All in the Blood: A Review of Aboriginal Australians’ Cultural Beliefs About Blood and Implications for Biospecimen Research (original) (raw)
Related papers
Indigenous Blood and Ethical Regimes in the United States and Australia Since the 1960s
Blood samples collected from members of indigenous communities in the mid-20th century by scientists interested in human variation remain frozen today in institutional repositories around the world. This article focuses on two such collections—one established and maintained in the United States and the other in Australia. Through historical and ethnographic analysis, we show how scientific knowledge about the human species and ethical knowledge about human experimentation are coproduced differently in each national context over time. Through a series of vignettes, we trace the attempts of scientists and indigenous people to assemble and reassemble blood samples, ethical regimes, human biological knowledge, and personhood. In including ourselves—a U.S. historian of science and an Australian anthropologist—in the narrative, we show how humanistic and social scientific analysis contributes to ongoing efforts to maintain indigenous samples.
This paper seeks to explore how biomedical models of health have generated Aboriginal health images that continue to culturally pathologize Aboriginal communities. Early health writing on Aboriginal peoples constructed them as primitive, superstitious, and incapable of complex thought (Waldram, 2004), and described Aboriginal communities as plagued with infectious disease, chronic disease, or social pathology (Waldram, Herring, & Young, 2006). Through the medical construction of pathological communities with primitive Aboriginals one can begin to imagine how biomedical definitions of disease are inextricably linked with the larger structures of authority and power[i] in settler societies such as Canada and the United States, and arguably, around the world. O’Neal, Reading and Leader (1998) explain that “epidemiological knowledge constructs an understanding of Aboriginal society that reinforces unequal power relationships” (p. 230); they emphasise that “an image of sick disorganized communities can be used to justify paternalism and dependency” (ibid). Shields, Bishop and Mazawi (2005) refer to this cycle of construction of deviation from a norm being used to justify a need for paternalism and dependency as ‘pathologizing practices’. If research on Aboriginal health or other dimensions of Aboriginal life (e.g. culture or education) is to challenge pathologizing practices, researchers need to engage with the political economy of knowledge production through an analysis of the relationships between western power, biomedical knowledge, and the construction of Aboriginality and Aboriginal health. In order to explore the unequal relationship between settler and Aboriginal communities, engagement with post-modern, post-colonial, and decolonizing theories have proven useful (Ashcroft, Griffiths, & Tiffin, 2007; Tuhiwai Smith, 1999). Therefore, this paper takes a critical perspective based on postcolonial and decolonizing approaches to examine how the underlying codes of imperialism, colonialism and biomedicine have systematically classified Indigenous peoples as the ‘other’ within hierarchies of race and typologies of difference. The first part of the paper focuses on Aboriginal cosmologies and traditional Indigenous medicine. The second part outlines a critique of the biomedical model of health and its association with colonial practices. The final part examines some examples of research on Aboriginal Health and proposes a combination of approaches to support the resilience and revitalisation of Aboriginal culture, practices and communities.
Journal of Aboriginal Health (Accepted for publication but subsequently withdrawn by authors), 2008
This paper describes the lessons learned from efforts to develop greater understanding between traditional Aboriginal and western medical traditions and practitioners. Between 2003 and 2008, the Building Aboriginal Health Teaching and Learning Capacity project at the University of Calgary’s Faculty of Medicine, sponsored a series of unique, land and community-based gatherings that brought together traditional Aboriginal healers and ceremonial leaders, clinicians and medical students. The gatherings provided an opportunity to develop and pilot curriculum materials, modules and culturally-appropriate teaching methods as well as providing a forum for a much deeper dialogue between medical specialists from both traditional Aboriginal and western clinical backgrounds. To work generatively between cultures has required us to learn how to navigate through complex ethical, social, cultural, political, spiritual and personal terrain, and in this paper, we share some of the process as well as the outcomes of that learning. Our conclusions stress the importance of building respectful and meaningful relationships as a foundation for learning and practice.
Bioethics for clinicians: 18. Aboriginal cultures
2000
ALTHOUGH PHILOSOPHIES AND PRACTICES ANALOGOUS TO BIOETHICS EXIST in Aboriginal cultures, the terms and categorical distinctions of "ethics" and "bioethics" do not generally exist. In this article we address ethical values appropriate to Aboriginal patients, rather than a preconceived "Aboriginal bioethic." Aboriginal beliefs are rooted in the context of oral history and culture. For Aboriginal people, decision- making is best
Science, research and social change in Indigenous health ? evolving ways of knowing
Australian Health Review, 2009
History tells us of the overwhelming destructive influence of exotic culture, politics and knowledge forms upon the worldview and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians. The power of dominant culture to oppress, control and dominate traditional Indigenous ways of knowing and being has been identified as a being a crucial influence on the health status, future hopes and aspirations of Indigenous Australians. Fundamental to this assertion is that the alienating effect of the belief in and application of the scientific method in relation to learning and knowing is a phenomenon that is incompatible with the law and cultural ways of traditional Indigenous people. The establishment of the Centre of Clinical Research Excellence (CCRE) is predicated upon and responds to a deep need in our community today to synthesise the ideological and epistemological premises of an increasing range of cultures and world views. It recognises that clinical research, for example, is important to the health of ...
International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies
Blood metaphors abound in everyday social discourse among both Aboriginal and nonAboriginal people. However, ‘Aboriginal blood talk’, more specifically, is located within a contradictory and contested space in terms of the meanings and values that can be attributed to it by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. In the colonial context, blood talk operated as a tool of oppression for Aboriginal people via blood quantum discourses, yet today, Aboriginal people draw upon notions of blood, namely bloodlines, in articulating their identities. This paper juxtaposes contemporary Aboriginal blood talk as expressed by Aboriginal people against colonial blood talk and critically examines the ongoing political and intellectual governance regarding the validity of this talk in articulating Aboriginalities.