible!! Perhaps not. For example, Debbie and I talked about my time spent with Shirley while my mom and Connie swam laps. I think she says we sat by the pool waiting for them to finish. Well, we generally visited and talked inside the house while the other ladies swam. When the bubble was on the pool, there was no "poolside." It was all taken up by the cover. Oh, and guess what! I even found a typo!! DOES IT MATTER? Absolutely not. The fact of the matter is that Debbie Nathan accurately and compassionately captured the essence of two women who were special and wonderful parts of my childhood, and whom I knew for decades of my life. Therefore, I trust that she captured the important elements of her interviews with other folks she talked to as well.

I was most impressed with her thorough research and documentation. I'd known this book was in the works for years and this particular element was the most surprising to me. I don't know why, but it was. People I knew in Lexington had told me about this "crazy New Yorker" who was trying to discredit the Sybil myth. By the second page of the book, I knew that Debbie Nathan was the real thing and that she'd taken this task very seriously.

I was sad to read that Shirley had such a hard time. I continue to believe that people go to incredible lengths for love and acceptance and I also believe that Connie and Shirley vehemently believed in their story. I also believe that there is more to any story, which Debbie Nathan has expertly shown us. Life is complex and mental illness still one of its greatest mysteries.

Thankfully, Nathan doesn't even attempt to give us definitive answers to these very complex matters. For me, however, she gave me a new way to think and question and doubt and trust.

READ IT!!

I remember watching the movie Sybil, marveling at the wonder of how her many personalities protected her from the awful abuse she suffered at the hands of her mother, and how touching it was at the end when Sally Field reintegrated all of her "selves" and comforted and healed them. But as we see from this exhaustively researched, fascinating book, SYBIL EXPOSED, this iconic multiple personality case was basically an elaborate hoax, perpetrated by an ambitious psychiatrist desperate to make a name for herself, who manipulated a frail troubled and dependent young woman, and a journalist, more concerned with writing a best seller than in telling the truth.

Author Debbie Nathan convincingly reconstructs lives of the 3 women using extensive archival material, tapes and interviews with surviving people who knew them. Revealed is the complex, totally unethical relationship that the psychiatrist Connie Wilbur had with Sybil, dosing her heavily with powerful barbiturates, administering electroshocks, and then making strong suggestions that she was horribly abused as a child. In these sessions Wilbur coaxed her to reveal her other "personalities" and interpreted impossible fantasies babbled while under sedation, as literal truth. It was a case of a doctor formulating a theory, and then doing whatever was necessary to make her patient conform to that "diagnosis".

It took an limelight craving author and a screen writer to further flesh out the fantasies to make the story more sensational and sympathetic. It is fascinating to watch how they are first reluctant and sceptical when it becomes obvious to them that the allegations against Sybil's mother, and the assertions of Sybil's strange behavior were false, but as they become more invested in the project they shamelessly embellish the story to make it more engaging and cinematic.

This is anything but a one-dimensional story. Nathan reveals with some compassion how Dr. Wilbur, while behaving unethically and irresponsibly, also really seemed to care for Sybil, letting her visit regularly and even live in her home. Wilbur probably believes that she is actually helping, even as she is using the helplessly dependent Sybil to garner the professional accolades she so craves. Nathan presents us with the historical and social context in which the events occur... primarily the upheaval in the roles of women, and the personal turmoil that created. She offers insightful analyses of why the Sybil tale was so widely embraced, and why the diagnosis multiple personality skyrocketed after SYBIL was published. It also serves as a cautionary tale for the way some psychotherapies can be abused and cause great harm.

As I read through some of the negative reviews of this book on this site, it appears that many of the reviewers have a professional and personal stake in the veracity of the original story. My advice is, read the book and decide for yourselves.

The "Sybil" story fascinated America in the 1970's and on a whim American's didn't bother to question the book's accuracy at all--until now. This is not a "what if" conspiracy theory book, instead the author, Debbie Nathan, has thoroughly researched her subject by interviewing close relatives/friends of Sybil and her Doctor, as well as sifting through important archived documents and letters. All of the evidence proves that many claims made in the original book are not only exaggerated but made up entirely. It is appalling that Sybil's mother was falsely accused of such heinous acts that nobody could prove--Sybil herself in a letter to her doctor admitted this amongst other things. Ms. Nathan merely presents the facts and does not inject her own feelings into this, after all she doesn't have to because the damaging evidence speaks for itself. This was just a work of fiction to begin with just for the Doctor to make a name for herself. I want to say so much more, but at risk of spoiling the book I won't. Pick this up, you won't be disappointed.

I remember the pastor of my church and his extreme skepticism of modern atheistic psychiatry. I believe the author of this book. Connie Wilbur was an acutely ambitious and unscrupulous psychiatrist who along with Flora Shreiber, doped Shirley Mason on an incredible soup of narcotics, hypnotized her and created "Sybil" Shirley Mason had pernicous anemia,which accounted for almost every physical symptom of her "hysteria". Connie Wilbur had a lesbian relationship with Shirley also. Nobody I know trusts psychiatrists. They live in a world of "destroy the family". This is done by blaming parents, religion and the family unit for everything. Nothing Sybil described ever happened. Nothing. Remember the day care center witch hunts of the eighties? It's part of the same syndrome.

Debbie Nathan's Sybil Exposed is an investigative tour de force and a must-read book for anyone interested in American history. Nathan dissects the shocking phenomenon of Sybil--a best-selling book from the 1970s that kicked off one of the most bizarre chapters in American history. In the book, Nathan tells the riveting, untold story of the three women behind Sybil. The book is meticulously researched and brilliantly written.

I haven't seen anywhere that author Debbie Nathan has had any psychotherapy training or clinical experience whatsoever....Did she ever sit in on a diagnostic or psychotherapy session with a patient purported to be a DID? Weird.

I really enjoyed this book. Nathan's conclusions about the Sybil case aren't mere conjecture; she did research and went through Flora Rheta Schreiber's archive at John Jay University, and she has the documentation to back up her claims. I didn't feel there was a lot of effort to attribute motivations or thoughts to people she didn't interview. For the most part, the entire book relies on documents from the Schreiber archive and the author's own investigation to "expose" the truth - that it is highly probable that Shirley Mason, the real "Sybil," did not have MPD and had never been horrifically abused. To me, the recantation Mason wrote saying she had fabricated the whole thing was not as compelling a piece of evidence as the fact that people who knew and saw Mason every day of her childhood - including a household worker - had no recollection and never saw evidence of any abuse. And if you've read "Sybil," you know that much of the claimed abuse and outrageous actions by "Sybil's" mother would have been visible or knowable by people who were close to the family - especially in the kind of small town Shirley grew up in.

The book does get pretty critical, in the last part, of therapist-encouraged "recovered memories." But I think skepticism is warranted. Nathan points out that not one of the cases of ritualistic Satanic abuse in the 1980s and 1990s that the media covered breathlessly - and where people ended up in prison - was ever conclusively proved with scientific evidence, or any evidence at all other than the (probably false) "recovered" memories of the people involved. In most cases, not one shred of evidence of daycare/preschool "abuse rings" or Satanic groups was ever found. That is something to consider and something to be concerned about. I thought, honestly, that therapists had stopped a lot of the irresponsible "memory recovery" therapies that resulted in false accusations and was surprised to read that apparently, some therapists are still using those debunked methods with their patients. I never saw Nathan, in the book, claim that MPD didn't exist or that all recovered memories are false. Just that most likely, the methods that therapists used in past years resulted in fabricated memories; and that MPD was most likely wildly overdiagnosed in the wake of "Sybil." She does draw a direct connection between the Sybil case, and resulting negative consequences like "recovered memories" being used to send people to prison for hundreds of years, that I thought was both clear, and not overblown.

I thought this was a great read. It's dense in places - there's a lot of research involved - but Nathan was meticulous in her investigations and it shows. A few small inconsistencies - similar to those that are found in just about any work of this magnitude, where the author is relying on archived papers for her sources, shouldn't be taken as larger than they really are. A couple of minor mistakes does not mean that the book as a whole is untrue and the author is untrustworthy; that is a classic logical fallacy. One usually employed when people are hearing something they don't want to hear.

I have been following the posts and am honestly nonplussed by the negative reviews and seemingly vitriolic attitude towards Ms. Nathan's work. What gives ? I read the original book, SYBIL, back in the 70's and was compelled by the story, as was everyone else at the time. Finding that it was largely fiction does not lessen the impact of the story - just as watching a very interesting and creative film does not disappoint me because it isn't a documentary. I don't pretend to be a psychiatrist or have that kind of background and training, but I do have a good BS detector. When I read the criticisms of SYBIL EXPOSED, it is obvious that it is the detractors who have the agenda here, not Ms. Nathan. If you read her book carefully, you will see that there is no dismissive attitude towards Shirley's suffering, or that of any other person diagnosed with MPD. Her objection is to the rapid and ubiquitous application of the diagnosis, directly attributable to the sensation caused by SYBIL.

If one looks to the history and evolution of any field, there are always wrong turns in the path which must be admitted, and then remedied. If a time table of Psychiatry/Psychology were to be laid out, with Cornelia Wilbur's career and treatment of Shirley overlaid upon it, it would become clear that this story did not occur in isolation, divorced from the new discoveries, theories, and experimental practises which were rising and falling at the time. Please read the following article from Psychology Today:

[...]

The "bandwagon effect" cannot be discounted when delving into the world of MPD diagnosis and the fervor with which SYBIL EXPOSED is being attacked. From wiki:

When individuals make rational choices based on the information they receive from others, economists have proposed that information cascades can quickly form in which people decide to ignore their personal information signals and follow the behavior of others. Cascades explain why behavior is fragile--people understand that they are based on very limited information.

Treating a person who is obviously in pain and presenting disjointed or seemingly dissociative behaviors must surely be an arduous and herculean task. It seems pointless to overly dramatize a precarious situation by affixing a label such as MPD, or DID as it is now referred to. Ms. Nathan is trying to go back to the big bang of this unquantifiable - and therefore dangerously qualitative, subjective - diagnosis by meticulous sleuthing and plumbing the personalities and personal histories of the three women involved in what really amounts to one of the greatest pieces of fiction to come out of the 70's.

By the way, have you wondered about the name "Sybil" and how it resonates with both of these books, Shirley's purloined story and Ms. Nathan's account ?

The first known Greek writer to mention a sibyl is Heraclitus, in the 5th century BC:
The Sibyl, with frenzied mouth uttering things not to be laughed at, unadorned and unperfumed, yet reaches to a thousand years with her voice by aid of the god.

Wow ! Enough said, for both contexts !

Ms. Nathan is an excellent writer who can maintain great narrative momentum even when discussing technical or medical concepts. Her greatest strength, though, is her willingness to travel anywhere and talk to anyone who might have first-hand knowledge of historical events, and to track down and read relevant documents wherever they can be found. There are a small knot of people who will vociferously dispute this in all sorts of disparagingly vague ways; they have attacked every single favorable review thus far posted. I ask them one question: How do you explain Dr. Wilbur's presenting a "diary" supposedly written by Shirley Mason in 1941 to Ms. Schreiber, in order to convince a doubting Schreiber that the various personalities were all real, written with a ball-point pen not invented until 1946? Do you think this did not happen? Are Ms. Nathan's experts wrong? If so, why do you think that? Are you saying that such a deliberate forgery, done at a time when the book's existence was hanging in the balance, does not matter? Are you even aware that this is in the book?