Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4.the Rhetoric of Women and Children's Rights in Indian Psychiatry
4.the Rhetoric of Women and Children's Rights in Indian Psychiatry
Marrow J. Source
Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, California, USA. jmarrow@stanford.edu
Abstract
Despite heavy patient aseloads and limited resour es, psy hiatri professionals of !orth "ndian pu#li tea hing hospitals aspire to deliver psy hoso ial interventions along with pharma euti al or #iologi treatments. $owever, signifi ant o#sta les stand in the way of the su ess of these interventions. %his paper dis usses how the relative so ial and politi al status differen es #etween elite professionals and their non&elite patients and patients' families render pro#lemati many of the psy hoso ial interventions employed. Data were olle ted in the form of o#servations of pra titioner&patient&family attendant intera tions at the (utpatient Department, and interviews with patients, patients' family mem#ers, and psy hiatri professionals at the "npatient Department )**+&)**,. Analysis found that many of the professionals' ver#al interventions attempted to promote egalitarian styles of ommuni ation and relating among patients' family mem#ers. -sy hiatrists per eived mental health pro#lems as stemming from stru tural violen e inherent in the !orth "ndian institution of the family, whi h they des ri#ed as organi.ed hierar hi ally a ording to gender, age, and generation. (ne strategy evident in interventions deployed 'traditional' values, #eliefs, and ma/ims irreverently in an attempt to re&order or level hierar hi al differen es. Another strategy invo0ed the on ept of individual rights in an effort to empower wea0er family mem#ers and enlighten powerful mem#ers regarding the destru tive impa t of relational styles predi ated on ine1uality. Unfortunately, the professionals e/perien ed their psy hoso ial interventions as unsu essful. %he paper suggests that rigid intera tional norms a ross lass statuses, an emphasis on li#eral individual rights versus ommunity rights, and a harsh e/hortative style, ontri#uted to the sense that the interventions alienated non&elite patients and family attendants.