The research design combines specific qualitative methodologies with analysis of theoretical debate and empirical material. It is innovative, generating insights contributing to new knowledge in academia, policy and practice in this field. Key gaps in literature addressed include limited studies on; a) populations in the global south on mental health in humanitarian settings, b) majority populations (not combatants or victims of sexual violence), c) community approaches to war related suffering (notably religion) and, d) limited academic studies on such humanitarian interventions.
Key findings indicate understanding of war related suffering as normal, linking the body, mind and spirit, with physical suffering paramount to psychological. Communities have their own approaches, mostly religion, considered as effective, relevant and appropriate. Advances in science reflected in the fields of alternative and integrative medicine support the ‘scientific’ value of such approaches. Finally, the inconsistency between community understandings and approaches and that of the global mental health responses is highlighted.
Key recommendations include; incorporating valuing community approaches within humanitarian actor competencies; engaging policy makers, academics and practitioners in research around spirituality and mental health in humanitarian settings in the global south, encouraging reflection and debate on revisions to methodological approaches of engaging war affected communities, more research in this field, and finally more profound reflection on such global responses leading not just to change, but total transformation.
