| Title |
Unequal Treatment: The Possibilities of and Need for Indigenous Parrhesiastes in Australian Medical Education
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, May 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10903-010-9352-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shaun C. Ewen |
| Abstract |
This paper investigates the relationship between the unacceptably poor levels of Indigenous health in Australia, the very low levels of representation (As at 2009, approximately 140 Indigenous medical graduates Australia wide) of Indigenous people within the medical field, and the potential for parrhesia (translated as "fearless speech") to challenge the medical hegemony, and as a tool of self-care for Indigenous medical students. This paper outlines the elements that make up parrhesia, the current state of Australian Indigenous (ill) health and Indigenous participation in the Australian health workforce, with some international comparison. Using Huckaby's (Educ Phil Theor 40: 770-788, 2008) conceptualization of specific parrhesiastic scholars, the paper introduces the idea of an Indigenous parrhesiastes. The paper then discusses, and endeavors to briefly address three questions that Foucault articulated in his series of lectures on parrhesia in 1983: "How can we recognize someone as a parrhesiastes? What is the importance of having a parrhesiastes in the city? What is the training of a good parrhesiastes?" (Foucault, http://foucault.info/documents/parrhesia/, 1985). In conclusion, this paper shows that Indigenous parrhesiastes could make a strong and positive contribution to medicine and medical education. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 30% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 33% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 19% |
| Psychology | 3 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 7% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2012.
All research outputs
#16,188,009
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#913
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,720
of 96,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 96,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.