Critical notes on stigma and medicalization according to the psycological and athropological view

4Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This article aims to reflect on ethical aspects involved in the social sciences and humanities researches conducted in the educational context. In this debate, which goes beyond the limits of Resolution 466/2012 and the Plataforma Brasil bureaucracies, we refer to Psychology and Anthropology critical readings in order to emphasize the ethical risks in the medicalized view of education and human development, which has contributed to the production of stigmas that reinforces school exclusion. As central elements of this questioning, we highlight: the debate about the illusion that research in humanities and social sciences donot imply ethical risks and the false dichotomy of biomedical sciences x social and human sciences within the research in psychology and anthropology in education. Attesting to the importance of such problems we referred to researches of national and international authors in the field of school /educational psychology and neuroscience.Through these considerations, the article concludes for the importance of ethical rigor in humanities and social sciences researches, focusing not only in the construction of the project and the methodological procedures of data collection, but also in the research results interpretations and in the publication of reports and scientific articles.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

De Viégas, L. S., Harayama, R. M., & De Souza, M. P. R. (2015). Critical notes on stigma and medicalization according to the psycological and athropological view. Ciencia e Saude Coletiva, 20(9), 2683–2692. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015209.08732015

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free