...
首页> 外文期刊>American journal of public health >Critical Race Theory, Race Equity, and Public Health: Toward Antiracism Praxis
【24h】

Critical Race Theory, Race Equity, and Public Health: Toward Antiracism Praxis

机译:批判种族理论,种族平等与公共卫生:走向反种族主义实践

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Racial scholars argue that racism produces rates of morbidity, mortality, and overall well-being that vary depending on socially assigned race. Eliminating racism is therefore central to achieving health equity, but this requires new paradigms that are responsive to structural racism's contemporary influence on health, health inequities, and research. Critical Race Theory is an emerging transdisciplinary, race-equity methodology that originated in legal studies and is grounded in social justice. Critical Race Theory's tools for conducting research and practice are intended to elucidate contemporary racial phenomena, expand the vocabulary with which to discuss complex racial concepts, and challenge racial hierarchies. We introduce Critical Race Theory to the public health community, highlight key Critical Race Theory characteristics (race consciousness, emphases on contemporary societal dynamics and socially marginalized groups, and praxis between research and practice) and describe Critical Race Theory's contribution to a study on racism and HIV testing among African Americans. ALTHOUGH RACE REMAINS salient to public health in a variety of ways, the field's theoretical and methodological conventions inadequately address the complexity with which structural racism influences both health and the production of knowledge about populations, health, and health disparities. Many projects lack clarity about the nature of racial stratification. They conceptualize, measure, and analyze race- and racism-related factors using tools better suited for studying other risk factors. Although structural forces drive inequities, research and interventions disproportionately emphasize individual and interpersonal mechanisms. Additionally, overconfidence in the objectivity of research can blind investigators to the inadvertent influence of a priori assumptions on research. Race as a category denoting skin color was first used to classify human bodies by Francois Bernier, a French physician. 1 The notion of racial groupings was introduced in Carolus Linnaeus's Natural History in 1735 and subsequently advanced by many others. 1 Both Linnaeus's concept of race and the subsequent racial groupings devalued and degraded those classified as non-European. 2 Linnaeus's classification became the foundation on which many countries, including the United States, based their racial policies. Later, racialized policies gained “scientific” affirmation in the work of scholars such as Josiah Nott, whose publications reinforcing White supremacy appeared in 1843 in such respected journals as the American Journal of the Medical Sciences . Prevailing notions about race shaped early scientific research, but because investigators were not critical about their relationships to their racialized social contexts, they were unable to perceive the insidious influence of racism in their work. The contributions of minorities who might have challenged underlying assumptions were largely excluded. Their exclusion buttressed artificially high levels of confidence among researchers about the import and validity of racial findings. Against this backdrop, progressive scholars, many of them racial or ethnic minorities, began to scrutinize knowledge production processes and the implications for minority communities. By the late 20th century, they had begun developing new frameworks such as Critical Race Theory to explicitly account for the influences of racism on both outcomes and research processes. Gilmore defines racism as “the state-sanctioned and/or extralegal production and exploitation of group-differentiated vulnerability to premature death.” 3 (p247) This definition suggests that health for all cannot be achieved if structural racism persists. Eliminating racism, therefore, is part and parcel to achieving the objectives of public health. Table 1 provides definitions of public health and of the Critical Race Theory concepts discussed in this commentary. TABLE 1 Definitions of Public Health and Selected Concepts of Critical Race Theory Concept Definition Public health The art (i.e., practice) and science (i.e., research) of protecting and improving the health of communities Centering in the margins Making the perspectives of socially marginalized groups, rather than those of people belonging to dominant race or culture, the central axis around which discourse on a topic revolves Critical consciousness Digging beneath the surface of information to develop deeper understandings of concepts, relationships, and personal biases Experiential knowledge Ways of knowing that result from critical analysis of one's personal experiences Ordinariness The nature of racism in post–civil rights society: that is, integral and normal rather than aberrational Praxis Iterative process by which the knowledge gained from theory, research, personal experiences, and practice inform one another Primacy Prioritizing the study of racial in
机译:种族学者认为,种族主义会导致发病率,死亡率和整体福祉的发生率,这取决于社会上所分配的种族。因此,消除种族主义是实现健康公平的关键,但这需要新的范式来应对结构性种族主义对健康,健康不平等和研究的当代影响。批判种族理论是一种新兴的跨学科种族平等方法,起源于法律研究,并以社会正义为基础。批判种族理论进行研究和实践的工具旨在阐明当代种族现象,扩大讨论复杂种族概念的词汇量,并挑战种族等级制度。我们向公共卫生界介绍了关键种族理论,重点介绍了关键种族理论的主要特征(种族意识,对当代社会动力和社会边缘化群体的重视以及研究与实践之间的实践),并描述了关键种族理论对种族主义和种族主义研究的贡献。非裔美国人的艾滋病毒检测。尽管种族歧视以多种方式对公共卫生具有重要意义,但该领域的理论和方法惯例并未充分解决结构性种族主义影响健康以及有关人口,健康和健康差异的知识产生的复杂性。许多项目对种族分层的性质缺乏明确的认识。他们使用更适合研究其他风险因素的工具来概念化,衡量和分析与种族和种族主义相关的因素。尽管结构性力量导致不平等,但是研究和干预过分强调个人和人际关系机制。此外,对研究客观性的过度自信可能会使研究者蒙蔽先验假设对研究的无意影响。种族是表示肤色的一个类别,最早是由法国医生Francois Bernier进行的。 1 种族分组的概念在1735年的卡洛斯·林奈(Carolus Linnaeus)的《自然史》(Natural History)中得到了介绍,随后被许多人提倡。 1 林奈的种族概念和随后的种族集团贬低并贬低了非欧洲人。 2 林奈的分类成为许多国家(包括美国)的基础。国家,根据其种族政策。后来,种族化政策在约西亚·诺特(Josiah Nott)等学者的工作中获得了“科学”肯定,约西亚·诺特(1841)于1843年在《美国医学杂志》(American Journal of the Medical Sciences)等受人尊敬的期刊中发表了加强白人至上主义的出版物。关于种族的普遍观念影响了早期的科学研究,但是由于调查人员对其种族与社会环境的关系并不严格,因此他们无法理解种族主义在其工作中的阴险影响。少数人可能对基本假设提出质疑的贡献被排除在外。他们的排斥使研究人员对种族发现的重要性和重要性人为地提高了信心。在这种背景下,进步主义者,其中许多是种族或少数民族,开始研究知识的生产过程及其对少数民族的影响。到20世纪后期,他们已经开始开发诸如“临界种族理论”之类的新框架,以明确考虑种族主义对成果和研究过程的影响。吉尔莫尔(Gilmore)将种族主义定义为“国家认可的和/或法外生产和利用群体差异性过早死亡的脆弱性。” 3(p247)该定义表明,如果结构性种族主义无法实现所有人的健康坚持。因此,消除种族主义是实现公共卫生目标的重要组成部分。表1提供了公共卫生的定义以及本评论中讨论的关键种族理论的概念。表1:公共卫生的定义和关键种族理论的某些概念概念定义公共卫生保护和改善社区健康的艺术(即实践)和科学(即研究),以边缘为中心提出社会边缘化群体的观点而不是属于支配种族或文化的人,围绕主题话题进行讨论的中心轴批判意识挖掘信息的表面之下,以加深对概念,关系和个人偏见的理解体验性知识了解结果的方式从对个人经历的批判性分析中得出结论普遍性后公民权利社会中种族主义的性质:即整体的和正常的而非惯常的实践迭代过程,通过这种迭代过程,从理论,研究,个人经验和实践中获得的知识会相互启发。优先研究种族

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号