The History and Legacy of Pennhurst State School and Hospital
- Sam Shepherd
- Nov 25, 2024
- 6 min read
By Anne Sparks
No study of the history of mental hospitals in the United States would be complete without a section on Pennsylvania’s Pennhurst State School and Hospital. Any researcher on the history of disabilities in America is likely to have heard of this institution. It is infamous both for its treatment of patients during its operation and its landmark case that resulted in its closure. The scandals unearthed in investigations of this “hospital”, and others like it, helped ignite a public outcry that garnered support for all Americans with disabilities and proper healthcare practices for those with mental disabilities. This article will explore the founding principles of the hospital, its operation practices, and its eventual downfall from a court case that led to hope for a future that would not repeat the past.
The Eastern Pennsylvania State Institution for the Feeble-Minded and Epileptic, the original name of Pennhurst, opened in 1908 at the command of the state legislation. Construction had begun in 1903, with the state having been convinced there was a pressing need for a facility that could house and segregate individuals with mental disabilities from the public. This was very trendy at the time, as those who did not fit the “typical” standards of society were often cast off as strange and undesirable. The institution was the “solution” for overcrowding at other pre-existing hospitals and homes, those deemed too different were sent to the 1,400-acre facility in Spring City, Chester County, PA to live out their days [1].
The school was quickly filled to capacity, reaching 3,550 in 1954, and even more in subsequent decades [2]. It opened at a period in history when eugenics and segregation were very pervasive, and this led many parents in the eastern Pennsylvania area to send their children to Pennhurst.
Many faculty members were proponents of the eugenics movement, and the institution practiced sterilization without the permission of the patient, an obvious and horrific human rights violation that was allowed to continue for decades. Men and women were segregated with little to no fraternization, partially because of behavioral concerns but primarily to prevent reproduction and pregnancies among female residents [3]. However, extra care for separating the sexes did not ensure the safety of residents from staff members. There were reports of sexual assault from a staff member in 1976, one resident testified as being thrown several feet across a room by a staff person, and a staff person with a shackle belt hit one resident. While each of these incidents resulted in the termination of the hospital worker, the prevalence of accounts like these is very significant. Parents commonly visited their children only to discover they had acquired new scratches, bruises, and cuts, with no explanation from the hospital [3].
These injuries were often acquired due to negligence and overcrowding. Staff was unable to manage large groups of patients, and health standards were often set aside in favor of cutting costs. Residents were housed in a facility that was filled far past capacity and this often resulted in agitation and violence among patients. These conditions progressively worsened through the 1940s-1970s, through the so-called “baby boom” as the general population of America increased. This population spike and increased awareness of signs of mental disabilities led to more and more parents being influenced by medical professionals and peers to institutionalize their children. The hospital, as so many others did during this time, continued to take patients without properly preparing more rooms and facilities. Management refused to meet the new needs of the increased patient population, and staff members were left with over 45 patients to one individual’s care. Instead of working to ensure mental and physical stimulation, many children were drugged into lethargy to make them more “manageable”, and patients' mental and physical faculties gradually deteriorated into a state unrecognizable to parents that had interred them at the institution [3].
Conditions at Pennhurst and other similar institutions finally came under investigation after increased popular interest in the 1970s and 80s. Pennhurst particularly was thrust into the public spotlight when the landmark case, Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hospital was filed in 1974. The case was a class-action suit filed on behalf of the residents of Pennhurst and it accused the school of violating their constitutional rights, neglecting to provide adequate care, and resorting to abuse and inappropriate punishments [4]. The school and hospital held over 4,000 residents at peak capacity in the 1960s, with the average stay being around 35 years for each patient [5]. The conditions that patients, their primary care provider, or their parents, attested to were abysmal. One patient, Linda Taub, an young girl with mental and physical disabilities, was reportedly strapped into a wheelchair and confined in a straitjacket –even though she was fully capable of walking– simply because attendants did not want to put any effort into monitoring her movements. Her father testified that his daughter had regressed significantly while attending the institution due to neglicence. Linda resided at Pennhurst for 9 years, through those years she was often badly bruised, scarred, and injured, and staff seemed to have no reasonable explanations for the circumstances she was subjected to. Unfortunately, hers was not an uncommon story at Pennhurst. The Halderman v. Pennhurst case was dozens of these stories told one after the other, a scathing indictment of human rights violations and cruelty [3].
The case was filed in 1974, and in 1977 the federal court ruled that the conditions violated the constitutional rights of the patients, stating; “Evidence had shown the facility was consistently overcrowded, understaffed, and lacking in programs necessary for adequate habilitation…also found excessive use of restraints and psychotropic drugs as control measures. Residents suffered injuries from abuse by staff and other residents” [4]. This ruling resulted in a nationwide call for the deinstitutionalization of Pennhurst. But it was not the end of the story. The case was repeatedly appealed, and it did not officially close until 1998, in favor of the patients against Pennhurst. However, a settlement in 1984 effectively ensured Pennhurst would not continue operating. The institution closed for good in 1987, and the remaining 1,156 residents were relocated into community homes with more resources and staff appropriately allocated to small groups of patients [4].
The Halderman v. Pennhurst decision set a very important precedent in a time that was crucial for the deinstitutionalizing of similar “hospitals” and “schools”. Pennhurst, and places like it, sparked a public outcry that resulted in an increase of advocacy for those with disbilities that had never been seen prior. Healthcare moved away from large institutions that would overextend their resources, and parents began to turn to smaller, well-run community homes that resulted in less stress on both the patient and their families. The horrors of the testimonies in the case resulted in a national conversation about responsibility and humanity when treating and caring for individuals with mental disabilities, and guilty parties were finally held accountable for their misdeeds.
Today, Pennhurst operates as a “museum and tourist attraction”, offering daytime tours and “haunted attractions”. This has been a topic of heated debate, as many people find this to be disrespectful for all the human beings that suffered at the hands of the institution. While it is undoubtedly important to remember Pennhurst, and a past that we can hope is never repeated, there is good reason to oppose its status as a tourist attraction. Pennhurst was a site of innumerable tragedies and staggering pain, and its victims are an inspiration to keep fighting for the advocacy and respect of individuals with disabilities. Their story is not one for macabre “entertainment”, but one that should inspire vigilance against repetition of the past.
Works Cited
[1] Downy, Dennis. "Pennhurst State School and Hospital." The Encyclopedia of Greater
Philadelphia, Philadelphia Encyclopedia,
Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.
[2] Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. (1954). Pennhurst State School. Spring City, PA:
[3] Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance. (n.d.). About Pennhurst State School and Hospital. Pennhurst Memorial and Preservation Alliance. Retrieved November 21, 2024, from http://www.preservepennhurst.org/default.aspx?pg=36
[4] Halderman v. Pennhurst, 2:74-cv-01345 (E.D. Pa. May 30, 1974). Civil Rights Litigation
Clearinghouse. Retrieved from https://clearinghouse.net/case/490/.
[5] Zernike, K. (1983, November 4). “Workers indicted in patient abuse”. The New York Times.
