Dear All,
I was interested to read Jeff Greens post regarding asian women
receiving HRT, and the reference to whether a eurocentric
perspective should be allowed to be imposed upon other cultures.
May I offer my perspective on this:
I am not aware of anything that either religously or culturally forbids
HRT for asian women, perhaps in the way that contraception may
be an issue. Moreover, anything that can benefit and improve a
persons quality of life, I believe should, at the very least be offered
and explained as to what the potential benefits of this treatment
may be, to that person.
Offering someone the choice to decide to have a particular
treatment, is not in my opinion imposing in anyway, but is enabling
and empowering to the service user/client to then be able to decide
for themselves.
If services are not offered because they may be thought to be of a
eurocentric origin, this has the potential to be a dangerous
stereotype, and euro centicity runs the risk of becoming the
scapegoat for not providing services, particularly if it is not based
on any supporting research. If eurocentricity is a concern in the
manner in which services are offered, this matter should be
examined closer before it is accepted. Aspiring to improve ones
quality of health is a world wide concept not just a eurocentric one.
Equity, like equality of opportunity is often mistaken to mean:
giving/treating everyone the same, whereas it is more about
ensuring that people are placed in a position where they are able to
access appropriate services and treatments. The difference is a
subtle but impotant one. I believe that the element of choice must
still remain with the client/service user, but that service providers
must be able to enable all clients/service users to have the
appropriate information to be able to do this.
Any thoughts??!!
Regards,
Khalida H Ashrafi
Research Officer
Mother and Infant Research Unit,
University of Leeds.
Tel: 0113 2331569
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|