alexa Health Care Practitioners Ambivalence about Traditional
ISSN: 2471-9870

Journal of Perioperative & Critical Intensive Care Nursing
Open Access

Like us on:
OMICS International organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations

700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)

Commentary

Health Care Practitioners Ambivalence about Traditional Healing: A Critical Reflection on the Findings of Maboe Mokgobis Dlitt Et Phil Study

Mokgobi MG1-3*

1Department of Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Monash University (South Africa Campus), Republic of South Africa

2Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, USA

3Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa

Corresponding Author:
Mokgobi MG
Department of Psychology, School of Health Sciences
Monash University, Republic of South Africa
Tel: 27 11 950 4074
E-mail: [email protected]

Received Date: Feburary 05, 2016; Accepted Date: Feburary 17, 2016; Published Date: Feburary 24, 2016

Citation: Mokgobi MG (2016) Health Care Practitioners’ Ambivalence about Traditional Healing: A Critical Reflection on the Findings of Maboe Mokgobi’s Dlitt Et Phil Study. J Perioper Crit Intensive Care Nurs 1:107. doi:10.4172/2471-9870.1000107

Copyright: © 2016 Mokgobi MG. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

 

Abstract

This paper deliberates on the findings of a doctoral study that investigated western-trained health care practitioners’ views on traditional healing. The paper particularly focuses on the ambivalences that emerged in the responses of health care practitioners when they responded to questions relating to (1) whether they use the services of traditional healers, (2) whether they have knowledge of traditional healing, (3) whether they support traditional healing and (4) whether they would be willing to work with traditional healers in the future. For the benefit of the reader, the paper begins by presenting the executive summary of the DLitt et Phil study whose results are being reflected upon in this paper. The paper tapers off by suggesting that both the western healing and traditional healing systems could learn from each other although western-trained health care practitioners indicated a reluctance to work with traditional healers in the future. When comparing the views of different categories of western-trained health care practitioners, psychiatrists and psychiatric nurses (as compared to general physicians and general nurses) appeared to be the most welcoming of the idea of working with traditional healers in the future.

Share This Page

Additional Info

Loading
Loading Please wait..
 
Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords