Skip to content
PaperFren

Colonial medicine

When did Dutch colonies lock up leprosy?

Snelders S, van Bergen L, Huisman F · Social history of medicine : the journal of the Society for the Social History of Medicine · 2021

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Compulsory segregation was the exception, used where Dutch rule was direct and plantation slavery made racialised workers disposable once they could not labour.

Study at a glance

Design
Qualitative / archival — Comparative colonial history of Dutch West and East Indies leprosy segregation, 1750–1950
N
Empire-wide comparative history; 1930 Suriname statistic that ~80% diagnosed were Afro-Surinamese is contextual
Population
Leprosy policy and segregation under Dutch colonial rule in West and East Indies
Outcome
Compulsory segregation as exception tied to plantation labour and racialised disposability

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

Visible isolation was not universal: money, distance, and communication blocked it. Segregation tracked plantation-intensive economies and racial ‘Others’ in slavery or involuntary servitude. The colonial gaze is how planters, officials, and doctors legitimised locking up those no longer useful as labour.

Methodology

Building on Foucault’s medical gaze, the authors compare Dutch West and East Indies from 1750–1950. They tie segregation decisions to how labour was organised, then follow later asylums and a 1930 Suriname statistic that most diagnosed people were still Afro-Surinamese.

Limitations

This is a comparative colonial history, not a clinical trial of chaulmoogra or MDT. The 80 per cent figure is for 1930 diagnoses in that setting, not a universal racial law.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsColonial medicineconcept

    Dutch colonial leprosy segregation was the exception, used where rule was direct and plantation slavery made racialised workers disposable once they could not labour.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsArchival Researchmethod

    Comparative archival work can link medical decisions to economic structures. Comparing the Dutch West and East Indies from 1750 to 1950 shows compulsory leprosy segregation was the exception, tracking direct rule and plantation slavery, and that money, distance and communication blocked visible isolation elsewhere.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsArchival Researchmethod

    Scope is a trade-off. The leprosy study compares two colonies across two centuries and can generalise about segregation and labour, but its authors warn that the 1930 Suriname figure is not a universal racial law. The Glasgow School and nursing studies stay tightly local and can describe practice in detail, but say they cannot prove Glasgow outperformed Cambridge or score modern competence.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

  • Scope difference — different assays, populations, or outcomes

    Scope is a trade-off. The leprosy study compares two colonies across two centuries and can generalise about segregation and labour, but its authors warn that the 1930 Suriname figure is not a universal racial law. The Glasgow School and nursing studies stay tightly local and can describe practice in detail, but say they cannot prove Glasgow outperformed Cambridge or score modern competence.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.