Explanatory models of health and disease: surprises from within the former Soviet Union
Keywords:
social anthropology, medical anthropology, social theory, public health, illness, explanatory models, media advocacy, health promotion, social epidemiologyAbstract
Extract
The review of anthropological theories as applied to public health by Jennifer J. Carroll (Carroll, 2013) published in this issue of TCPHEE made me recollect my first and most surprising discoveries of how differently same things can be understood in different parts of the world. Probably less unexpectedly, these impressions concern substance abuse and addiction behaviors, similarly to many examples deployed by Jennifer J. Carroll.
The first of these events happened soon after the break-up of the Soviet Union when some of the most active people from the West rushed to discover what was going on behind the opening iron curtain. A director of an addiction clinic, who had just come into contact with a Dutch counterpart, invited me to join the collaboration and the innovation process he planned to launch. Being a participant of the exchange program started within this collaboration, I had an opportunity to discover how addictive behaviors were understood and explained in books (English, 1961; Kooyman, 1992; Viorst, 1986) recommended by the colleagues in the Netherlands and, as I could observe with my own eyes, addressed in everyday practice. This was a jaw-dropping contrast to what I learnt at the soviet medical university and some post-graduate courses, where all the diseases related to alcohol, tobacco, or drug abuse were considered predominantly a result of the substance intake. In the Soviet discourse, the intake itself was understood as 'willful and deliberate' or immoral behavior which, in some cases, was to be rectified in prison-like treatment facilities. In the West, quite oppositely, substance abuse was seen rather as a consequence of a constellation of life-course adversities thoroughly considered by developmental psychology. This approach was obviously deeply ingrained in how practitioners diagnosed and treated their patients.
References
Carroll, J. J. (2013). Key Theories from Critical Medical Anthropology for Public Health Research. Part I: Starting with Foucault: cultures of medicine and meanings of illness. Tobacco Control and Public Health in Eastern Europe, 3(1), 39-46. doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.729258
English, H. B. (1961). Dynamics of child development: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Kooyman, M. (1992). The therapeutic community for addicts: intimacy, parent involvment and treatment outcome: Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Oakes, J. M., & Kaufman, J. S. (2006). Methods in Social Epidemiology: Wiley.
Pertschuk, M. (1988). Smoking control: Media advocacy guidelines: Washington, DC: Advocacy Institute for the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
Pertschuk, M. (2001). Smoke in their eyes: lessons in movement leadership from the tobacco wars: Vanderbilt University Press.
Promoting Health: Intervention Strategies from Social and Behavioral Research. (2000). (B. D. Smedley & S. L. Syme Eds.): National Academies Press.
Sheinfeld-Gorin, S., & Arnold, J. (2008). Health Promotion in Practice: Wiley.
Tones, K., & Tilford, S. (2001). Health Promotion: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Equity: Nelson Thornes.
Viorst, J. (1986). Necessary losses: the loves, illusions, dependencies, and impossible expectations that all of us have to give up in order to grow: Ballantine Books.
