‘What Are We To Do About Difference?’: Race, Culture and the Ethical Encounter

Jeffery, Donna; Nelson, Jennifer

doi:10.1080/17496535.2011.559359

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While there was no consensus across participants on how to reconcile such disjunctions, there was a recognition of often countervailing forces across these spheres. In line with previous work which has highlighted the relationship between ethical practice and cultural competence,19 20 the participants in our study routinely discussed concepts of ethics or professionalism as juxtaposed with those of belief and practice. This raised both ongoing complexities and revealed the importance of viewing ‘cultural competence’ as operating at the nexus of the personal, professional and institutional, regardless of whether there is agreement on how to work with it.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…Whether focused on comprehension of advice,16 adherence to treatment17 or barriers to communication,18 the emphasis has been placed on the individual and in some respects potential individual deficits that need accommodating 19. Such models of cultural competence have been criticised for addressing culture-in-isolation; focusing on perceived cultural traits; ignoring diversity within ‘culture’; engendering stereotype slippage and erasure of patient individuality; and ignoring the nexus of patient identity and the structural causes of health inequality 19–21. Yet little is known about how healthcare professionals’ experience this evolving sphere of intercultural care—and the everyday dilemmas in achieving culturally competent care—a gap in knowledge that we begin to address in this study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A qualitative study of cancer care professionals’ experiences of working with migrant patients from diverse cultural backgrounds

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo improve the experiences of people from diverse cultural backgrounds, there has been an increased emphasis on strengthening cultural awareness and competence in healthcare contexts. The aim of this focus-group based study was to explore how professionals in cancer care experience their encounters with migrant cancer patients with a focus on how they work with cultural diversity in their everyday practice, and the personal, interpersonal and institutional dimensions therein.DesignThis paper draws on qualitative data from eight focus groups held in three local health districts in major metropolitan areas of Australia. Participants were health professionals (n=57) working with migrants in cancer care, including multicultural community workers, allied health workers, doctors and nurses. Focus group discussions were audio recorded and transcribed in full. Data were analysed using the framework approach and supported by NVivo V.11 qualitative data analysis software.ResultsFour findings were derived from the analysis: (1) culture as merely one aspect of complex personhood; (2) managing culture at the intersection of institutional, professional and personal values; (3) balancing professional values with patient values and beliefs, and building trust and respect; and (4) the importance of time and everyday relations for generating understanding and intimacy, and for achieving culturally competent care.ConclusionsThe findings reveal: how culture is often misconstrued as manageable in isolation; the importance of a renewed emphasis on culture as interpersonalandinstitutional in character; and the importance of prioritising the development of quality relationships requiring additional time and resource investments in migrant patients for enacting effective intercultural care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A qualitative study of cancer care professionals’ experiences of working with migrant patients from diverse cultural backgrounds

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In focusing on “difference” in cancer care, we were acutely aware of the plenitude of existing “culturally and linguistically diverse” (CALD) research already in existence across the health and medical spheres. Yet, as has been argued elsewhere (e.g., Jeffery & Nelson, 2011; Muaygil, 2018), much of this work slips into either cultural categorization (reductivism) or models wherein “difference” is largely about the person’s characteristics (reification). Such simplicities have also been shown to exist in many of the interventions targeting migrant communities in cancer care settings (Jenks, 2011; Thackrah & Thompson, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The (Co)Production of Difference in the Care of Patients With Cancer From Migrant Backgrounds

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An extensive body of scholarship focuses on cultural diversity in health care, and this has resulted in a plethora of strategies to “manage” cultural difference. This work has often been patient-oriented (i.e., focused on the differences of the person being cared for), rather than relational in character. In this study, we aimed to explore how the difference was relational and coproduced in the accounts of cancer care professionals and patients with cancer who were from migrant backgrounds. Drawing on eight focus groups with 57 cancer care professionals and one-on-one interviews with 43 cancer patients from migrant backgrounds, we explore social relations, including intrusion and feelings of discomfort, moral logics of rights and obligation, and the practice of defaulting to difference. We argue, on the basis of these accounts, for the importance of approaching difference as relational and that this could lead to a more reflexive means for overcoming “differences” in therapeutic settings.

show abstract

“…As Given (2013) reminds us, conviviality is therefore political, for to foster and maintain conviviality requires countering unconvivial forces. Conviviality also engages ethics: how we see others, read them in their social context, and relate to them despite hierarchies of exclusion (Ahmed 2000;Jeffery and Nelson 2011). Finally, for some authors, the notion of conviviality has the advantage that it has not (at least not yet) been co-opted by corporate and policy discourses in the way that diversity has ; it is more elusive and less amenable to enumeration and policy audits, with its referencing of relationships and interactions .…”

Section: Situating Convivialitymentioning

confidence: 99%