African Health and Society - Research Paper Example

? History – African Health and Society Introduction During the colonial era in Africa, there were constant conflicts and compromises between the pre-existing African traditional, social, economic, and political development and the Western social, economic, and political ideologies. When Britain colonized Kenya there was the emergence of wage labor, the development of the European colonizer economy, and the growth of colonial trade started, which affected the traditional production patterns. The political and social developments in Kenya demanded the development of social facilities including hospitals and schools (Ndege 2002, 1).1 The introduction of Western biomedicine in Africa among other changes brought by colonizers created debates among the locals regarding how to incorporate these changes. Africans relied on traditional medicine emanating mainly from plants. There were other believes about health and healing and some Africans believed on praying their God for healing. Though Africans criticized certain features of Western biomedicine, there were a variety of compromises and accommodations. Conflicts The proponents of Western biomedicine espoused an uncompromising stance toward African healing strategies. Through the introduction of Western biomedicine, the colonizers aimed to supersede traditional values, beliefs, and knowledge that were vital to African therapeutic practices. The Africans and Europeans were involved in conflict where the Africans aimed at guarding their traditional health practices, whereas the West aimed at replacing these African traditional health practices. In Kenya, the conflicts were manifest in avoidance of public hospitals and drug prescriptions, formal protests, and indifference to the European public health campaigns (Ndege 2002, 4).2 One conflict arose as a result of the interpretation of the causes of diseases. Western biomedicine came along with hospitals and medical laboratories. This introduction and institutionalization of Western biomedicine led to empirical and intellectual conversations among Africans and the state regarding issues and implications concerning health, sickness, and therapy. The colonizers relied on laboratory based system to examine the causes of diseases, whereas Africans relied on traditional explanations concerning causes of diseases. The colonial government conducted aggressive public health campaigns, and this weakened the attempts by Africans to comprehend the objective of the state officials (Ndege 2002, 2).2 The colonial state established commissions of inquiry to address the problems of race and conflict, injustice and equality, and the power of the rulers and the followers. The colonial state gave little attention to the function of such commissions on the issue of health care (Ndege 2002, 3). For example, there is an argument that such commissions in South Africa are established by the state with an aim of legitimizing citizens’ minds and what the government desires, which the government is incapable of accomplishing through formal policy proclamations. However, the appointing authority of these commissions determined the final report of the commissions. A conflict arose in regard to recognition of Western biomedicine and African biomedicine. The laboratory system of the Western biomedicine enabled the identification of the causes of the diseases through the examination of the blood and other tissues. The colonial state absorbed, extended, and customized the medical operation of blood and other tissues, thereby embracing this brand of medicine irrevocably to the administration of the colonies. The colonial state did not accord similar recognition to the African medicine. The instantaneous conflict originated from the refutation of indigenous curative knowledge, agency, and personhood. The denial motivated a domestic, cultural critique, which questioned the very principles that Western biomedicine advocated (Ndege 2002, 5).3 In particular, this happened during the shadow-boxing era of medical research. This period lacked a systematic and accurate knowledge driven strategy on how to manage and contain epidemics. For approximately two decades, the Europeans lacked a solid grasp of the degree of the epidemic challenges. They tried many methods to contain the epidemics. These methods failed to generate instantaneous results since they were based on British experience and not on the knowledge of conditions in Kenya. The aggressive European medical systems evoked critiques from Africans to the government and biomedicine understanding of the cause and effect of epidemics. The dismissal and consequent marginalization of the African ways of diagnosis and treatment reduced the government to more or less the single health campaigner in an epidemic and cultural background in which it had little knowledge (Ndege 2002, 6).4 There is another conflict regarding health knowledge, which emanates from diversity of African beliefs concerning healthcare and health knowledge. Distinguishing knowledge and belief is a challenging task in Africa. The distinction of knowledge, especially in health and medicine, is contested in relation to the belief system. The health knowledge from which an individual or society selects to believe affects the manner that health seeking conducts, health treatment choices and discourses on health matters are pursued in sub-Saharan Africa. The cultural values and religious beliefs affect the health seeking conducts of Africans and service of health providers (Falola 2008, 20).5 The Kenyan government has historically stigmatized optional medicine practitioners from the Abuluyia community. While stigmatization of HIV/AIDS in bhurri-mnhuuru in Guinea and South African victims seems commonly accepted, alternative medication in Kenya has lingered famous because of its efficacy, affordability, and accessibility despite criticism and derogation through neocolonial and colonial government policies. Recently, through the efforts of the academic research, the Kenyan government has legitimately recognized the autonomy of alternative medical practitioners to perform their expertise on a professional basis (Falola 2008, 150).6 6There has been the conflict among worldwide opinions between scientific pragmatism and religious faith. Mensah conducted a study involving Christian doctors in Ghana. The doctors expressed their conviction in the spiritual perspective to illness and health through individual experiences, but it not frequently acceptable to hold such opinions among those who consider in biomedical absolutes. The social stigma also affects the health seeking behavior of patients, especially HIV/AIDS patients. Stigmatization and societal shame affects patients’ treatment decisions among most Africans (Falola 2008, 170). Accommodations and Compromises Besides the strands of conflicts, which attended the establishment and institutionalization of Western biomedicine, there existed a variety of compromises and accommodations. The compromises and accommodations were negotiated in mission stations, schools and commission of inquiry on the topic of health and therapeutic care. This was noticeable in numerous Africans who were not willing to fully accept Western biomedicine, and those who pioneered the growth of the colonial health care nationwide. When epidemics of sleeping sickness, smallpox, bubonic plague, and pneumonia started to be an enduring feature of the nation’s disease regime, the positions of both the Europeans and Kenyans began to soften. The increasing mortality rates and the interdependent characteristic of the colonial economy started to draw attention to the relentless danger of disease outbreak in one region of the state spreading to other regions (Ndege 2002, 8).7 There are three distinct aspects of the origin of African biomedicine. First, similar to other historical- cultural development s, biomedicine represents an ontological whole, which is encompassed of multiple, mutually dependent ontological spheres. The interrelated character of these spheres shows that biomedicine is a dynamic medical system subject to continuing change and development. Therefore, biomedicine is a fundamental prerequisite for the emergence of African biomedicine in the 20th century. The second aspect is the expedition of the biomedicine to Africa. The expedition acted as an expansion of the European subjugation and colonial regulation over the African continent (Baranov 2008, 31).8 The application of biomedicine in Africa by Europeans took the form of incorporating capitalist world system. Biomedicine consistently pulled Africa more and more firmly into the course of the political, economic, and historical-cultural formations and procedures, which entailed the capitalist world system. The third aspect of Africa biomedicine is the basic characteristics of African pluralistic medical systems. Despite the rich diversity of the pluralistic medical systems, various common elements could be eminent. A lot of these elements, including holistic interpretation of disease and realistic attitudes toward alternative medical systems, facilitated the acceptance of certain features of biomedicine without sacrificing the cardinal beliefs and values of African pluralistic medicine (Baranov, 2008, 32).9 As 10 Ndege observes, through the persisting conflict among colonial state and the colonized regarding health systems, Europeans structured the health care system to address only the medical concerns of Europeans and township dwellers (Ndege, 2002, 9). The health care system was designed to protect the parties from epidemics, which were perceived too African and rural in nature. The outbreak of bubonic plague, especially in the major towns of Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu offered a rationalization for the colonial government to proceed with the arrangement of towns in terms of separate groups; Asians, Africans and Europeans. The distribution of health centers in urban areas resulted to unequal access of services, where services were offered on the basis of race. The colonial economy interdependency distorted the dichotomy of European versus African, and urban areas versus rural areas. Africans worked on the settlers’ ranches, and they maintained strong links with their origin homes. The economic reality and the emergent of health problems necessitated the colonial government to intervene. The colonial government introduced the educational systems and established various hospitals, to address the health problems (Ndege 2002, 10).11 Africans relied on their traditional beliefs in the interpretation of the causes and effects of diseases. The traditional beliefs entailed religious elucidations and cultural interpretations of the causes and effects of diseases. Since some traditional African societies practiced sorcery and witchcraft, they believed that a person became sick as a result of witchcraft, and the disease could only be cured through witchcraft. Various Africans used plants as a source of medicine for the diseases. Certain plants were used to make medicine for various diseases, but the identification of the disease relied on the cultural interpretation of the symptoms (Feierman and John, eds 1992, 30).12 This method of treatment worked fairly well for some diseases, but it was not functional for epidemics such as smallpox in Kenya. Kenya is composed of various communities, which had different religious belief systems. Africans relied on these religious beliefs systems, to interpret the causes and effects of diseases. As 13Vaughan (1991, 78) observes, the introduction of the Western religious beliefs systems, especially Christianity, helped the Europeans to institutionalize Western biomedicine. Along with the expansion of Christianity in Kenya, British missionaries established mission schools and hospitals. The mission hospitals helped in the adoption of the Western biomedicine through the establishment of medical laboratories and drug prescriptions to patients. After independence, the neocolonial government embraced the Western biomedicine, but due to poorly structured policies, there were low levels of medical research. However, in the XX century, most African states have embraced Western biomedicine and allowed the application African biomedicine in the healthcare sector. Conclusion In conclusion, the introduction of Western biomedicine and its consequent institutionalization in colonial Africa entailed cross-cultural procedures, which involved compromises and conflicts. In Kenya, there were constant compromises and conflicts among the pre-existing African traditional, social, economic, and political principles and the Western social, economic, and political principles. The British encountered various conflicts during public health campaigns and institutionalization of the Western biomedicine in Kenya. The conflicts arose from traditional beliefs regarding the causes and effects of diseases and the Europeans view on the same. However, there were compromises among the Europeans and Africans regarding the development of the healthcare system in Africa. References Baranov, David. The African Transformation of Western Medicine and the Dynamics of Global Cultural Exchange. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2008. Falola, Toyin. Health Knowledge and Belief Systems in Africa. Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. Feierman, Steven, and John M. Janzen, eds. The Social Basis of Health and Healing in Africa. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992. Ndege, George Oduor. Health, State, and Society in Kenya. Rochester, New York: University of Rochester Press, 2002. Vaughan, Megan. Curing Their Ills: Colonial Power and African Illness. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1991. Read More