You are here

Responses

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Brief report
Cultural crossings of care: An appeal to the medical humanities
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 22 February 2018
    A Shift in the MH long needed
    • Tobias Dietrich, Doctoral Candidate University of Bremen, Centre for Media, Communication and Information Research (ZeMKI)

    Kristeva and her colleagues argue for a bilateral dialogue between the culture and the scientific Humanities and putatively objective Natural Sciences. As they are strikingly tracing back the Humanities' supplementary character for a dominant biomedical perspective of health and sickness, they establish decisive and inspiring landmarks to realigning the realm of Medical Humanities which needs to be continued. However, it remains unclear which concept of culture is applied and how to equate it to the Humanities as joined opposite of Science. Furthermore, when it comes to criticizing the monopole of evidence-based research in Natural Science, we should consider that it is not this approach that "runs the risk of exalting biology into an ‘essential Being’ and a normative stasis " (p. 3), but as well and in particular the interpretative act of clinicians and medecins which is worth having a deeper look in (as did Zimmermann 2016; Jurecic 2012; Hunter 1991). And, on the opposite, it would be interesting to focus not only on the perspective of the "experts" but as well on the patients' impact on co-creating the array between health and sickness. It would be beneficial to add this experiential dimension of everyday life to the discussion. At last, this well informed polemic offers thorough starting points for further discussion and gives new insights scholars have already been waiting for for so long.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.