...
首页> 外文期刊>Mathematical research letters: MRL >Contested legitimacy for anthropologists involved in medical humanitarian action: experiences from the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic
【24h】

Contested legitimacy for anthropologists involved in medical humanitarian action: experiences from the 2014-2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic

机译:有争议的人类学家参与医疗人道主义行动的合法性:2014 - 2016年西非埃博拉流行病的经验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The growing involvement of anthropologists in medical humanitarian response efforts has laid bare the moral and ethical consequences that emerge from humanitarian action. Anthropologists are well placed to examine the social, political, cultural and economic dimensions that influence the spread of diseases, and the ways in which to respond to epidemics. Anthropologists are also, with care, able to turn a critical lens on medical humanitarian response. However, there remains some resistance to involving anthropologists in response activities in the field. Drawing on interviews with anthropologists and humanitarian workers involved in the 2014-2016 West African Ebola epidemic, this paper reveals the complex roles taken on by anthropologists in the field and reveals how anthropologists faced questions of legitimacy vis-a-vis communities and responders in their roles in response activities, which focused on acting as 'firefighters' and 'cultural brokers' as well as legitimacy as academic researchers. Whilst these anthropologists were able to conduct research alongside these activities, or draw on anthropological knowledge to inform response activities, questions also arose about the legitimacy of these roles for anthropological academia. We conclude that the process of gaining legitimacy from all these different constituencies is particular to anthropologists and reveals the role of 'giving voice' to communities alongside critiquing medical humanitarianism. Whilst these anthropologists have strengthened the argument for the involvement of anthropologists in epidemic response this anthropological engagement with medical humanitarianism has revealed theoretical considerations more broadly for the discipline, as highlighted through engagement in other fields, especially in human rights and global health.
机译:人类学家在医疗人道主义反应努力中越来越越来越大的阐述了人道主义行动中出现的道德和道德后果。人类学家深受影响影响疾病传播的社会,政治,文化和经济方面,以及对流行病学的方式。人类学家也是如此,能够在医疗人道反应上转动关键镜头。然而,涉及涉及现场反应活动的人类学家存在一些抵抗力。本文介绍了参与2014-2016西非埃博拉疫情的人道主学家和人道主义工作人员的访谈,揭示了该领域人类学家所采取的复杂作用,并揭示了人类学家如何面临合法性Vis-A-Vis社区和响应者的问题在回应活动中的角色侧重于作为“消防员”和“文化经纪人”以及合法性作为学术研究人员。虽然这些人类学家能够与这些活动一起进行研究,但是借鉴人类学知识,以告知响应活动,也出现了这些角色对人类学学术界的合法性。我们得出结论,从所有这些不同的选区获得合法性的过程是人类学家,揭示了“给予声音”与批评医疗人道主义的社区的作用。虽然这些人类学家加强了人类学家在流行病学中的参与的论据,但这种与医疗人道主义的人类学敬业揭示了对纪律更广泛的理论考虑,正如通过在其他领域的参与,特别是在人权和全球健康方面所突出的纪律突出。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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