Are cultural safety definitions culturally safe? A review of 42 cultural safety definitions in an Australian cultural concept soup

Mark Lock, Megan Williams, Atalanta Lloyd-Haynes, Oliver Burmeister, Heather Came, Linda Deravin, Jennifer Browne, Maria Jose Lopez Alvarez, Troy Walker, Jessica Biles, Danielle Manton, Holly Randell-Moon, Sophie Zaccone, Renee Otmar, Elizabeth Kendall, Tara Flemington, Aqua Hastings, Jayne Lawrence, Faye McMillan, Bindi Bennett

Research output: Other contributionDiscipline Preprint RepositoryResearch

Abstract

Cultural safety is a keystone reform concept intended to improve First Nations Peoples’ health and wellbeing. Are definitions of cultural safety, in themselves, culturally safe? A purposive search of diverse sources in Australian identified 42 definitions of cultural safety. Structuration theory informed the analytical framework and was applied through an Indigenist methodology. Ten themes emerged from this analysis, indicating that cultural risk is embedded in cultural safety definitions that diminish (meddlesome modifications and discombobulating
discourse), demean (developmentally dubious and validation vacillations), and disempower (professional prose, redundant reflexivity, and scholarly shenanigans) the cultural identity (problematic provenance and ostracised ontology) of First Nations Australians. We offer four guidelines for future definitional construction processes, and methodology and taxonomy for building consensus based of definitions of cultural safety. Using this approach could reduce cultural risk and contribute to improved workforce ability to respond to the cultural strengths
of First Nations Australians.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherResearch Square
Number of pages18
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Dec 2021

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are cultural safety definitions culturally safe? A review of 42 cultural safety definitions in an Australian cultural concept soup'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this