Clark Jocalyn
icddr,b, Dhaka, Bangladesh; Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada;
Glob Health Action. 2014 May 16;7:24000. doi: 10.3402/gha.v7.24000. eCollection 2014.
Once an orphan field, 'global mental health' now has wide acknowledgement and prominence on the global health agenda. Increased recognition draws needed attention to individual suffering and the population impacts, but medicalizing global mental health produces a narrow view of the problems and solutions. Early framing by advocates of the global mental health problem emphasised biological disease, linked psychiatry with neurology, and reinforced categories of mental health disorders. Universality of biomedical concepts across culture is assumed in the globalisation of mental health but is strongly disputed by transcultural psychiatrists and anthropologists. Global mental health movement priorities take an individualised view, emphasising treatment and scale-up and neglecting social and structural determinants of health. To meet international targets and address the problem's broad social and cultural dimensions, the global mental health movement and advocates must develop more comprehensive strategies and include more diverse perspectives.
“全球心理健康”曾经是一个冷门领域，如今在全球健康议程上已得到广泛认可并备受瞩目。认可度的提高使人们开始关注个体的痛苦以及对人群的影响，但将全球心理健康医学化会导致对问题及其解决方案的看法过于狭隘。全球心理健康问题的倡导者早期所构建的框架强调生物性疾病，将精神病学与神经学联系起来，并强化了心理健康障碍的类别。在心理健康全球化过程中，生物医学概念被假定具有跨文化的普遍性，但这遭到了跨文化精神病学家和人类学家的强烈质疑。全球心理健康运动的重点采取个体化视角，强调治疗和扩大规模，而忽视了健康的社会和结构决定因素。为了实现国际目标并解决该问题广泛的社会和文化层面，全球心理健康运动及其倡导者必须制定更全面的战略，并纳入更多样化的观点。
