Tijdschrift voor psychiatrie · 2026
[Towards a postcolonial psychiatry? The contemporary relevance of Frantz Fanon].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Vleminck J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The centenary of Frantz Fanon’s birth in 2025 sparked renewed attention to his work. In recent years, his reception has shifted noticeably: from Fanon as a political activist to Fanon as a psychiatrist.
AIM: To offer a concise exploration of the historical significance and contemporary relevance of Fanon’s psychiatric writings, and to help make this body of work more accessible to a Dutch-speaking readership.
METHOD: A reflective discussion based on a literature review of both the primary and recent secondary literature, including a recent narrative literature review on Fanon via PubMed.
RESULTS: The renewed engagement with Fanon’s psychiatric writing provides a more accurate understanding of his role in the decolonization of psychiatry and sheds light on his radically innovative clinical practice as a psychiatrist.
CONCLUSION: Although formal decolonization largely lies behind us, Fanon remains a vital point of reference for social and transcultural psychiatry. His work continues to issue a postcolonial challenge to the broader psychiatric field: it calls for culturally sensitive care and reminds psychiatry of its societal responsibility to confront institutional racism.
AIM: To offer a concise exploration of the historical significance and contemporary relevance of Fanon’s psychiatric writings, and to help make this body of work more accessible to a Dutch-speaking readership.
METHOD: A reflective discussion based on a literature review of both the primary and recent secondary literature, including a recent narrative literature review on Fanon via PubMed.
RESULTS: The renewed engagement with Fanon’s psychiatric writing provides a more accurate understanding of his role in the decolonization of psychiatry and sheds light on his radically innovative clinical practice as a psychiatrist.
CONCLUSION: Although formal decolonization largely lies behind us, Fanon remains a vital point of reference for social and transcultural psychiatry. His work continues to issue a postcolonial challenge to the broader psychiatric field: it calls for culturally sensitive care and reminds psychiatry of its societal responsibility to confront institutional racism.