Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 664–672 | Cite as

Reasons for Self-Medication and Perceptions of Risk Among Mexican Migrant Farm Workers

Original Paper

Abstract

Although the frequency of self-medication among Mexican migrants has been well-documented in the public health literature, the multiple reasons for this practice are poorly understood. Most studies point to migrants’ cultural preferences for Mexican medications, their prior experiences in countries where antibiotics are loosely regulated, and their lack of access to health care as the primary factors behind their self-medication. Based on participant observation and in-depth interviews with 23 Mexican migrants in a farm working community in the interior of California, we argue that occupational vulnerability is an equally important factor that encourages self-medication. All 23 of our interviewees reported having engaged in some degree of self-medication, notable in this location 8 h from the US–Mexico border. Among interviewees, occupational vulnerability represented an even more important factor influencing self-medication than lack of health insurance or lack of legal documentation. While interviewees did express a preference for Mexican medications as more potent and effective, this did not necessarily translate to a preference for using them without a doctor’s supervision. Finally, we show that rather than remaining unaware of the risks of following this custom “transported from Latin America”, Mexican migrants devised an elaborate hierarchy of resort of the safest self-medication practices to follow.

Keywords

Self-medication Latinos Migrant farm workers Risk perception Pharmaceuticals Structural vulnerability Hierarchy of resort 

References

  1. 1.
    Cespedes A, Larson E. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding antibiotic use among Latinos in the United States: review and recommendations. Am J Infect Control. 2006;34(8):495–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coffman MJ, Shobe MA, O’Connell B. Self-prescription practices in recent Latino immigrants. Public Health Nurs. 2008;25(3):203–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mainous AG, Cheng AY, Garr RC, Tilley BC, Everett CJ, McKee MD. Nonprescribed antimicrobial drugs in Latino community, South Carolina. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:883–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mainous AG, Diaz VA, Carnemolla M. Factors affecting Latino adults’ use of antibiotics for self-medication. JABFM. 2008;21(2):128–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McKee MD, Mills L, Mainous AG. Antibiotics for the treatment of upper respiratory infections in a diverse community. J Fam Pract. 1999;48:993–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Landers TF, Ferng Y, Wong McLoughlin J, Barrett AE, Larson E. Antibiotic identification, use, and self-medication for respiratory illnesses among urban Latinos. J Am Acad Nurs Pract. 2010;22:488–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larson E, Diolone J, Garcia M, Smolowitz J. Factors which influence Latino community members to self-prescribe antibiotics. Nurs Res. 2006;55(2):94–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Larson E, Ferng YH, Wong J, Alvarez-Cid M, Barrett A, Gonzalez MJ, et al. Knowledge and misconceptions regarding upper respiratory infections and influenza among urban Hispanic households: need for targeted messaging. J Immigr Minor Health. 2008;11(2):71–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pylypa J. Self-medication practices in two California Mexican communities. J Immigr Health. 2001;3(2):59–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Menjivar C. The ties that heal: Guatemalan immigrant women’s networks and medical treatment. Int Migr Rev. 2002;36(2):437–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Das V, Das RK. Urban health and pharmaceutical consumption in Delhi, India. J Biosoc Sci. 2005;38:69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Helman CG. Culture, health, and illness. 4th ed. London: Arnold; 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Waldstein A. Popular medicine and self-care in a Mexican migrant community: toward an explanation of an epidemiological paradox. Med Anthropol. 2010;29(1):71–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ugalde A, Homedes N. Household storage of pharmaceuticals in Costa Rica. In: Etkin Nina, Tan ML, editors. Medicines: meanings and contexts. Quezon City: Health action information network; 1994. p. 165–83.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    US Census. Census 2000 summary file 1 (SF-1) 100-percent data. Table P4. “Hispanic or Latino, and Not Hispanic Latino by race”. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau; 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2002.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bourgois P. Anthropology and epidemiology on drugs: the challenges of cross-methodological and theoretical dialogue. Int J Drug Policy. 2002;13:259–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bourgois P. A Latino oral health paradox? Using ethnography to specify the factors that contribute to immigrant children’s poorer oral health. Natl Assoc Pract Anthropol Bull. 2010;34(1):68–83. Special issue on anthropological perspectives on migration and health.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bourgois P. Stigmatized biologies: examining the cumulative effects of oral health disparities for Mexican American children. Med Anthropol Q. 2010;24(2):199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sanjek R. Fieldnotes: the making of anthropology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; 1990. p. 93–4.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heyman JMcC, Nunez GG, Talavera V. Health care access and barriers for unauthorized migrants in El Paso County, Texas. Fam Community Health. 2009;32(1):4–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Whyte SR, van der Geest S, Hardon A. Injectionists: the attraction of technology. In: Whyte SR, van der Geest S, Hardon A, editors. Social lives of medicines. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002. p. 104–29.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Whyte SR, Van der Geest S. Injections: issues and methods for anthropological research. In: Nina E, Tan ML, editors. Medicines: meanings and contexts. Quezon City: Health Action Information Network; 1994. p. 137–61.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wyatt HV. The popularity of injections in the Third World: origins and consequences for poliomyelitis. Soc Sci Med. 1995;88(6):654–6.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Romanucci-Ross L. The hierarchy of resort in curative practices: the Admiralty Islands, Melanesia. In: Landy D, editor. Culture, disease, and healing: studies in medical anthropology. New York: Macmillan; 1977. p. 481–7.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Viladrich A. Botanicas in America’s backyard: uncovering the world of Latino immigrants’ herb-healing practices. Hum Org. 2006;65(4):407–19.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Flaskerud JH, Nyamathi AM. Home medication injection among Latina women in Los Angeles: implications for health education and prevention. AIDS Care. 1996;8(1):95–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lafferty J. Self-injection and needle sharing among migrant farmworkers. Am J Public Health. 1991;81(2):221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cartwright E. Immigrant dreams: legal pathologies and structural vulnerabilities along the immigration continuum. Med Anthropol. 2011;30(5):475–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Holmes S. Structural vulnerability and hierarchies of ethnicity and citizenship on the farm. Med Anthropol. 2011;30(4):425–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Quesada J. Structural vulnerability and health: Latino migrant laborers in the United States. Med Anthropol. 2011;30(4):339–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyCollege of Liberal Arts & Sciences, University of Colorado DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations