Suchergebnisse

This exploratory qualitative study examines holy water priest healers' explanatory models and general treatment approaches toward mental illness, and their views and reflections on a collaborative project between them and biomedical practitioners. The study took place at two holy water treatment sites in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Twelve semi-structured interviews with holy water priest healers found eight notable themes: they held multiple explanatory models of illness, dominated by religious and spiritual understanding; they emphasized spiritual healing and empathic understanding in treatment, and also embraced biomedicine as part of an eclectic healing model; they perceived biomedical practitioners' humility and respect as key to their positive views on the collaboration; they valued recognition of their current role and contribution in providing mental healthcare; they recognized and appreciated the biomedical clinic's effectiveness in treating violent and aggressive patients; they endorsed the collaboration and helped to overcome patient and family reluctance to the use of biomedicine; they lamented the lack of spiritual healing in biomedical treatment; and they had a number of dissatisfactions and concerns, particularly the one-way referral from religious healers to the biomedical clinic. The study results show diversity in the religious healers' etiological understanding, treatment approaches and generally positive attitude and views on the collaboration. We present insights and explorations of factors affecting this rare, but much needed collaboration between traditional healers and biomedical services, and potential ways to improve it are discussed.

This article describes the authors' personal experiences of collaborating across international borders in academic research. International collaboration in academic medicine is one of the most important ways by which research and innovation develop globally. However, the intersections among colonialism, academic medicine, and global health research have created a neocolonial narrative that perpetuates inequalities in global health partnerships. The authors critically examine the visa process as an example of a racist practice to show how the challenges of blocked mobility increase inequality and thwart research endeavors. Visas are used to limit mobility across certain borders, and this limitation hinders international collaborations in academic medicine. The authors discuss the concept of social closure and how limits to global mobility for scholars from low- and middle-income countries perpetuate a cycle of dependence on scholars who have virtually barrier-free global mobility—these scholars being mainly from high-income countries. Given the current sociopolitical milieu of increasing border controls and fears of illegal immigration, the authors' experiences expose what is at stake for academic medicine when the political sphere, focused on tightening border security, and the medical realm, striving to build international research collaborations, intersect. Creating more equitable global partnerships in research requires a shift from the current paradigm that dominates most international partnerships and causes injury to African scholars.

This paper provides guidance on the steps, obstacles and mistakes to avoid in the implementation of community mental health care. The document is intended to be of practical use and interest to psychiatrists worldwide regarding the development of community mental health care for adults with mental illness. The main recommendations are presented in relation to: the need for coordinated policies, plans and programmes, the requirement to scale up services for whole populations, the importance of promoting community awareness about mental illness to increase levels of help-seeking, the need to establish effective financial and budgetary provisions to directly support services provided in the community. The paper concludes by setting out a series of lessons learned from the accumulated practice of community mental health care to date worldwide, with a particular focus on the social and governmental measures that are required at the national level, the key steps to take in the organization of the local mental health system, lessons learned by professionals and practitioners, and how to most effectively harness the experience of users, families, and other advocates. ; Kings Coll London, Inst Psychiat, Hlth Serv & Populat Res Dept, London, England ; Univ Addis Ababa, Fac Med, Dept Psychiat, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Dept Psychiat, Sao Paulo, Brazil ; Dartmouth Psychiat Res Ctr, Lebanon, NH USA ; Natl Ctr Neurol & Psychiat, NIMH, Tokyo, Japan ; Douglas Mental Hlth Univ Inst, Montreal, PQ, Canada ; McGill Univ, Montreal, PQ, Canada ; New Zealand Mental Hlth Commiss, Wellington, New Zealand ; Schizophrenia Res Fdn SCARF, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India ; Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Dept Psychiat, Sao Paulo, Brazil ; Web of Science

This paper provides guidance on the steps, obstacles and mistakes to avoid in the implementation of community mental health care. The document is intended to be of practical use and interest to psychiatrists worldwide regarding the development of community mental health care for adults with mental illness. The main recommendations are presented in relation to: the need for coordinated policies, plans and programmes, the requirement to scale up services for whole populations, the importance of promoting community awareness about mental illness to increase levels of help-seeking, the need to establish effective financial and budgetary provisions to directly support services provided in the community. The paper concludes by setting out a series of lessons learned from the accumulated practice of community mental health care to date worldwide, with a particular focus on the social and governmental measures that are required at the national level, the key steps to take in the organization of the local mental health system, lessons learned by professionals and practitioners, and how to most effectively harness the experience of users, families, and other advocates.