Acknowledging the crucial role of Max Glatt in the development of the Jellinek curve and the enduring relevance of his model of recovery from problem drinking.
Saved in:
| Title: | Acknowledging the crucial role of Max Glatt in the development of the Jellinek curve and the enduring relevance of his model of recovery from problem drinking. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | McInerney, Kevin, Best, David |
| Source: | Addiction. Sep2025, Vol. 120 Issue 9, p1889-1897. 9p. |
| Subjects: | National health services, Archives, Compulsive behavior, Medical care, Information resources, Convalescence, Theory, Alcoholism, Hospital wards |
| Abstract: | Background and Aims: Shortly after Max Glatt published a 'Chart of Alcohol Addiction and Recovery' in 1954, a misnomer emerged and it became known as the 'Jellinek Curve'. The current article aims to investigate the contributions that both Max Glatt and Morton Jellinek made towards the misnamed 'Jellinek Curve', how the misnomer may have emerged and the relevance of Jellinek's addiction concept and Glatt's model of recovery with contemporary theories of addiction and recovery. Method: Warlingham Park Hospital housed the first residential alcohol detoxification and rehabilitation unit in the UK's National Health Service, a model created and developed by Max Glatt. Much of the data that informed Glatt's model came from ex‐Warlingham Park Hospital patients in recovery. The current article assumes an ethnographic approach. Literature searches were undertaken and the Warlingham Park Hospital archives were scrutinized. Conclusions: Max Glatt's 'Chart of Alcohol Addiction and Recovery' has mistakenly been referred to as the 'Jellinek Curve' for the last seven decades. 'The Matthew Effect' presents a possible explanation for the misnomer: the notion that eminent scientists are likely to receive greater credit than lesser‐known scientists, regardless of their contribution. The recovery slope of Glatt's 'Chart' may be just as relevant today as when it was first published. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Addiction is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Background and Aims: Shortly after Max Glatt published a 'Chart of Alcohol Addiction and Recovery' in 1954, a misnomer emerged and it became known as the 'Jellinek Curve'. The current article aims to investigate the contributions that both Max Glatt and Morton Jellinek made towards the misnamed 'Jellinek Curve', how the misnomer may have emerged and the relevance of Jellinek's addiction concept and Glatt's model of recovery with contemporary theories of addiction and recovery. Method: Warlingham Park Hospital housed the first residential alcohol detoxification and rehabilitation unit in the UK's National Health Service, a model created and developed by Max Glatt. Much of the data that informed Glatt's model came from ex‐Warlingham Park Hospital patients in recovery. The current article assumes an ethnographic approach. Literature searches were undertaken and the Warlingham Park Hospital archives were scrutinized. Conclusions: Max Glatt's 'Chart of Alcohol Addiction and Recovery' has mistakenly been referred to as the 'Jellinek Curve' for the last seven decades. 'The Matthew Effect' presents a possible explanation for the misnomer: the notion that eminent scientists are likely to receive greater credit than lesser‐known scientists, regardless of their contribution. The recovery slope of Glatt's 'Chart' may be just as relevant today as when it was first published. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09652140 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/add.70053 |
