Research of stigmatized conditions: dilemma for the sociocultural psychiatrist.

Over the last 23 years, I have had the privilege of researching several stigmatizing conditions in sociocultural context. These conditions have ranged from alcohol abuse and alcoholism, opium addiction and other dtug abuse, to incest, depression, amok and other homicide, and psychosis in village settings. Groups in which these conditions have been studied have included the Hmong, Lao, and other ethnic groups in Asia, Chippewa and other t ribal peoples in Minnesota, refugees, medical students, and physicians. Roles in these studies have at times varied from the 'pure" research role, to various applied roles such as consultant, planner, evaluator, and administrator. Although some work has been done with my own resources or with research funding, other work has been under the auspices of numerous funding organizations; these include the U.S. Agency for International Development, the World Health Organization, the White House (Office of Drug Abuse Prevention), Congress of American Indian Affairs, United Sioux Tribes, the Indian Health Board of Minneapolis, and others (Westermeyer, 1971, 1972a, 1972b 1973, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1988; Westermeyer & Walzer, 1975; Westermeyer & Kroll, 1978; Westermeyer & Wintrob, 1979; Westermeyer & Pe ake, 1983; Westermeyer, Neider, & Vang, 1984; Westermeyer, Phaobtong, & Neider, 1988; Westermeyer & Hausman, 1974a, 1974b). Against this background, it is especially gratifying to read and comment on Dr. Edward Foulks' paper. His experience in one case study mirrors familiar situations and problems from many of my efforts. His courage in relating these events, and his lucid analysis, serve the useful purpose of examining the social, political, and personal issues associated with this type of work.