Interdisciplinary Fellowship Program

Past Fellows of CHCS Program 2003-2004 Fellows

Erin Finley "Involvement in the Center for Health, Culture, and Society (CHCS) Fellowship has provided me an education in public health that’s been a long time coming. As a graduate student in medical anthropology at Emory, my interest in anthropology has always been linked to my interest in human health – my undergraduate coursework led to an honors thesis examining maternal mortality among Mayan women in Guatemala. In fact, it was during the fieldwork for that project that I first encountered public health, both as a systemic body of research and service and as a world-view. Public health is rare in the scope of its goals – health for all the people, all the time; this vision, however bruised by the realities, was infectious. My interest grew during a year with the CDC’s Guide to Community Preventive Services and two years working in a substance abuse research unit at a public hospital in Massachusetts. During both those positions, I sat through endless meetings listening to public-health-speak I only vaguely understood through exposure, and among all the things I learned in that time, two stand out: 1) interdisciplinary health research has the potential to vastly advance both scientific knowledge and our ability to enhance population-level health; and 2) I didn’t have the skills to participate fully in such research. The CHCS Fellowship has, on the most basic level, provided me the methodological skills to conduct combined qualitative and quantitative research and taught me how to communicate effectively with and as a public health professional. But beyond this, the fellowship has provided me a space in which to think critically about my own research agenda and its relationship to medical anthropology and public health. The Center’s Health and Community Seminar offered a forum in which to consider the relationship between researchers’ and community needs and goals. The Center’s regular Fellows Meetings, along with a Paul Farmer reading group of anthropology, medicine, and international health students, encouraged me to challenge assumptions around human rights and responsible scholarship. A course in the History of Public Health made visible past triumphs and ignominy in public health, and suggested a language for talking about current efforts with a mind towards previous lessons learned. As a result, I have begun to think about my own research in a new way. Following the fellowship, I am returning to coursework in the anthropology department with a fresh perspective on the usefulness of knowledge that integrates theory with applicability. I intend to continue research on psychological well-being and resilience among survivors of political violence, specifically African refugees resettling in North America. I am grateful to the Center for the twin opportunities of this time and this training. This year has given me everything I hoped of it, which has – as all the best things do – added up to something wholly different than I could have expected."

Angela Weaver "I began the CHCS fellowship after earning an MPH degree from the Department of International Health at the Rollins School of Public Health with a concentration in infectious diseases. While attending Rollins, I developed an interest in pediatric infectious diseases, immunization, and vaccine development, and became increasingly interested in the populations disproportionately affected by vaccine preventable diseases. These interests took me to Soweto, South Africa, where I completed my master’s thesis research on the effectiveness of Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate vaccine (Hib) and pneumococcal conjugate vaccine to prevent pneumonia in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected children. While completing this research, I had the opportunity to spend time in the pediatric infectious disease wards, attend daily rounds, and attend outpatient pediatric HIV clinics. In addition to witnessing firsthand healthcare administration in a resource-limited setting, I gained valuable insight into the complexities of delivering healthcare to populations requiring special care, such as orphans. I took part in the CHCS fellowship program to better understand how special-needs populations utilize and experience healthcare, and, most importantly, how healthcare practitioners can more effectively interact with these populations from a more informed perspective. This past year provided me with opportunities to attend course seminars in which these issues were examined from myriad perspectives, including anthropology, medical history, ethics, religion, and gender health. In addition, I was able to extend my interest in the history of medicine and had the opportunity to be a teaching assistant in Howard Kushner’s History of Public Health course. Beyond course work, I took the opportunity to collaborate with a physician at Grady Hospital on a project exploring the rich history of Grady. In culmination of this project I am developing a manuscript focusing on the history of syphilis and health disparities at Grady. This summer I will begin medical school at the University of Maryland. I am confident that my fellowship studies will contribute to my ability to work and communicate effectively with vulnerable and underserved populations in the clinical setting, and will enable me to approach public health problems with a greater understanding of the complex social and cultural factors that influence community and individual health. I am grateful to the Center, especially Peter Brown and Howard Kushner, for giving me this opportunity to 'think outside of the box'.”

Svea Closser "Prior to entering graduate school in anthropology two years ago, I spent one year each in Nepal and Pakistan. There, I saw a number of public health projects that were failures, often fabulously expensive failures. Given the great need for effective health care in these areas, these observations pained me. I entered graduate school hoping to understand what I could about ways of changing the situation. I wanted to do research on cross-cultural communication between care providers and patients and the effects this has on health. I soon realized that to put such research in context, I needed answers to some basic questions. How is international health policy formulated and disseminated? How do NGOs get funded, exactly? What are the traditional ways of creating and evaluating IH programs? What insights does epidemiology give to public health professionals, and how might I find it useful? What are strategies for managing NGO programs? I applied for the CHCS fellowship with the hope of finding some answers. I learned a lot more than the answers to these questions. Through coursework, discussion with my fellow students, and opportunities like the CHCS “Community and Health” seminar, I learned a great deal about the structure, culture, history, possibilites and limitations of such diverse international health agencies as the WHO, CDC, and Save the Children. This discussion and learning has transformed my research. From a somewhat simplistic “culture clash” model, I have moved toward an approach that takes health care bureaucracies seriously, with a much more nuanced understanding of their possibilities and limitations. Previously, my model of “health care” took seriously into account only the provider and the patient—a limited view. Now, rather than examining only provider-patient interactions, I plan to take into account international policy and the aid bureaucracy, how these organizations shape health care delivery at the village level in South Asia, and where and how changes might be made to improve the health of impoverished South Asian communities. My fellowship with CHCS, and the bridges across campus it has enabled me to build, has broadened and complexified my worldview. I am thankful to the Center, as well as my fellow students and professors in the School of Public Health, for providing me with this great year of reflection and growth."

Whitney Pyles "During my fellowship, I discovered that being given free license to enter another discipline and explore for a year tends to get you off track. As it turned out, getting off track helped me in ways I never would have imagined. The fellowship opportunity caught my attention because I thought experience in Anthropology would complement my interests in maternal and child nutrition. I came from a very technical background and the chance to explore the cultural aspects of food and feeding appealed to me. Some of the other aspects of the fellowship, such as the seminars and opportunity for interdisciplinary dialogue just seemed like a nice bonus. When I applied for the fellowship, I valued the Center’s goals of interdisciplinary dialogue; however, I didn’t fully realize the complexities until well into the year. I assumed that people from various disciplines would approach topics from different points of view, but when the need to 'speak each other’s language' was mentioned, I felt like it was a stretch. After all, we were all academics – how hard could it be? I really began to see how crucial the need for this approach was during the first few weeks into my anthropology coursework. All of sudden I felt like a complete outsider - and all I had done was walk across campus! One of the most frustrating parts of the fellowship was that I really liked the people outside the classroom; we just always seemed to be disagreeing inside the classroom. During the year, it became clear how various personalities are drawn to certain fields, methods, etc and how those settings further shape our perspectives. While this is often referred to as a 'bias', I came to dislike the negative connotation. It leads us to think that if we can all get passed our own biases, then we can really talk to each other. In all honesty, though, my perspective (or my bias) didn’t change a lot over the year, but my listening skills did improve a bit. Instead of trying to not think like a public health practioner, I simply value my colleagues in anthropology as my natural complement. They balance both my information and experience. Rather than trying to always agree, I found it was more productive to take advantage of the variety of backgrounds that were represented. Along with the interdisciplinary dialogue, I found that the chance to spend a significant amount of time practicing my analytical writing skills was one of the most useful aspects of the fellowship. While writing for public health requires a clear style and ability to expertly convey the implications of data, writing for anthropology meant tackling much more theoretical questions, with fewer direct ties to policy and action. For someone who’s more of a doer than a thinker, this was quite a challenge. Also, exploring how public health policy can really take advantage of anthropologies theories and methods really stretched my abilities. Given that all of my accomplishments this year rested on the interaction between myself, those associated with the Center, and my colleagues in anthropology, I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone. The amount of time and consideration everyone has shown for my ideas and professional development has been truly amazing and I appreciate it more than words can say. As a result of my fellowship, I am now exploring the possibility of pursuing a PhD in programs that allow you to split your time between anthropology and public health - I’ve decided that it’s the only way to go! I’ll take my time picking out a program though; I’m thoroughly exhausted from this past year! "

Jennifer Kuzara "When I applied for the CHCS fellowship in the spring of 2003, my goals for the upcoming year were very simple. I wanted to learn epidemiologic methods, primarily study design and statistics. The problem I was tackling was very biological, and slightly obscure in the realm of public health, but important, I felt. It revolved around a cell-surface molecule called MHC, which happens to be one of the primary interfaces between illness and the immune system, and one of the most fabulously complex gene systems known. I clung tenaciously to this problem through the first months of my study of epidemiology. That was to change, however. The more familiar I became with the toolbox of the epidemiologist, the more realistic I had to be. As I read study after study on some of the most pressing issues in public health, the more pressed I felt to focus my work on a problem of greater weight than the one I had chosen for myself. Redrafting the very architecture of my goals and the complexion of my self-perception as a scholar was difficult, at times painful, as all growth processes are at times. There were moments when I felt that, rather than learning new techniques, I was learning what pitfalls I should avoid. There were moments when I felt that the gulf between the perspectives I’ve been so long trained to take, and those held by my fellow students and professors, was simply impassable. I felt the critical approach, so important in anthropology, in which I’d invested so much to develop, to be an encumbrance in this field where skills were the focus. At times I resented being so monopolized by this efficient, skill-building machine that I had no mental space left to devote to the growing conflict I felt about where I should concentrate my efforts. My year in public health challenged me in ways I would never have predicted. It was disconcerting, even frightening, to be driven so completely from my chosen goal. My path had been very clear, sequential, explicit, and, as I would learn, entirely illusory. As it turned out, being forced into a mode of thinking I’d never engaged in before was precisely the jolt I needed to bring myself back into a realistic way of thinking. It forced me to reconsider every priority I had had for my career, which I had considered fixed. I haven’t yet settled on a new goal for my research. I’ve realized I have a great deal to learn in the next year, before I can set my priorities in a new order, one to which I can reconcile myself academically, ethically and personally. When I do set forth, however, I’ll have a set of methods and perspectives, new skills and a new style of communication, in my repertoire. These will not replace my training in anthropology, but will be used in conjunction with it, in ways that will hopefully make a novel contribution to both disciplines. I’m compelled to take this opportunity very seriously; it will be my responsibility to inform my work from both disciplines and to translate my work to my, now vastly expanded, group of colleagues."

Current Fellows Reports of Past Fellows   Return to Fellowships Page