Reconsidering American Indian historical trauma: Lessons from an early Gros Ventre war narrative
Reconsidering American Indian historical trauma: Lessons from an early Gros Ventre war narrative
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1363461513489722
复制
发表时间：
2014-06-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Gone, Joseph P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gone, Joseph P.
专业临床医生和人类服务提供者越来越多地将美洲印第安人（AI）的心理健康问题归因于历史创伤（HT）。作为一种替代既定的精神疾病，人工智能HT的制定是为了解释持久的心理健康差异起源于欧美殖民化的部落经验。因此，AI HT被描述为集体的、累积的和代际的心理社会残疾，这些残疾是由大规模基于群体的压迫造成的，如强迫搬迁、政治征服、文化统治和种族灭绝。HT结构的一个目标是从社会和历史的角度来框定AI的痛苦和功能障碍。鉴于广泛的土著殖民经验，HT的削弱作用被认为影响了今天的大多数AI社区。考虑到这一背景，我探讨人工智能HT具体参考“战争叙事”获得的一位人类学家在1901年从一位老年妇女格罗斯岛。在这篇报道中，Watches All描述了她参与了一场历史性的部落间战斗，以及她随后在19世纪60年代末被俘虏和逃离敌人。这段历史叙述引用了许多第一手的经验，这些经验在今天被认为是创伤性的。然而，有趣的是，这个帐户使AI HT的几个假设复杂化，导致了Watches All的折磨是否真的有资格作为AI HT的实例的令人烦恼的问题。无论人们如何回答这些问题，这种模糊性突出了严重的理论混乱，需要详细说明和完善，如果人工智能HT是一个有用的结构，在行为健康科学。
Professional clinicians and human services providers are increasingly attributing the mental health problems of American Indians (AIs) to historical trauma (HT). As an alternative to established psychiatric disorders, AI HT was formulated to explain enduring mental health disparities as originating in tribal experiences of Euro-American colonization. As a result, AI HT has been described as the collective, cumulative, and intergenerational psychosocial disability resulting from massive group-based oppression, such as forced relocation, political subjugation, cultural domination, and genocide. One objective of the HT construct is to frame AI distress and dysfunction in social and historical terms. Given widespread indigenous experiences of colonization, the debilitating effects of HT are presumed to affect most AI communities today. With this background in mind, I explore AI HT with specific reference to a "war narrative" obtained by an anthropologist in 1901 from an elderly Gros Ventre woman. In this account, Watches All described her participation in a historic intertribal battle, and her subsequent captivity and escape from the enemy during the late 1860s. This historical narrative references many first-hand experiences that would today be identified as traumatogenic. Interestingly, however, this account complicates several assumptions underlying AI HT, leading to vexing questions of whether Watches All's ordeal actually qualifies as an instance of AI HT. No matter how one answers these questions, such ambiguity highlights serious theoretical confusions requiring elaboration and refinement if AI HT is to remain a useful construct in the behavioral health sciences.