酷刑幸存者的康复：六个证据误区及其对未来研究的影响。

Rehabilitation for torture survivors: Six evidence myths and their implications for future research.

机构信息

Consultant Clinical Psychologist. International Centre for Health and Human Rights, Director. University of East London, Professor of Clinical Psychology. Correspondence to:

Consultant Clinical Psychologist.University College London, Proffessor of Clinical Health Psychology. Correspondence to:

出版信息

Torture. 2022;32(1,2):227-250. doi: 10.7146/torture.v32i1-2.131776.

DOI:10.7146/torture.v32i1-2.131776

PMID:35950436

Abstract

Whilst it is established that torture survivors suffer from complex, multiple and often severe and enduring physical, psychological, social, welfare and many other difficulties; and that rehabilitation as reparation should be holistic, interdisciplinary and specialist, majority of the research on rehabilitation focuses increasingly and almost exclusively on psychological interventions. Further, as-sumptions that this research provides evi-dence of which are effective psychological interventions may underpin and skew ser-vices funded and provided to torture sur-vivors. In this paper we challenge some of those assumptions, and discuss the concep-tual, theoretical, epistemological and meth-odological limitations of this research and implications for future research.

摘要

虽然已经确定酷刑幸存者遭受着复杂的、多重的、往往是严重且持久的身体、心理、社会、福利和许多其他方面的困难；而且康复作为赔偿应该是全面的、跨学科的和专业的，但大多数关于康复的研究越来越多地且几乎完全集中在心理干预上。此外，这些研究提供了有效的心理干预措施的假设，可能会影响和扭曲为酷刑幸存者提供资金和服务的方式。在本文中，我们对其中的一些假设提出了质疑，并讨论了该研究在概念、理论、认识论和方法论方面的局限性，以及对未来研究的影响。