In June 1992, 35 health care professionals, child and disability advocates, researchers, clinicians, and parents met at Wingspread Center in Racine, Wisconsin, for an invitational conference on Culture and Chronic Illness in Childhood. The meeting had as its goal the identification of the state of knowledge on the interface between culture, chronic illness, child development, and family functioning so as to lay the foundations for "culturally appropriate" health policy formulation, "culturally sensitive" services, and "culturally competent" clinicians.
The purpose of this special supplement is to establish a national agenda for research, policy, service delivery, and training in addressing the needs of all children with chronic illnesses and disabilities that takes the family, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and culture into full account. To meet this task, five papers were commissioned. The first, by Newacheck et al, addresses the changes in incidence and prevalence of chronic illness and disability among children and youth by ethnic group. The second paper, by McManus et al, focuses on the trends in health services organization, delivery, and financing as they vary among ethnic groups in the United States. What emerges is a rhetoric of cultural sensitivity not paralleled in the organization or financing of health services.
Groce and Zola's paper addresses how cultural attitudes and beliefs are the foundations of our perceptions about health and illness. Those perceptions at times are predisposed to conflict with a health care professional who, coming from a different culture, may hold different norms and beliefs.
Brookins grounds her discussion within the context of child development and argues that for a child of color or one whose ethnic heritage is other than mainstream, the key to developmental success is bicultural competence—the ability to walk in and between two worlds.
Health‐care professionals’ assessment of a person‐centred intervention to empower self‐management and health across chronic illness: Qualitative findings from a process evaluation study