Does "Susto" Really Exist? Indigenous Knowledge and Fright Disorders Among Q'eqchi' Maya in Belize.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
James B Waldram, Andrew R Hatala
{"title":"Does \"Susto\" Really Exist? Indigenous Knowledge and Fright Disorders Among Q'eqchi' Maya in Belize.","authors":"James B Waldram,&nbsp;Andrew R Hatala","doi":"10.1007/s11013-022-09777-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Susto is one of the most common disorders referenced in the medical anthropological and cultural psychiatric literature. This article questions if \"susto\" as understood in cultural psychiatric terms, especially in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM), is in fact a single \"cultural concept of distress.\" There is extensive cross-cultural and intracultural variability regarding fright-related disorders in the ethnographic literature. What is often labeled \"susto\" may be in reality a variety of distinct disorders, or lacking in the two signature components found in the cultural psychiatric literature: the existence of a \"fright,\" and subsequent soul loss. There has been significant polysemic and geographical drift in the idiom label, the result of colonialism in Mesoamerica, which has overlayed but not necessarily supplanted local knowledge. Using data from fifteen years of research with Q'eqchi' (Maya) healers and their patients, we demonstrate how important variability in signs, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of fright-related disorders renders any simple declaration that this is a singular \"susto\" problematic. We argue for a careful consideration of the knowledge of Indigenous medical specialists charged with treating fright-related disorders and against the inclination to view variability as insignificant. Such consideration suggests that Indigenous forms of fright-related disorder are not susto as presented commonly in the DSM and cultural psychiatric literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":47634,"journal":{"name":"Culture Medicine and Psychiatry","volume":"47 2","pages":"372-401"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture Medicine and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-022-09777-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Susto is one of the most common disorders referenced in the medical anthropological and cultural psychiatric literature. This article questions if "susto" as understood in cultural psychiatric terms, especially in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM), is in fact a single "cultural concept of distress." There is extensive cross-cultural and intracultural variability regarding fright-related disorders in the ethnographic literature. What is often labeled "susto" may be in reality a variety of distinct disorders, or lacking in the two signature components found in the cultural psychiatric literature: the existence of a "fright," and subsequent soul loss. There has been significant polysemic and geographical drift in the idiom label, the result of colonialism in Mesoamerica, which has overlayed but not necessarily supplanted local knowledge. Using data from fifteen years of research with Q'eqchi' (Maya) healers and their patients, we demonstrate how important variability in signs, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of fright-related disorders renders any simple declaration that this is a singular "susto" problematic. We argue for a careful consideration of the knowledge of Indigenous medical specialists charged with treating fright-related disorders and against the inclination to view variability as insignificant. Such consideration suggests that Indigenous forms of fright-related disorder are not susto as presented commonly in the DSM and cultural psychiatric literature.

“Susto”真的存在吗?伯利兹Q'eqchi'玛雅人的土著知识和恐惧障碍。
Susto是医学人类学和文化精神病学文献中最常见的疾病之一。这篇文章质疑,在精神病学文化术语中,特别是在美国精神病学协会的诊断和统计手册(DSM)中,“susto”是否实际上是一个单一的“痛苦文化概念”。在民族志文献中,关于与恐惧有关的疾病存在广泛的跨文化和文化差异。通常被贴上“susto”标签的东西实际上可能是各种不同的疾病,或者缺乏文化精神病学文献中发现的两个标志性组成部分:“恐惧”的存在,以及随后的灵魂丧失。在中美洲殖民主义的影响下,习语标签出现了明显的多义性和地理漂移,覆盖了当地知识,但不一定取代了当地知识。通过对Q'eqchi'(玛雅)治疗师和他们的病人15年的研究数据,我们证明了与恐惧相关的疾病在体征、症状、诊断、治疗和预后方面的可变性是多么重要,这使得任何简单地宣称这是一个单一的“susto”问题。我们主张仔细考虑负责治疗与恐惧有关的疾病的土著医学专家的知识,反对认为可变性无关紧要的倾向。这样的考虑表明,土著形式的恐惧相关障碍并不像DSM和文化精神病学文献中普遍呈现的那样。
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry is an international and interdisciplinary forum for the publication of work in three interrelated fields: medical and psychiatric anthropology, cross-cultural psychiatry, and related cross-societal and clinical epidemiological studies. The journal publishes original research, and theoretical papers based on original research, on all subjects in each of these fields. Interdisciplinary work which bridges anthropological and medical perspectives and methods which are clinically relevant are particularly welcome, as is research on the cultural context of normative and deviant behavior, including the anthropological, epidemiological and clinical aspects of the subject. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry also fosters systematic and wide-ranging examinations of the significance of culture in health care, including comparisons of how the concept of culture is operationalized in anthropological and medical disciplines. With the increasing emphasis on the cultural diversity of society, which finds its reflection in many facets of our day to day life, including health care, Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry is required reading in anthropology, psychiatry and general health care libraries.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信