Issue link: https://www.massageandbodyworkdigital.com/i/1476304
78 m a s s a g e & b o d y wo r k s e p te m b e r/o c to b e r 2 0 2 2 Examples of the Types of Histories The classification of histories should not be taken as a criticism of authors in any of the categories. Each type of history serves a different purpose, and each is valuable. This article does not aim to disrespect the work of any author. The aim here is to provide a guide for nonspecialists to be able to recognize these different types, and to develop their awareness of the value of broader contextual histories that adhere to scholarly standards and look at the evolution of health care holistically. The titles listed below are indicative only. Narratives Narratives are characterized by a close biographical focus, often told from an openly stated subjective perspective, and often written by experienced clinicians without historical training. Think of it as a selfie with filter applied. • Zachary Comeaux, Robert Fulford D.O. and the Philosopher Physician (Seattle, Eastland, 2002). • Iva Lloyd, The History of Naturopathic Medicine: A Canadian Perspective (Toronto: MCArthur & Co., 2009). • Phil Young, ed., Pranotherapy, The Origins of Polarity Therapy, and European Neuromuscular Technique: Pioneers of Manual Medicine Vol. I (London: Masterworks International Publishing, 2011). Internalist Histories Internalist histories are written largely objectively, with accurate but narrowly focused sequences of events relating directly to the topic without considering the broader social, cultural, and political context. This may be pointed to and reported as brief factual information, but not analyzed or explored in any depth. Authors may well be both professional clinicians and trained historians, but they have selected a characteristically tight focus that does not allow for depth regarding anything but the immediate topic. Think of it as a well-lit family photo with just enough background to provide scale, but little else. • Susan E. Cayleff, Nature's Path: A History of Naturopathic Healing in America (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016). • Norman Gevitz, The DOs: Osteopathic Medicine in America (Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004). • Friedhelm Kirchfeld et al., Nature Doctors: Pioneers in Naturopathic Medicine (Oregon: Buckeye Naturopathic Press, 1994). Academic Histories The focus of academic histories is much broader than in internalist histories, and clear efforts are made to understand the social and cultural matrix in which developments occurred. Sides are deliberately not taken, and objectivity is maintained. The priority is to understand the complex interaction of attitudes and events. Think of it as a wide- angle photo, clearly showing both scale, lighting, and interrelationships between the subject and its environment. • Adele E. Clarke et al., ed., Biomedicalization, Technoscience, Health, and Illness in the U.S. (Durham, London: Duke University Press, 2010). • Paul Starr, The Social Transformation of American Medicine: The Rise of a Sovereign Profession and the Making of a Vast Industry, 2nd ed. (Basic Books, 2017). • James C. Whorton, Nature Cures: The History of Alternative Medicine in America (Oxford University Press, 2002). and to discover the factors contributing to and maintaining dysfunction. We're also, ideally, looking for clues as to the psychosocial profile and environment of the client to better understand their expectations, what they are likely to respond to, and where to begin addressing their complaint. And we should be discussing realistic outcomes with that client to begin building a treatment plan. However, those realistic outcomes can only be presented once we have a clear and holistic view of the client within their full context. There is no difference between the critical skills needed to explore and respond to a client history and those that will unlock important insights from the history of health-care practice. Believing the wider history of a profession is somehow irrelevant to those on the front lines of hands-on practice is as misguided as thinking your hands and intuition alone will tell you all you need to know about the client. The reasons why the immediate connection between these two types of history is frequently missed are complex, but the problem has been well studied by medical educationalists and historians working to integrate the skills and insights that history can provide for clinical practice directly into biomedical curricula. Academic histories of medicine explain the driving forces motivating, obstructing, and providing fertile ground for historical founders of various therapeutic practices. They provide insight into how and why change occurs in practices, attitudes, and methods; how health care and society interact in the lives of individuals; and how health-care principles impact actual events. 5 Crucially, they help us to understand what is practiced, how, and why; raise our awareness of differences in practice among locales and professions; and support us in developing the all-important critical ability to apply in clinical practice. The same thought process sheds light on the messy, slow, uncertain interpersonal exchanges that give birth to ideas, how they succeed and fail, and the many complex layers that shape such