Solidarity through empathy
by Bianca Nguyen on January 17, 2012
Written by Aoife MacMahon
About the author
My name is Aoife MacMahon, and I am a pre-med sophomore majoring in biochemistry at Columbia University. I joined GlobeMed this fall with the intention of making a greater impact in the sphere of global health while studying to become a doctor, and meeting others who shared this desire to make a difference. I have since discovered the vast network and passionate individuals that comprise GlobeMed, which has reinvigorated my goals and beliefs regarding the future of global health.
One of the most striking themes for me in The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down was the juxtaposition of the solidarity inherent in Hmong culture, and the lack thereof in America.
This disparity between the two cultures is highlighted by a quote from the ethnographer Dwight Conquergood: “In a thousand ways, our separatist, individualistic ethic gets enunciated daily: individual place settings at meals, the importance of ‘a room of one’s own’ even for children, advertising appeals and jingles such as ‘Have it your way’ and ‘We do it all for you.’ The enactment of Hmong culture, on the other hand, is like a symphony; every part plays the themes of returning, recalling, restoring, reincorporating, binding together, and reuniting separated parts into a collective identity” (197). Hmong culture naturally tends towards partnership, American culture away from it. If Americans’ lack of solidarity makes empathizing with one another difficult, how could they possibly achieve an understanding and partnership with the Hmong?
Throughout the book, we see many instances of misunderstanding between the Lees and the Americans they encounter in Merced. Nurses and doctors, such as Robert Small, frequently express disdain towards them. Even Neil and Peggy, who are otherwise tremendously dedicated to treating Lia and collaborating with the Lees, “had no idea what the Lees were doing to heal Lia because they never thought to ask” (112). This lack of interest in the Hmong perspective is what makes them, in Fadiman’s words, “imperfect healers” (265).
However, many Americans that do reach out to the Lees, making a point to learn about their culture, develop a close relationship with them and are also better able to address Lia’s needs as a patient. The social worker Jeanine Hilt is one such individual, able to surmount her cultural limitations because her “empathy for the Lees may have been deepened by two factors: she understood what it was like to live with chronic illness…and she admired the closeness of Hmong families, because her relations with her own family…had been strained for many years” (113). Similarly, when Mrs. Lee learns that the son of Neil and Peggy has leukemia, “Mrs. Lee was hugging Peggy and they were both shedding a few tears. Sorrows of motherhood cut through all cultural barriers” (252).
It seems that ultimately, the tie that binds individuals and groups together is founded on common experiences, whether they are cultural or personal. With this in mind, how can GlobeMed effectively communicate with and learn about its partners to create such a bond? It is likely that most of us have never experienced some of the challenges faced by the members of our partner communities. Moreover, many chapters require the mediation of an interpreter. How can we know how much is lost in translation, and regardless of whether there is an interpreter or not, if we are informed enough about their cultural background to fully comprehend the needs of our partner organization?
This disparity between the two cultures is highlighted by a quote from the ethnographer Dwight Conquergood: “In a thousand ways, our separatist, individualistic ethic gets enunciated daily: individual place settings at meals, the importance of ‘a room of one’s own’ even for children, advertising appeals and jingles such as ‘Have it your way’ and ‘We do it all for you.’ The enactment of Hmong culture, on the other hand, is like a symphony; every part plays the themes of returning, recalling, restoring, reincorporating, binding together, and reuniting separated parts into a collective identity” (197). Hmong culture naturally tends towards partnership, American culture away from it. If Americans’ lack of solidarity makes empathizing with one another difficult, how could they possibly achieve an understanding and partnership with the Hmong?
Throughout the book, we see many instances of misunderstanding between the Lees and the Americans they encounter in Merced. Nurses and doctors, such as Robert Small, frequently express disdain towards them. Even Neil and Peggy, who are otherwise tremendously dedicated to treating Lia and collaborating with the Lees, “had no idea what the Lees were doing to heal Lia because they never thought to ask” (112). This lack of interest in the Hmong perspective is what makes them, in Fadiman’s words, “imperfect healers” (265).
However, many Americans that do reach out to the Lees, making a point to learn about their culture, develop a close relationship with them and are also better able to address Lia’s needs as a patient. The social worker Jeanine Hilt is one such individual, able to surmount her cultural limitations because her “empathy for the Lees may have been deepened by two factors: she understood what it was like to live with chronic illness…and she admired the closeness of Hmong families, because her relations with her own family…had been strained for many years” (113). Similarly, when Mrs. Lee learns that the son of Neil and Peggy has leukemia, “Mrs. Lee was hugging Peggy and they were both shedding a few tears. Sorrows of motherhood cut through all cultural barriers” (252).
It seems that ultimately, the tie that binds individuals and groups together is founded on common experiences, whether they are cultural or personal. With this in mind, how can GlobeMed effectively communicate with and learn about its partners to create such a bond? It is likely that most of us have never experienced some of the challenges faced by the members of our partner communities. Moreover, many chapters require the mediation of an interpreter. How can we know how much is lost in translation, and regardless of whether there is an interpreter or not, if we are informed enough about their cultural background to fully comprehend the needs of our partner organization?
Like the American doctors involved in the Lees’ case, we need to learn about more than the immediate issues faced by our partner organizations. We need “a concern for the psychosocial and cultural facets that give illness,” and other problems faced, “context and meaning” (265) in Gulu, in Phnom Penh, in Montgomery. Although we may not always have similar experiences to draw on, we can still make the effort to surmount cultural barriers and find common ground. As members of GlobeMed, we must emphasize our willingness to understand another culture in order to build on our partnerships. Ultimately, we can learn from one another as we strive towards a common goal, connecting through both differences and similarities alike.
No comments.