Introduction
The article by Roberts, Sanders, and Wass on UK student’s perception of race, ethnicity, and culture will be used to analyze a present day analysis of Medical education on race. The article is a primary source that qualitatively researches year 2 medical student’s understanding on the concept of race, ethnicity, and culture. The trajectory of medicine in the modern day has been seen to part with social science, which has led to various health disparities in the society. Therefore, in solving the problem there is a need to understand the social perspective of stakeholders in the society. Analysis of race, culture, ethnicity, and culture diversity perceptions of medical students in Northern UK would provide an ample understanding of race in medicine.
Definition of Race
In the article by Roberts et al., race is seen as a ‘double edge sword’ amongst the medical students (45). There is the idea that the subject is uncomfortable to discuss since it would result to either productive or unproductive reactions. In the qualitative study, two racial groups were analyzed with the view of understanding their definition of race. One of the groups, White British students, defined race as a topic that they feared or felt uncomfortable discussing. Whites preferred to discuss race issues in groups comprising themselves, or in the boundary of medicine. White British felt that race issues if openly discussed would make them be misunderstood. They preferred to avoid wholly the topic only to be brought out when medical issues are being discussed. When discussing medical issues, they were free to do so because they thought certain medical phenomena were explained by genetics (Roberts et al. 46).
Ethnic minorities in the study felt the topic as a discomfort because it made them feel different. Race amongst ethnic minorities was seen as an area where certain castes are identified. In the castes, there were those groups, which were superior to others. Ethnic minorities felt they were less superior, a feeling consistent amongst less dominant races. Hence, they saw race issues as racism (Roberts et al. 48). However, in all the two groups they lacked proper structures to deal with cultural issues. They were at ease in discussing race in safe boundaries where they offended other people least. The biomedical model they used in medicine to discuss race was traditionally based on genetic inheritance and play of racially different phenotypes in diseases.
Support of Race Definition
The authors of the article explain that the perceptions of the two groups were mainly influenced by cultural aspects. Race and ethnicity are seen to be the descriptors of culture hence creating diversity issues that are intertwined with medicine education. Therefore, culture acts as a barrier to theoretical developments in medicine as it influences perceptions towards other races. However, a social science perspective was proposed by Robert et al., as a way of easing the subject of race in the medical curriculum (49). The fear and lack of awareness of White British students was seen as an inhibitor of culture diversity learning. Consequently, debates in social science perspectives have insisted on the importance of studying race and ethnicity (Ellison et al. 288). The White British understood this when they referred to the race topic as a ‘slippery slope’ or double-edged-sword. The biomedical model provided a platform that Whites used to discuss race in the boundary of medicine because it provided them with better control and assurance, and avoided disapproval comments from their peers.
In explaining perceptions of race, Robert et al. posits that ethnic minorities had different full legitimate participation in learning medicine (50). This was explained by Wenger’s theory on ‘Legitimate Peripheral Participation’. Ethnic minorities according to the theory saw themselves as peripheral to the health care system. They perceived themselves as not accorded the protection and consideration of a health system that is dominated and long established by Whites.
Equally, the author explains that because of the two groups wanting to conform, students exhibited no opposition to the defusing effects of practical medical education. Accordingly, unclear cultural boundaries the students experienced earlier in their life may result to a safer option, which is avoiding race discussions; a sensitive issue. Hence, devaluation of social diversity may persist in any health care system resulting to increased health disparities.
Difference of Robert et al.’s race definition with other definitions
In the article by Robert et al. (45), race is defined on the sociological perspective which is similar to other definitions. The article qualitatively proved that different ethnic groups had different perceptions on race because of diverse cultures; hence sociological learning. Other definitions, approach the topic on a genetic perspective. This means that physical biological traits that are common amongst certain people define a race (Eisenberg et al. 1663). The similar biological trait that is mostly defined is skin color. Ellison et al. (287) also support the definition that race is a genetic aspect. The same authors also stipulate that the different race categories are poor markers of differences in social, cultural, and genotype characteristics, hence increased health disparities.
In medicine, the approach of defining race from a genetic perspective has led to reduction of certain diseases that are prevalent in certain races. This is because medical education and researches analyze genomes of different races with the aim of identifying factors that make certain diseases common in certain races. For instance, the invention of BiDil drug was a landmark discovery that would help prevent heart failure among African Americans (Eisenberg et al. 1668). Consequently, in the perspective of Robert et al. sociological perspective is important for understanding cultural backgrounds of certain races. Hence, if social factors such as income levels, education levels, and social status are considered, health disparities would be reduced (Eisenberg et al. 1663).
Relevance of the article in American Science and Medicine
The article is relevant in American Science and Medicine where perceptions of different ethnic groups and races are determinant in research and education. American society is greatly diverse culturally and sociologically. The different cultures bring about different definitions and perspective on race. In medical schools, students are from diverse races and have experienced diverse cultures. The sociological factors have contributed to health disparities in America more so amongst minority groups. Minority groups recording these disparities are: African American who record 10% more cancer rates; Latinos recording higher rates of diabetes; and Native Americans experiencing higher rates of alcoholism, pneumonia, and tuberculosis (Ellison et al. 288).
Research and medical practice in America does not consider and apply social perspectives in their methodologies. Furthermore, even if the health system incorporates social perspectives, it is poorly applied hence the need to strategize the health care system (Ellision et al. 289).
For instance, low economic status amongst Blacks might be the reason why they record high rates of tuberculosis, but this would not be analyzed since the focus might be on genetic analysis. Also, ethnic minorities fearing racism as recorded by the article has a potential of causing minorities to avoid seeking medical help. They do so for fear of being viewed differently or being stereotyped.
Conclusion
The article by Roberts et al. is relevant in proving that perceptions of certain race groups are essential in analyzing definitions of race from a social perspective. Majority race groups avoid discussing the topic due to fear and being misunderstood. Minority groups avoid race issues because of being viewed differently. The two groups perceptions were influenced by their cultural context; sociological factors. The definition of race in the article is different because other definitions insist on a genetic perspective. Therefore, it is important to incorporate a social perspective in solving medical problems and research.
Works Cited
Ellison GTH, Smart A, Tutton R, Outram SM, Ashcroft R, et al. (2007) Racial Categories in Medicine: A Failure of Evidence-Based Practice? PLoS Med 4(9): e287. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040287
Leon Eisenberg, et al. "Health Is Still Social: Contemporary Examples in the Age of the Genome." PLoS Medicine Oct. 2006: 1663+.Academic Search Premier. Web. 29 Nov. 2011.
Roberts, Jane H., Tom Sanders, and Val Wass. "Students’ Perceptions Of Race, Ethnicity And Culture At Two UK Medical Schools: A Qualitative Study."Medical Education 42.1 (2008): 45-52. Academic Search Premier. Web. 29 Nov. 2011.
