Culture, Health, and Ways of Knowing

     The dominant culture controls, oppresses and forms traditional ways of knowing and being, being an important impact on human health status, hope and expectation. Ways of knowing are as diverse as the cultures and the ways to knowledge understanding are not easily transformed. I found the issue of the naming of child in a family, mentioned in Airhihenbuwa’s book, is very interesting. Similarly, the naming has cultural meaning in China as in Africa. The name is a symbolic link of history with life of people. Chinese parents design the name of children aiming to place their aspiration, purpose and hope, especially involving health. For example, hoping children will be healthy, parents name children “Kang” (means health), or “Qubing” (far away from disease); female names are usually using flowers names, such as “Lan” means orchid with parents’ hope of beauty; to respect history or religion, people use “Xin” (belief) or “Mu” (revere) in their name; “Zhong” (loyalty) reflects a expected social ethos. Furthermore, according to the birth date and time of the child, it is speculated what element (Five Elements: metal, wood, water, fire, earth) the child lacks or conflicts with in the life. In this case, a corresponding word is added in the name to enable the five elements balanced, in order to keep the child healthy. The naming of children is a symbol of the attempt of family to follow the cultural ritual and reproduce themselves, making meanings within cultural meanings, to respond to the world. Thus, how this cultural issue is related to health? As Airhihenbuwa claimed, I agree that the survival of children depends on the survival of the family. The naming mirrors the role of children in the context of family, which is an aspect of expectations of parents. The expectations are shaped based on the perceived social structure and norms that people understand.

     The assumption that saying distress at menopause for Japanese women is inappropriately explained as natural and inevitable in both biomedical and psychosocial perspectives, which is proposed by Lock (1992), reminds me a question. How do we, researchers, or practitioners change their existed ways of knowing and being to improve patients’ health outcome? Or how do we deal with their ways of knowing? I think, may be the first step, before indigenous people actively engage in developing healthier life, is to acknowledge, face, and cure the wounds resulted from historical trauma, colonization, and inequality in health, as well as life experience. A sensitive identity is needed here, with respect, beneficence, and trust for each one in practice. Stepping to a further road, how to encourage health-related behavior change? Basically, I think there are some elements playing positive roles: awareness of the problem, skills to evaluate the environment and examine information, support of social network including family, friends and professionals, and more importantly, strengthened self-esteem, which increase the passion and willing to promote health status. Individuals obtain ability and power through acquiring the skills to deal with and manipulate the forces that influence the individual, although in fact it is very difficult, since sometimes people even are not conscious. It is the result of politics, economy, and culture forming the ways of knowing and wellbeing of indigenous people together. Indigenous people need to gain access to learning and being understood in a comfortable and respectful way.