{"title":"Does \"Susto\" Really Exist? Indigenous Knowledge and Fright Disorders Among Q'eqchi' Maya in Belize.","authors":"James B Waldram, 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.
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.