There are grave doubts as to the accuracy of these terms, so freely
talked about in the court rooms and among physicians who appear as
witnesses in court trials. Stories of grave neurotic diseases which
have rapidly recovered after a court decision in their favor are
common, but when examined, appear very different. . . . A famous
trial in which large damages were awarded was followed by the apparent
recovery of the patient. In an equally famous case the collection of a
large sum was followed by an increase of all the symptoms and death.
The former was commented on very publicly as an example of a fictitious
case; the latter passed without comment. The former case, after a year,
relapsed and is now a paralytic. . . .