Anthropology & Medicine最新文献

Governments across the world differently invoked citizen responsibility for responding to the risk of COVID-19 infection. Approaches which focused on changing social practices served to reinforce distinctions between 'sanitary' and 'unsanitary' citizenship. This paper examines citizens' responses to public health policy messaging, exploring as a case study the reception of UK Government messaging about responsible behaviour during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine the public responses to such messaging from narrative interviews with 43 people who became ill with COVID-19. These interviews were with people who identified as members of the minoritised religious and racialised groups, who were most heavily burdened by the impact of COVID-19. Interviewees challenged assumptions that they were 'irresponsible' for having caught COVID-19, and instead directed attention towards the ways in which pandemic guidance was unworkable. Some actively critiqued government messaging, questioning the problematic racialisation of pandemic messaging and challenging individual responsibilisation for the management of the pandemic. Through this analysis we demonstrate the active role of citizens in enacting, and at times resisting, health policy.

Using examples from the National Health Service in England, this paper illustrates key features of contemporary healthcare governance: the way decisions are hidden in places that are 'in between' and 'out of reach'; the enrolment of doctors in governing; and the important role played by 'boring things', such as power point slides, flow charts, and forms. The essay shows how anthropological proximity and perspectives can extend and deepen understanding of contemporary political power. It does this firstly by showing the importance of agency in the operation of governmentality, and secondly by illuminating the limits of governmentality. The different elements of governing assemblages, such as global management experts, medical leaders, forms of knowledge and analytical technologies, are brought together through the strategic act of framing. Frames are contested and resisted, requiring more visible forms of control.

Religious leaders, development experts and state officials in Pakistan were brought together on shared platforms to negotiate a morally-appropriate but scientifically informed response to HIV. Instead of dialogue and negotiation in line with the secular ideal of development, the moral authority of the religious figure compelled others to forefront the conservative in them, thereby undermining the goal of HIV prevention in the country. The everyday practices of state officials and health experts were already infused with Islamic public morality but the inclusion of religious leaders resulted in acceptance of their conservative position on HIV, gender and sexuality. Through the case study of an Inter-Religious Council on HIV, I argue that intervention strategies which specifically involve religious leaders end up enabling systematic marginalization of those who are already at a greater risk of HIV.

In 2016 Swedish law was amended to allow single women to access fertility treatment with donor sperm. In this paper, based on interviews, document analysis and autoethnographic insights, I examine the implementation of this law using human rights approaches, specifically the availability, accessibility, acceptability, and quality framework (AAAQ Framework). While the law extended the scope of reproductive rights, the health system was unprepared. Five years on, women seek care in the private sector or continue to travel abroad due in large part to waiting times which can be up to four years in some regions. The paper also provides a meeting point between anthropology and policy analysis. The law change provides a pathway for analyzing the Swedish health system and political context, particularly the relationships between the private and public sectors and between different regions, and the balance of responsibility between national and regional levels. While many of the challenges are unique to the Swedish context, they also offer lessons for countries which have or are considering expanding access to fertility treatment for single women and other patient groups, thus demonstrating the importance of ethnographic approaches in health policy analysis.

The 'task to come' in anthropological fieldwork is rarely discussed explicitly as a set of underpinning methodological, analytical, conceptual, and theoretical precepts and practices. Drawing on learnings from a study of policymakers in the Australian Public Service - a non-conventional fieldwork location - this paper presents an account of how the anthropologist instituted direction and purpose or 'fruitful ways of looking' as an orientation to policy ethnography and the sense-making journey that follows. This paper progresses three interrelated aims: (1) to argue that, through ethnographic fieldwork, anthropology adds value to understanding the policy setting and its actors as engaged in purposeful and meaningful work underpinned by policy knowledge and expertise; (2) provocate that anthropology should contribute to research agendas outside of critical normative disciplinary interests in power and control; (3) illustrate that preparation is useful to tailor the production of anthropological knowledge to its context. An 'interpretive framework' is described as the culmination of this approach to collecting and interpreting ethnographic field data, demonstrating how this attends to the policy setting as socio-cultural domain with actors engaged in shared practices, routines and rituals, steeped in policy-practitioner skills, knowledge and expertise - or policy 'craft'. Together, this conditioned the anthropological gaze to take in everyday activities involved in policy work and enabled the study of meetings and documents to discern what happens during these structured conversations to better understand how policy staff engage with academic research in meeting their policy responsibilities under the expectations of the evidence-based policy agenda.

Powerful pharmaceuticals are readily available for purchase throughout Tanzania and global health policy makers decry this situation as dangerous and disordered, as if no rules govern the use of drugs in Africa. In the prevailing global health understanding, 'truth' lies in the laboratory science that goes into the making and proper prescription of drugs, and such deviations as 'overuse' and 'misuse' result from the fact that locals supposedly misunderstand what these drugs are and how they should be used. However, my ethnographic research in Tanzania reveals that embodied epistemologies frequently enable medical practitioners and patients to evaluate the quality of various drugs and to identify chakachua (substandard or adulterated) pharmaceuticals through their material and sensory qualities-a practice I conceptualize as a form of 'fugitive science' (Rusert 2017). In light of this, I analyze the WHO's National Action Plan for Antimicrobial Resistance in Tanzania, demonstrating how such global health policies disregard this knowledge, employing neocolonial rhetoric that presents 'ignorance' and 'lack of hygiene' as the sources of growing antimicrobial resistance while simultaneously obscuring structural inequalities. I argue that such forms of global health surveillance operate through the logics and epistemologies of war (Chow 2006; Terry 2017) in ways that render populations in the Global South into threats and targets. I conclude by suggesting that fugitive science can work as counter-evidence to health security frameworks and, as such, represents a furtive form of resistance to these militarized logics.

How can ethnographic methods track implicit & explicit forms of structural casteism in Indian public health policy and praxis? How can a critical attention to ordinary stories and subjectivities of casted lives reveal the underlying Brahmanical moralities, assumptions and imaginations of public health but equally also unravel anti-caste counter-framings/counter-theorizations of symptoms, afflictions, injuries and chronic wounds wrought by caste? How, in other words, can the horizons of anti-colonial theory-making be expanded to capaciously conceptualize casteism as a core determinant of community health outcomes and life-chances in India? By mobilizing 'counter-storytelling' as a concept and method for critical medical anthropology from the Global South, and case studies from longitudinal ethnography in northern India, this paper provides a dual critique of: 1. Public health praxis in relation to questions of caste, addiction, respiratory debilitation, air pollution and TB. And, 2. Epistemologies of health policy making pertaining to wellness for 'the poor' and the gendered and casted labour of community care workers like ASHAs and non-institutionalized health actors.

In this introduction to our special issue, we take a wide view of the history and epistemic stakes of anthropological and ethnographic approaches to health policy. Drawing on the history of critical medical anthropology, the anthropology of policy, and critical policy studies, we show how anthropologies of health policy are particularly essential in this current moment, as policy production becomes increasingly abstracted and even more entwined with specific forms of evidence making. Taken together, the contributors of this special issue argue that anthropology's interventions into health policy are essential in three ways. First, they shed light on the practices of policy 'communities', the pragmatic parameters under which they work, and the central logics under which health policy actors are operating. Second, they examine the effects of policy implementation upon those intended to be the subjects of health policy, highlighting the effects of policy for those marginalised by gender, race, and caste. Here, anthropology provides a view into the 'lived experience' of those targeted by health policy, but it also demands that anthropologists provide 'counter-stories' and 'counter-evidences' that dismantle narrow systems of policy knowledge production. Finally, anthropological attention provides an essential lens into the things that carry over in the act of policy reform-the past reverberations and imperial inheritances. Together with our contributors, we call for anthropologies of health policy that work to highlight and dismantle such inheritances.

As people, particularly those ageing and living with disabilities, struggle with how care is enacted, integrated care has gained policy purchase in the United Kingdom. Despite integration's apparent popularity, its contribution to improved care for people has been questioned, exposing uncertainties about its associated benefits. Nonetheless, over decades a remarkably consistent approach to integrated care has advanced partnerships between the NHS and local government. Accordingly, in 2014 the Scottish Government mandated Health and Social Care Integration (HSCI) via the Scottish Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Act. Emerging from an interorganisational ethnography of the implementation of a Health and Social Care Partnership in 2016, in a place I call 'Kintra', I interrogated what happened when NHS Kintra and Kintra Council endeavoured to implement HSCI according to the precepts of 'the Act'. Immersed in the everyday arrangements in the spaces of governance, I attended to how these policy actors worked to both (re)configure and held things together behind care frontiers, and away from the bodywork of direct care. I charted their efforts to comply with regulations, plan, and build governance apparatuses through documents. In following documents, I show the ways in which HSCI was materialised through documentation. I reveal how, in the mundane mattering of document manufacturing, possibilities for (re)forming the carescape emerged. I deploy a posthuman practice stance to show not only the way in which 'papery' partnerships between the NHS and local government 'enact' care, but also how they make worlds through a sociomaterial politics of anticipation.

Health scientists have claimed that urban transit workers suffer from higher rates of stress-related disease than workers in most other occupations. This paper examines how a network of scientists and labor organizers constructed the problem of transit worker stress as a global phenomenon. According to study participants, transit workers worldwide are subject to a similar set of stress-related risks, which can serve as a basis for worker solidarity. This paper analyzes how the concept of stress has been used to identify pathogenic environments and considers anthropological claims that the concept often abstracts and depoliticizes harmful arrangements. The findings show that scientists and labor organizers use the stress concept to construct a figure of a universally at-risk transit worker that serves the ends of transnational labor organizing. At the same time, by focusing on the case of San Francisco's transit workers, this analysis shows that a persistent association between stress and 'hard work'-in both lay and scientific discourses-may block recognition of stress-related harms for transit workers who are accused of being lazy and overpaid.