Critical Review paper 60%
Assessment 2
Critical Review paper 60%
1500 words
3 October will be finished by 21st sepA critical review is an opportunity for you as the student to demonstrate your ability to critically review literature pertaining to the topic ofCulture, Values and Beliefs (Module 4).It isnot about describing what the author has said, in a regurgitated approach, and making general statements such as `it was a very interesting article, as one example.
The learning opportunity is for you to be able to further demonstrate a capacity to evaluate the content of the article and its relevance, strengths and or weaknesses in addressing the topic area it is presenting.
Critically review the following article:
Paradies, Y. (2016). Colonisation, racism and indigenous health. Journal of Population Research, 33(1), 83-96. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12546-016-9159-y
Your critical review will include and explore:
Identifies the above article in full bibliographic reference
States your overall evaluation of the chosen article
Identifies and substantiates any weaknesses and or strengths of the article, in addressing the topic
How the article has contributed further to your understanding of the topic
Your reasons for drawing the conclusion you have in the critical review of the article
Please ensure you also meet the standard following criterion:
APA 7thReferencing style
Consistency in use of appropriate terminology in reference to Indigenous Australian People, communities, and issues.
Source at least4otherscholarlyreferencesin additionto the chosen article that you are critically reviewing. Wikipedia and other such websites arenotacceptable scholarly reference material.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12546-016-9159-y
Relevance
Strengths
Weaknesses
States your overall evaluation of the chosen article
Identifies the above article in full bibliographic reference
colonisation is most often associated with indigenous peoples, it is also closely related to historical and contemporary phenomena experienced by other populations. In addition to the extensive literature on franchise colonialism, the Atlantic slave trade has left large African-diaspora populations in the Americas who also suffer from land insecurity, cultural/language suppression and, in some cases, pressure to assimilate (e.g. Perry 2013). Clearly, what makes colonisation distinct for indigenous peoples is not the domination of a settler majority group, but, rather, a status as first peoples or, at a minimum, peoples inhabiting a territory at the time of invasion, even if not the actual first according to Western archaeological science. This primacy of occupancy is what Povinelli (2011) calls the priority of the prior.
Following a brief foray into the vexed question of who precisely is indigenous, this paper takes the developing scholarship on historical trauma as emblematic of the complexities inherent in conceptualising coloniality as a determinant of health. Intersections with racism are canvassed, with decolonisation explored as a potential solution. The paper concludes by examining frames for explicating indigenous disadvantage and exploring implications for settler-indigenous relations into the future.
In relation to indigenous peoples, the concept of historical trauma was first explored in the 90s (Brave Heart 1993), with a focus on individual symptoms such as mourning, survivor guilt, rumination and intrusive cognition/emotion, vicarious impacts on children via parents re-living events, and indirectly through impaired parenting practices (Evans-Campbell 2008).
Identifies and substantiates any weaknesses and or strengths of the article, in addressing the topic
Historical trauma has been found to impact on health above and beyond contemporary stressors such as family violence/marital problems or major life stressors (Walls and Whitbeck 2011).
How the article has contributed further to your understanding of the topic
The fundamental impact of settler-colonialism on indigenous peoples is now well-recognised within public health discourses (King et al. 2009; Sherwood 2013; Czyzewski 2011).
historical trauma is animated by the 4Cs: colonial injury along with the collective experience, cumulative effects and cross-generational impacts of such injuries (Kirmayer et al. 2014: 301)
what makes colonisation distinct for indigenous peoples is not the domination of a settler majority group, but, rather, a status as first peoples or, at a minimum, peoples inhabiting a territory at the time of invasion, even if not the actual first according to Western archaeological science. This primacy of occupancy is what Povinelli (2011) calls the priority of the prior.
Despite its widespread recognition, it is only recently that investigation has begun into the specific pathways by which colonialism and colonisation impact on the health of indigenous peoples.
Although receiving relatively less attention, settler colonialism is also recognised as a factor in indigenous ill-health and disadvantage in other regions of the world, notably South America (Maldonado-Bouchard et al. 2015).
Such identify turn-over results from various intersecting factors such as changes in survey terminology or sampling, varied willingness to identify due to socio-political events or life-course influences on self-identification (e.g. adulthood, marriage, parenthood, etc.). Whatever the cause, clearly this phenomenon impacts on the already complex dynamics of indigenous health disparity measurement (Pettersen and Brustad 2013), adding to the already difficult task of elucidating the ongoing contribution of colonisation to such inequalities.
Your reasons for drawing the conclusion you have in the critical review of the article
