Читать книгу A Companion to Medical Anthropology онлайн

51 страница из 242

Dissatisfaction with (bio)medicalized medical anthropology has increased since. Methodologically, many condemn the unthinking acceptance of biomedicine’s penchant for separating health-related situations or experiences into discrete, static, countable units or factors. “Research that sets out to generate data that fits within pre-existing categories embraced by the ‘factorial’ model” (Parker and Harper 2005, p. 2) pulls experience to bits, focusing attention on parts rather than the whole, and treating culture as just another variable in a researcher-imposed equation. Instead, “complex interpretive strategies” (p. 4) should be applied. This includes being free to redefine research questions and methods as research moves along, as well as to question initial research assumptions with the express goals of “reconfiguring the boundaries of the problem” (Lambert and McKevitt 2002, p. 212) and making sure that various stakeholders’ standpoints are represented. Happily, health-care experts, too, increasingly recognize the shortcomings of a factorial gaze; medical anthropology has contributed greatly to the nascent growth of a new methodological openness in these circles.