"From family to community and politics, relationships establish the social conditions in which health is forged. The inequalities that structure these relationships have left the health of women living in urban poverty chronically vulnerable. Yet for women living in slums, there is no other option than to depend on someone. Based on fourteen months of intensive fieldwork in a Delhi slum, this book explores how women respond to the social inequalities that threaten their health by focusing on inner well-being. Women's strategies to cultivate their moral selves foster their mental health while enabling them to navigate unreliable relationships"--Provided by publisher
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, India's flagship sanitation intervention, set out to end open defecation by October 2019. While the program improved toilet coverage nationally, large regional disparities in construction and use remain. Our study used ethnographic methods to explore perspectives on open defecation and latrine use, and the socio-economic and political reasons for these perspectives, in rural Bihar. We draw on insights from social epidemiology and political ecology to explore the structural determinants of latrine ownership and use. Though researchers have often pointed to rural residents' preference for open defecation, we found that people were aware of its many risks. We also found that (i) while sanitation research and "behavior change" campaigns often conflate the reluctance to adopt latrines with a preference for open defecation, this is an erroneous conflation; (ii) a subsidy can help (some) households to construct latrines but the amount of the subsidy and the manner of its disbursement are key to its usefulness; and (iii) widespread resentment towards what many rural residents view as a development bias against rural areas reinforces distrust towards the government overall and its Swachh Bharat Abhiyan-funded latrines in particular. These social-structural explanations for the slow uptake of sanitation in rural Bihar (and potentially elsewhere) deserve more attention in sanitation research and promotion efforts.
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, India's flagship sanitation intervention, set out to end open defecation by October 2019. While the program improved toilet coverage nationally, large regional disparities in construction and use remain. Our study used ethnographic methods to explore perspectives on open defecation and latrine use, and the socio-economic and political reasons for these perspectives, in rural Bihar. We draw on insights from social epidemiology and political ecology to explore the structural determinants of latrine ownership and use. Though researchers have often pointed to rural residents' preference for open defecation, we found that people were aware of its many risks. We also found that (i) while sanitation research and "behavior change" campaigns often conflate the reluctance to adopt latrines with a preference for open defecation, this is an erroneous conflation; (ii) a subsidy can help (some) households to construct latrines but the amount of the subsidy and the manner of its disbursement are key to its usefulness; and (iii) widespread resentment towards what many rural residents view as a development bias against rural areas reinforces distrust towards the government overall and its Swachh Bharat Abhiyan-funded latrines in particular. These social-structural explanations for the slow uptake of sanitation in rural Bihar (and potentially elsewhere) deserve more attention in sanitation research and promotion efforts.
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, India's flagship sanitation intervention, set out to end open defecation by October 2019. While the program improved toilet coverage nationally, large regional disparities in construction and use remain. Our study used ethnographic methods to explore perspectives on open defecation and latrine use, and the socio-economic and political reasons for these perspectives, in rural Bihar. We draw on insights from social epidemiology and political ecology to explore the structural determinants of latrine ownership and use. Though researchers have often pointed to rural residents' preference for open defecation, we found that people were aware of its many risks. We also found that (i) while sanitation research and "behavior change" campaigns often conflate the reluctance to adopt latrines with a preference for open defecation, this is an erroneous conflation; (ii) a subsidy can help (some) households to construct latrines but the amount of the subsidy and the manner of its disbursement are key to its usefulness; and (iii) widespread resentment towards what many rural residents view as a development bias against rural areas reinforces distrust towards the government overall and its Swachh Bharat Abhiyan-funded latrines in particular. These social-structural explanations for the slow uptake of sanitation in rural Bihar (and potentially elsewhere) deserve more attention in sanitation research and promotion efforts.
Scholarship on idioms of distress has emphasized cross-cultural variation, but devoted less attention to intra-cultural variation—specifically, how the legitimacy of distress may vary according to the context in which it is expressed, social position, and interaction with medical categories of distress. This variation can pose challenges for interventionists seeking to establish culturally acceptable ways of identifying distress and creating relevant resources for recovery. We describe efforts over three years (2014–2016) to identify and adapt a culturally appropriate evidence-based intervention for depressed rural Appalachian women. Though the prevalence of depression among rural women is high, limited services and social barriers restrict treatment access. Formative research revealed varied understandings of distress. Depression was (a) medicalized as a treatable condition, (b) stigmatized as mental illness, (c) accepted as a non-pathological reaction to regional poverty and gendered caregiving responsibilities, (d) rejected as a worthy justification for seeking individual care, and (e) less represented in comparison to other competing forms of distress (i.e., multiple morbidities, family members' distress). In a small pilot trial, we applied an implementation science perspective to identify and implement appropriate evidence-based programming for the context. We outline how we reached Appalachian women despite these diverse understandings of depression and established a flexible medicalization of depression that enabled us to legitimize care-seeking, work with varied rural healthcare professionals, and engender culturally relevant support. Our adaptation and implementation of the concept of "mental health recovery" enabled the development of programming that furthered non-pathological communicative distress while resisting the normalization that silences women in the context of deep health disparities.
