I have done my research and made an outline with the main points I want in my paper. Feel free to change it if it makes more sense and thanks again in advance.
However, I have not included any points from my side as all the information below is from references. Please try to paraphrase as much as you can and quote when necessary. Also this paper is in Chicago citation style.
Cross-cultural Psychiatry: A need for a culture-free bias on diagnosis
Intro – introduce the topic and describe it
Cross- cultural psychiatry is psychiatry that is without any cultural bias. There is a growing concern about the diagnosis process and the influence of culture on diagnosis and experimentation. There is a growing need for a bias free diagnosis to accommodate individuals from different cultures who grow with different expectations and environments.
Psychiatry
Main Body – 3 paragraphs.
1st – praising and commenting on current Psychiatry based on present and past
2nd – Describing in detail cross-cultural psychiatry, its advantages over cultural bias in psychiatry
3rd – comparing and talking about the advantages of cc psych over present day culture bias psych
Conclusion
Tips – use although, start narrow with intro,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755270/
Cultural psychiatry deals with the description, definition, assessment, and management of all psychiatric conditions, inasmuch as they reflect and are subjected to the patterning influence of cultural factors. It uses concepts and instruments from the social and biological sciences, to advance a full understanding of psychopathological events and their management by patients, families, professionals and the community at large
Tseng WS. Handbook of cultural psychiatry. San Diegor: Academic Press; 2001.
Favazza AR, Oman M. Foundations of cultural psychiatry. In: Mezzich JE, Berganza CE, editors. Cultural psychopathology. New York: Columbia University Press; 1984. pp. 15–35.
It cannot be restricted to being a psychiatric subspecialty, because culture impregnates every clinical and non-clinical event in any and all diseases.
The patient’s cultural background and identity must be thoroughly understood by the clinician, and its impact duly recognized and evaluated. Involving a crucial set of factors, culture plays several roles in the diagnostic process
Alarcón RD, Westermeyer J, Foulks EF. Clinical relevance of contemporary cultural psychiatry. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1999;187:465–471.
They can be agents in the expression of clinical symptoms, reflecting the dominant themes of the historical period in which the illness occurs. They are certainly decisive elements in treatment.
Those that find ways to provide decent cultural information, and gather solid cultural data, learn to recognize what is cultural in the clinical area generally called “environment”. If and when this is done, the diagnosis will then be truly comprehensive, individualized and, for all these reasons, will also possess the humanistic seal that must always be at the core of any clinical interaction in medicine and, more particularly, in psychiatry.
Unfortunately, these advantages meet disadvantages resulting from the criticisms discussed above 31. Culture is said to be too broad a concept, too complex in content, and too heterogeneous in nature (the hundreds, even thousands of cultural and subcultural groups, languages and dialects all over the world are frequently cited as proof) to be covered by relatively simple clinical interactions
Kirmayer IJ. Cultural evaluations in the response to psychiatric disorders and emo-tional distress. Soc Sci Med. 1989;29:327–339.
The socalled “culture-bound syndromes” deserve special comments. These are clinical pictures said to be uniquely related to specific cultural characteristics of the human groups in which they occur; as such, their etiological, pathogenic and clinical manifestations do not correspond to the conventional entities included in mostly Western-based nomenclatures.
The trajectory of today’s two main nosological systems has made clear that culture, as an etiopathogenic and pathoplastic factor, and as a contributing component of severity, has a significant impact on psychiatric diagnosis. But, such impact goes even beyond: every clinician needs to know about, and assess pertinent cultural variables, family data, explanatory models, strengths and weaknesses of individual patients and their communities of origin. Cultural psychiatry, as a young but robust discipline, helps in the systematization of these pieces of knowledge, thanks to its growing connections with both neurobiological and social sciences.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00048-014-0113-9
The conditions for the genesis of psychiatry in the phase of the formation of a nation state can be observed extremely well in Japan because – as will be shown below – there were traditional ways of dealing with the mentally ill in society in Japan, but these are due to the fractional introduction of western psychiatry at the turn of the 20th century had to collide with it inevitably
In an institution he visited in Kyoto, he saw an effort to build up psychiatry based on the European model, but at the same time had to state that the lack of certain cultural characteristics of the Japanese, such as empathy, corrupts the traditional ties to European practices:
The dementia praecox , the premature dementia, was one of the most powerful concept creations in psychiatry in the 20th century, which was coined by Kraepelin. In his nosology, under the term dementia praecox, some endogenous clinical pictures that had previously been treated separately, whose course showed certain similarities, could be brought together. With the typical onset age in youth and the noticeably rapid progression, this form of dementia should, according to Kraepelin, lead to severe personality disorders
Its unparalleled attention among psychiatrists earned the dementia praecox because of its relative abundance in Europe and America, “dementia praecox is undoubtedly one of the most common forms of mental illness of all”
This term first manifested itself in the psychiatric discourse of Japan with the Kraepelin student Miyake (cf. Miyake 1938 : 234). In the Japanese Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry , one of the first publications by Japanese psychiatrists to gain a foothold in international psychiatric discourse, Miyake published his version of a psychiatric location of Japan. Under the title “A Psychiatric Bird’s-Eye View of Nippon” (Miyake 1926) a cartography of mental illnesses in Japan was drawn up with excessive use of statistics. According to documentation in the Matsuzawa Clinic in Tokyo (ibid .: 9 f.), Both men (4,858 of a total of 13,576 cases) and women (2,064 of 5,437 cases) had the highest proportion of diagnoses due to dementia praecox .
But, and this is the crux of the matter, it allowed comparative psychiatry to determine variously different manifestations, not only of dementia praecox , but of psychoses in general among the various peoples of the earth. In this way, a special psychosis theoretically changes from a pathological category to a diffuse grouping of pathological states, which can enable ascriptions of a certain psycho-cultural constitution from an ethnocentric perspective.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2763492?resultClick=1
Knowledge gaps persist regarding racial and ethnic variation in late-life depression, including differences in specific depressive symptoms and disparities in care
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2004.00509.x
Regarding the prevalence of psychiatric morbidity, schizophrenia and related psychoses especially are reported to be over-represented among immigrants, particularly in studies from the UK, the Benelux countries and Scandinavia (6-15). The findings on prevalence rates of other mental disorders are not as clear-cut as those in the case of schizophrenia (16, 17).
•
Asylum seekers are a special group within the immigrants. Findings indicate that the relative risk of psychiatric admission is higher for asylum seekers than for natives or other immigrants (14).
•
In addition, the higher number of coercive admissions in migrants compared with natives (18) results in both an increased utilization of and an intensified care in mental health services.
•
There is a gender difference in psychological distress among migrants, with women being reported to have more distress and higher symptom rates (19).
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10912-017-9501-1
I argue that the present manual runs the risk of making context an “ethnic dividing line” between those seen as culturally “other” and those who are not.
The article focuses on the abovementioned claim of having made DSM-5 more sensitive to cultural issues
Here, I take criteria for Panic Anxiety as an illustrative example of how the manual continues to construct some symptoms of psychiatric distress as universal, whereas others are construed of as linked only to particular groups of people.
Cultural psychiatry is a research field that aims to merge “anthropological methods and conceptualizations with traditional psychiatric and psychological approaches” in order to investigate cross-cultural aspects of psychopathology (Lopez and Guarnaccia 2000, 571).
Lopez, S.R., and P.J. Guarnaccia. 2000. “Cultural Psychopathology: Uncovering the Social World of Mental Illness.” Annual Review of Psychology 51 (1): 571–599.
there are indications that culture takes part in creating “specific sources of stress and distress” (Alarcón et al. 2002, 221) and that there might be yet “un-identified cultural factors” that affect, for instance, comorbidity or severity of illness (Alarcón et al. 2002, 222).
Categorizing the research field of cultural psychiatry, Alarcon et al. (2002, 220) identifies three different “strands” starting with the study of asylums and colonialist psychiatrists that identified and defined different “culture-bound syndromes”, syndromes that only exist within a certain, culturally defined, population. A second strand focuses on culturally diverse populations with a main interest in refugees and migrants’ presumed stress from migration and acculturation processes. The third strand includes a more comprehensive investigation of nosology and diagnostic procedures. This strand acknowledges that also psychiatric knowledge and practice are, in themselves, outcomes of specific socio-political, economic and cultural contexts (see also Kirmayer and Minas 2000).
Alarcón, R.D., C.C. Bell, L. Kirmayer, K. Lin, B. Üstün, and K.L. Wisner. 2002. “Beyond the Funhouse Mirrors: Research Agenda on Culture and Psychiatric Diagnosis.” In A Research Agenda for DSM-V, edited by D. J. Kupfer, M. B. First, and D. A. Regier, 219–281. Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Association.
https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/psyc.2011.74.3.187
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|