Search

This paper introduces an innovative curricular approach-the Health Humanities Portrait Approach (Portrait Approach)-and its pedagogical tool-the Health Humanities Portrait (HHP). Both enable health professions learners to examine pressing social issues that shape, and are shaped by, experiences of health and illness. The Portrait Approach is grounded in a set of "critical portraiture" principles that foster humanities-driven analytical skills. The HHP's architecture is distinctively framed around a pressing social theme and utilizes a first-person narrative and scholarship to explore how the dimensions of the personal and the structural are mutually constituted. We argue that when creator-educators adopt the Portrait Approach and its critical portraiture principles to design and teach the HHP, they enable learners to become proficient in synthesizing and analyzing-with both depth and breadth-the human and social dimensions of patients' lives. This inventive curricular intervention provides a needed contribution to health professions education in that it utilizes health humanities methodologies to elucidate the multiple aspects of health, illness, disability, and healthcare.

As the number of medical and health humanities degree programs in the United States rapidly increases (Berry, Lamb and Jones 2016, 2017), it is especially timely to consider the range of specific disciplinary (and multidisciplinary) perspectives that might benefit students enrolled in these programs. This paper discusses the inclusion of one such perspective from the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS.) The author asserts that STS benefits students in the medical and health humanities in four particular ways, by: (1) challenging the "progress narrative" around the advancement of biomedicine as scientific practice, (2) evaluating the meaning of technology, especially in how technology orients us towards sickness and how health technology is in turn shaped by social and cultural values, (3) assessing the plurality of biomedical epistemologies, rather than assuming biomedicine is one, cohesive body of knowledge that does not differ across contexts, and (4) critiquing bias in biomedical practice and science, especially in the marginalization of women's voices and in the racial and postcolonial trajectories of contemporary biomedicine. The paper discusses the theoretical importance of these four trajectories to the medical and health humanities, as well as the venues for inclusion of STS within coursework and programming at Case Western Reserve University. The paper also comments on how programming at other institutions might be adapted to incorporate STS scholarship. By drawing on numerous examples of research in the anthropology, sociology, history, and the philosophy of science, this article seeks to open a conversation about the value of science and technology studies to health humanities pedagogy.

For those interested in developing baccalaureate programs in health humanities, this essay draws on our experience of developing a minor in health humanities to share insights on what to expect, strategies that work well, and how to deal with obstacles. These insights range from how to explain the concept of health humanities to stakeholders (faculty, administrators, and community partners) to how to decide where to house a health humanities program. We share our insights in a way that promises to translate well to different institutional contexts. That said, this paper is more relevant for institutional contexts where budgets are stressed and, consequently, proposals to invest in humanities programs are a difficult sell. This paper is divided into sections addressing how to (a) earn institutional support, (b) gain campus buy-in, (c) identify benefits of the proposed program, (d) decide where to house the program, (e) calculate program cost, and (f) secure external funding. We conclude with some final reflections on the current status of our program and why we are committed to health humanities education.

Throughout its fifty-year history, the role of the medical humanist and even the name "medical humanities" has remained raw, dynamic and contested. What do we mean when we call ourselves "humanists" and our practice "medical humanities?" To address these questions, we turn to the concept of origin narratives. After explaining the value of these stories, we focus on one particularly rich origin narrative of the medical humanities by telling the story of how a group of educators, ethicists, and scholars struggling to define their relatively new field rediscovered the studia humanitatis, a Renaissance curriculum for learning and teaching. Our origin narrative is composed of two intertwined stories-the history of the studia humanitatis itself and the story of the scholars who rediscovered it. We argue that as an origin narrative the studia humanitatis grounds the medical humanities as both an engaged moral practice and pedagogical project. In the latter part of the paper, we use this origin narrative to show how medical humanists working in translational science can use their understanding of their historical roots to do meaningful work in the world.

Visuality is a concept used to study vision as an historically and culturally specific activity. Curriculum in the medical humanities could address visuality by stressing how different kinds of practitioners and peoples learn how to see. This paper introduces the visual training promoted by the discipline of art history, analysing early modern French medical images of the unborn as a case study. The goal is to encourage medical practitioners to reflect on their own visual skills, comparing and contrasting them with the visual methodologies of art history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]