How narration could unfold oppression: insights from the experiences of the Kurds in access to Turkish healthcare services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Uncovering the nuances of oppression in qualitative research can be challenging, as oppression often manifests in subtle, implicit ways. In such contexts, individuals from oppressed groups may share their experiences in ways that reveal embedded meanings. As such, when interpreting interviews with people from oppressed groups, it is crucial to look beyond what is explicitly stated to uncover their true experiences. This paper examines how the way non-Turkish-speaking Kurds narrate their experiences reveals the effects of language-related oppression and internalized oppression within Turkish healthcare services. METHODS: This paper is a methodological reflection on a prior qualitative study examining how the exclusion of the Kurdish language from Turkish healthcare system impacts access. Through semi-structured interviews conducted in 2018-2019 with 12 non-Turkish-speaking Kurds, the primary study revealed that language barriers extended beyond miscommunication and were deeply rooted in systemic oppression. In this paper, we reanalysed the data using the concepts of the narrated, nonnarrated, and disnarrated, developed by Vindrola-Padros and Johnson, to reveal how narration could unfold oppression. RESULTS: We found that non-Turkish-speaking Kurds seeking healthcare in Turkey often excluded (nonnarrated) government services due to the lack of services in Kurdish. They indirectly mentioned (disnarrated) the political conflict as the root cause of their negative experiences; and portrayed themselves as the ones who must adjust to the system, rather than the system accommodating their needs which implied internalized oppression (circumnarrated). As a result of this complexity, the individual often disappeared from their own narrative, relying heavily on family involvement (conarrated) as their primary means of access. CONCLUSION: Applying the concepts of the narrated, nonnarrated, and disnarrated to the healthcare access experiences of Kurds in Turkey has revealed important insights into the structural and internalized oppression. By extending the original framework to include the concepts of conarration and circumnarration, we have provided a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities of oppression in healthcare access. Additionally, we found that one form of narration often acts as a response, replacement, or justification for another, urging researchers to consider the dynamism and the intricate relationship between different forms of narration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".