•  
  •  
 

St. Thomas Law Review

First Page

59

Document Type

Article

Abstract

This article is divided into five parts. The foregoing Part I, a brief introduction, highlights a few contemporary policy issues in the discourse about TM in international law and public health arenas. It identifies the epistemic schism between TM and the allopathic system as being at the root of the grandiose policy of integrating TM into national health systems. Premised on a multi-juridical framework, Part II examines select international legal and quasi-legal instruments, and probes the extent to which they make provisions for the protection of TM. Part III evaluates the international policy regime on TM, specifically as championed by the WHO, by examining the WHO's TM program. Part IV evaluates state practices in the context of national cultures and amongst constituent peoples and belief systems as they relate to TM in an attempt to situate its worldwide status. Part V is a perspective on the paradigmatic divergence between TM and Western biomedicine as well as their underlying theories of illness which is central to the epistemic schism. The conclusion re-sketches the central theme of the article, affirming, I contend, that TM attracts adequate recognition in the international law and policy framework reviewed. However, for undermining the epistemic question posed, discussions and policies about TM have limited consequence for effective medical pluralism and consequently the optimization of humanity's ability to tackle the burden of illness. The continued undermining of TM by the allopathic episteme fosters the reductionist assimilation of TM. A realistic future for TM is one linked to addressing the epistemic question. That question needs to be the focus of the discussions about TM in the context of global public health policy.

Download

Share

COinS