以社区为基础的社会心理护理中的“社区”双刃剑:对尼泊尔农村任务转移的反思。

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Anthropology & Medicine Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1080/13648470.2022.2161765
Liana Chase
{"title":"以社区为基础的社会心理护理中的“社区”双刃剑:对尼泊尔农村任务转移的反思。","authors":"Liana Chase","doi":"10.1080/13648470.2022.2161765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research in the field of Global Mental Health has stoked hopes that 'task-shifting' to community workers can help fill treatment gaps in low-resource settings. The fact that community workers inhabit the same local moral worlds as their clients is widely framed as a boon, with little consideration of the social and ethical dilemmas this might create in the care of chronic, stigmatized conditions. Drawing on 14 months of ethnographic research focused on psychosocial interventions in Nepal, this paper traces how the multiple roles community workers occupied with respect to their clients - clinician, neighbour, and at times kin - came to bear on the care they provided. In-depth case studies are used to explore two divergent logics of care informing Nepali community workers' practice. While formal psychosocial care guidelines emphasized clients' autonomy, calling for non-judgmental and non-directive forms of emotional support, everyday efforts to 'convince' neighbours and relatives in distress often involved directive guidance oriented toward the restoration of moral personhood and social relations. These approaches could be mutually supportive, but tensions arose when community workers invoked moral standards linked with mental health stigma. This analysis highlights the challenge of mobilizing communities' strengths and resources without inadvertently reproducing their exclusions. It suggests the deployment of community workers to address psychosocial care gaps may entail not only leveraging existing relationships within communities, but also reconfiguring the very terms of relatedness.</p>","PeriodicalId":8240,"journal":{"name":"Anthropology & Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"294-309"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The double-edged sword of 'community' in community-based psychosocial care: reflections on task-shifting in rural Nepal.\",\"authors\":\"Liana Chase\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13648470.2022.2161765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Research in the field of Global Mental Health has stoked hopes that 'task-shifting' to community workers can help fill treatment gaps in low-resource settings. The fact that community workers inhabit the same local moral worlds as their clients is widely framed as a boon, with little consideration of the social and ethical dilemmas this might create in the care of chronic, stigmatized conditions. Drawing on 14 months of ethnographic research focused on psychosocial interventions in Nepal, this paper traces how the multiple roles community workers occupied with respect to their clients - clinician, neighbour, and at times kin - came to bear on the care they provided. In-depth case studies are used to explore two divergent logics of care informing Nepali community workers' practice. While formal psychosocial care guidelines emphasized clients' autonomy, calling for non-judgmental and non-directive forms of emotional support, everyday efforts to 'convince' neighbours and relatives in distress often involved directive guidance oriented toward the restoration of moral personhood and social relations. These approaches could be mutually supportive, but tensions arose when community workers invoked moral standards linked with mental health stigma. This analysis highlights the challenge of mobilizing communities' strengths and resources without inadvertently reproducing their exclusions. It suggests the deployment of community workers to address psychosocial care gaps may entail not only leveraging existing relationships within communities, but also reconfiguring the very terms of relatedness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8240,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropology & Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"294-309\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropology & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13648470.2022.2161765\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropology & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13648470.2022.2161765","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

全球精神卫生领域的研究激起了人们的希望,即把“任务转移”给社区工作者可以帮助填补资源匮乏地区的治疗空白。社区工作者和他们的客户生活在同一个当地的道德世界里,这一事实被广泛地认为是一种福利,很少考虑到这可能在治疗慢性、耻辱性疾病时造成的社会和伦理困境。根据在尼泊尔进行的为期14个月的以社会心理干预为重点的人种学研究,本文追溯了社区工作者在其客户(临床医生、邻居,有时还有亲属)方面所扮演的多重角色是如何影响他们提供的护理的。深入的案例研究,探讨两种不同的逻辑护理通知尼泊尔社区工作者的做法。虽然正式的社会心理护理指南强调客户的自主权,呼吁非评判和非指导性的情感支持形式,但日常努力“说服”处于困境中的邻居和亲属,往往涉及以恢复道德人格和社会关系为导向的指导性指导。这些方法可以相互支持,但当社区工作者援引与精神健康耻辱相关的道德标准时,紧张局势就出现了。这一分析强调了调动社区的优势和资源而不无意中重复其排斥的挑战。它表明,部署社区工作者来解决社会心理护理差距可能不仅需要利用社区内现有的关系,还需要重新配置关系本身。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The double-edged sword of 'community' in community-based psychosocial care: reflections on task-shifting in rural Nepal.

Research in the field of Global Mental Health has stoked hopes that 'task-shifting' to community workers can help fill treatment gaps in low-resource settings. The fact that community workers inhabit the same local moral worlds as their clients is widely framed as a boon, with little consideration of the social and ethical dilemmas this might create in the care of chronic, stigmatized conditions. Drawing on 14 months of ethnographic research focused on psychosocial interventions in Nepal, this paper traces how the multiple roles community workers occupied with respect to their clients - clinician, neighbour, and at times kin - came to bear on the care they provided. In-depth case studies are used to explore two divergent logics of care informing Nepali community workers' practice. While formal psychosocial care guidelines emphasized clients' autonomy, calling for non-judgmental and non-directive forms of emotional support, everyday efforts to 'convince' neighbours and relatives in distress often involved directive guidance oriented toward the restoration of moral personhood and social relations. These approaches could be mutually supportive, but tensions arose when community workers invoked moral standards linked with mental health stigma. This analysis highlights the challenge of mobilizing communities' strengths and resources without inadvertently reproducing their exclusions. It suggests the deployment of community workers to address psychosocial care gaps may entail not only leveraging existing relationships within communities, but also reconfiguring the very terms of relatedness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
(In) visibility of health and illness: Instagram as an unregulated public health platform. 'We are not done': reclaiming care after mobile health in Burkina Faso. Digital technologies and the future of health: aspirations, care and data. Phantom data and the potentials of radical caretaking in reproductive health. The insensitivity of 'sensitive care': the bureaucracy of pregnancy tissue disposal in England, UK.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1