There are many and various opinions of the dangers of hypnotism. Some of those who have given it a fair trial have insisted on its dangers. Some of those who have had very large experience have declared emphatically that there is no danger at all. Occasionally it has seemed that such a declaration must be considered as having been dictated by such intensity of interest as sometimes leads men to overlook the darker side of things with which they are much occupied. Certain moral aspects of hypnotism are at least dubious, and, it must be admitted, present opportunities for abuse. There are certain dangers connected with its effect upon nervous patients, and especially with its influence upon character, that have become more and more clear in recent years. Dr. John K. Mitchell, in his "Self Help for Nervous Women," a series of familiar talks on economy in nervous expenditure, [Footnote 21] has dwelt on certain of these dangers of hypnotism for nervous patients in a passage that deserves to be recalled. As a representative of a school of thought that is worthy of special regard from American physicians his expressions must carry weight: [Footnote 21: Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1909.] The greatest danger of all is the use of hypnotism in any form or degree, a two-edged sword, capable indeed of usefulness, but more capable of harm. After years of study, beginning with too easy an approval of it, hypnotism, whether called by that name or by the unsuitable one of suggestion, has been laid aside by the medical profession as a means too dangerous for ordinary use, involving great risk of deterioration of character in the subject if often repeated, and putting a terribly tempting tool in the hands of the user, fascinating in the ease with which it can produce superficial and temporary good results and equally capable of being used for harmful ones. A susceptible person, once hypnotized, is more and more easily thrown into the hypnotic state until even the slightest hint suffices to bring about the condition. It is not necessary for the hypnotization to go so far as deep sleep; this more advanced stage is indeed seldom required, and to say that persons are not hypnotized because they are not put into a sleep or a trance shows ignorance of the subject. I am not asserting that very slight degrees of the hypnotic condition are as dangerous as the deeper, but I do say that all degrees of it are dangerous to the integrity and healthy action of the subject's nervous system. The danger of harm increases with every repetition of the hypnotization. In suggestible, that is, over-susceptible, individuals, who are almost universally neurotic persons, to fix the eyes on a small point, especially a bright one, sometimes even to fix the mind on the one idea of going into the hypnotic state (mild or deep), is enough without further intervention from any one to put them into that state. {162}