Invisible Black Women: Medical Bias and the Silencing of Enslaved Black Women in 18th- and 19th-Century British West Indian Medical Discourse.

IF 3.9 3区 工程技术 Q2 BIOLOGY
Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine Pub Date : 2025-09-30 eCollection Date: 2025-09-01 DOI:10.59249/PVVB2237
Vicki M Richardson
{"title":"Invisible Black Women: Medical Bias and the Silencing of Enslaved Black Women in 18th- and 19th-Century British West Indian Medical Discourse.","authors":"Vicki M Richardson","doi":"10.59249/PVVB2237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the historical roots of medical neglect experienced by Black women, focusing on the 18th- and 19th-century British West Indies. During this period, White male physicians constructed racialized and gendered frameworks of disease that excluded enslaved Black women from diagnosis, care, and medical legitimacy. Positioned not as patients but as reproducers and laborers, their suffering was either pathologized or dismissed. Drawing on medical treatises and plantation manuals, this article argues that enslaved Black women were relegated to a space of medical liminality: recognized as reproductive laborers but denied clinical legitimacy or voice. It advances three key arguments. First, it explores how physicians framed Black women as morally deficient and biologically inferior, blaming their behavior for illness. Second, it shows how reproductive outcomes like miscarriage and abortion were weaponized to portray Black women as lacking maternal instinct. Third, it examines how female-only diagnoses, such as <i>Chlorosis</i>, excluded Black enslaved women, even when they presented similar symptoms. Instead, they were assigned stigmatized conditions, like \"dirt-eating,\" reinforcing assumptions of biological difference and unworthiness of care. By tracing this history, the article reveals the foundations of contemporary racial disparities in women's healthcare. It concludes by linking these colonial ideologies to current maternal health outcomes, where Black women in the United States still face disproportionate rates of medical dismissal and death. This legacy underscores the urgent need to confront the historical frameworks that continue to shape how Black women are treated in medicine today.</p>","PeriodicalId":48617,"journal":{"name":"Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine","volume":"98 3","pages":"273-283"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12466277/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59249/PVVB2237","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the historical roots of medical neglect experienced by Black women, focusing on the 18th- and 19th-century British West Indies. During this period, White male physicians constructed racialized and gendered frameworks of disease that excluded enslaved Black women from diagnosis, care, and medical legitimacy. Positioned not as patients but as reproducers and laborers, their suffering was either pathologized or dismissed. Drawing on medical treatises and plantation manuals, this article argues that enslaved Black women were relegated to a space of medical liminality: recognized as reproductive laborers but denied clinical legitimacy or voice. It advances three key arguments. First, it explores how physicians framed Black women as morally deficient and biologically inferior, blaming their behavior for illness. Second, it shows how reproductive outcomes like miscarriage and abortion were weaponized to portray Black women as lacking maternal instinct. Third, it examines how female-only diagnoses, such as Chlorosis, excluded Black enslaved women, even when they presented similar symptoms. Instead, they were assigned stigmatized conditions, like "dirt-eating," reinforcing assumptions of biological difference and unworthiness of care. By tracing this history, the article reveals the foundations of contemporary racial disparities in women's healthcare. It concludes by linking these colonial ideologies to current maternal health outcomes, where Black women in the United States still face disproportionate rates of medical dismissal and death. This legacy underscores the urgent need to confront the historical frameworks that continue to shape how Black women are treated in medicine today.

看不见的黑人妇女:医学偏见和被奴役的黑人妇女在18世纪和19世纪英国西印度医学话语沉默。
这篇文章考察了黑人妇女经历的医疗忽视的历史根源,重点放在18世纪和19世纪的英属西印度群岛。在此期间,白人男性医生构建了种族化和性别化的疾病框架,将被奴役的黑人妇女排除在诊断、护理和医疗合法性之外。他们不是被定位为病人,而是被定位为繁殖者和劳动者,他们的痛苦要么被病态化,要么被忽视。根据医学论文和种植园手册,这篇文章认为,被奴役的黑人妇女被贬谪到一个医学限制的空间:被认为是生殖劳动者,但被剥夺了临床合法性或发言权。它提出了三个关键论点。首先,它探讨了医生如何将黑人女性诬陷为道德缺陷和生理劣势,并将疾病归咎于她们的行为。其次,它显示了流产和堕胎等生育结果是如何被武器化的,以描绘黑人女性缺乏母性本能。第三,它研究了女性专用诊断,如黄萎病,如何排除被奴役的黑人妇女,即使她们表现出类似的症状。相反,他们被分配了污名化的条件,比如“吃土”,强化了生物差异和不值得照顾的假设。通过追溯这段历史,文章揭示了当代妇女保健方面种族差异的根源。最后,它将这些殖民意识形态与当前的孕产妇健康结果联系起来,在美国,黑人妇女仍然面临着不成比例的医疗解雇和死亡率。这一遗留问题凸显了我们迫切需要面对那些仍在影响黑人女性在医疗领域如何接受治疗的历史框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine
Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-General Biochemistry,Genetics and Molecular Biology
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine (YJBM) is a graduate and medical student-run, peer-reviewed, open-access journal dedicated to the publication of original research articles, scientific reviews, articles on medical history, personal perspectives on medicine, policy analyses, case reports, and symposia related to biomedical matters. YJBM is published quarterly and aims to publish articles of interest to both physicians and scientists. YJBM is and has been an internationally distributed journal with a long history of landmark articles. Our contributors feature a notable list of philosophers, statesmen, scientists, and physicians, including Ernst Cassirer, Harvey Cushing, Rene Dubos, Edward Kennedy, Donald Seldin, and Jack Strominger. Our Editorial Board consists of students and faculty members from Yale School of Medicine and Yale University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. All manuscripts submitted to YJBM are first evaluated on the basis of scientific quality, originality, appropriateness, contribution to the field, and style. Suitable manuscripts are then subject to rigorous, fair, and rapid peer review.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信