IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/gender/v28y2021is1p89-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reflections on front‐line medical work during COVID‐19 and the embodiment of risk

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Yarrow
  • Victoria Pagan

Abstract

Drawing on the voice of a woman NHS front‐line doctor during the current COVID‐19 pandemic, we explore her lived experience of the embodiment of risk in the crisis. We explore her struggles and difficulties, giving her voice and mobilizing our writing to listen to these experiences, reflecting on them as a way of living our own feminist lives. Her story illustrates that the current crisis is not only a crisis of health, but a crisis for feminism. Through telling her story, we cast light upon the embodied amplification of inequalities, paternalistic discourses around risk and lived experience of exposure to risk of contracting a deadly virus. We explore her work on the NHS front line, providing a conceptual framework of the multi‐level facets of the embodiment of risk, through lived experiences of risk and observations of the inequality of risk in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the UK.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Yarrow & Victoria Pagan, 2021. "Reflections on front‐line medical work during COVID‐19 and the embodiment of risk," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(S1), pages 89-100, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:28:y:2021:i:s1:p:89-100
    DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12505
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/gwao.12505?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Rafael Alcadipani, 2020. "Pandemic and macho organizations: Wake‐up call or business as usual?," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 734-746, September.
    3. Helena Liu, 2017. "The Masculinisation of Ethical Leadership Dis/embodiment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 263-278, August.
    4. Deborah Kerfoot & David Knights, 1993. "Management, Masculinity And Manipulation: From Paternalism To Corporate Strategy In Financial Services In Britain," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 659-677, July.
    5. Sonia Mukhtar, 2020. "Feminism and gendered impact of COVID‐19: Perspective of a counselling psychologist," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 827-832, September.
    6. Sophie Hennekam & Yuliya Shymko, 2020. "Coping with the COVID‐19 crisis: force majeure and gender performativity," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(5), pages 788-803, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elena P. Antonacopoulou & Andri Georgiadou, 2021. "Leading through social distancing: The future of work, corporations and leadership from home," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 749-767, March.
    2. Dharshani Thennakoon & Shalini Dananja Kumari Wanninayake & Pavithra Kailasapathy, 2022. "Honey, How Can I Help? Gender and Distribution of Unpaid Labour during COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Bradley, Ian, 2003. "The representative bettor, bet size, and prospect theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 409-413, March.
    4. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Gutierrez, Roman J., 2007. "Testing for intransitivity of preferences predicted by a lexicographic semi-order," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 96-112, September.
    5. Sujoy Chakravarty & Jaideep Roy, 2009. "Recursive expected utility and the separation of attitudes towards risk and ambiguity: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 199-228, March.
    6. Michael R. CARTER & Alain de JANVRY & Elisabeth SADOULET & Alexandros SARRIS, 2014. "Index-based weather insurance for developing countries: A review of evidence and a set of propositions for up-scaling," Working Papers P111, FERDI.
    7. Jörg Oechssler & Andreas Roider & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2015. "Cooling Off in Negotiations: Does it Work?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(4), pages 565-588, December.
    8. Haim Levy & Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thorsten Hens, 2012. "Two Paradigms and Nobel Prizes in Economics: a Contradiction or Coexistence?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 18(2), pages 163-182, March.
    9. Hobman, Elizabeth V. & Frederiks, Elisha R. & Stenner, Karen & Meikle, Sarah, 2016. "Uptake and usage of cost-reflective electricity pricing: Insights from psychology and behavioural economics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 455-467.
    10. Fei Wang & Shu Li & Xin-Wen Bai & Xiao-Peng Ren & Li-Lin Rao & Jin-Zhen Li & Huan Liu & Hong-Zhi Liu & Bin Wu & Rui Zheng, 2015. "Town Mouse or Country Mouse: Identifying a Town Dislocation Effect in Chinese Urbanization," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    11. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Wang, 2002. "Consistent testing for stochastic dominance: a subsampling approach," CeMMAP working papers 03/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. Gebhard Geiger, 2012. "Multi-attribute non-expected utility," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 263-292, July.
    13. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    14. Ewa Michalska & Renata Dudzińska-Baryła, 2012. "Comparison of the valuations of alternatives based on cumulative prospect theory and almost stochastic dominance," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 22(3), pages 23-36.
    15. Carolyn Fischer & William A. Pizer, 2019. "Horizontal Equity Effects in Energy Regulation," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(S1), pages 209-237.
    16. Aurélien Baillon & Yoram Halevy & Chen Li, 2022. "Experimental elicitation of ambiguity attitude using the random incentive system," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1002-1023, June.
    17. Gao, Kun & Sun, Lijun & Yang, Ying & Meng, Fanyu & Qu, Xiaobo, 2021. "Cumulative prospect theory coupled with multi-attribute decision making for modeling travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 1-21.
    18. Shuoqing Deng & Xun Li & Huyên Pham & Xiang Yu, 2022. "Optimal consumption with reference to past spending maximum," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 217-266, April.
    19. Edward Gu & Tianguang Meng & Hongying Wang & Alexander Zhang, 2023. "E-Government Use, Perceived Transparency, Public Knowledge of Government Performance, and Satisfaction with Government: An Analysis of Mediating, Moderating, and Framing Mechanisms Based on the COVID-," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 79-124, September.
    20. Heiko Karle & Georg Kirchsteiger & Martin Peitz, 2015. "Loss Aversion and Consumption Choice: Theory and Experimental Evidence," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 101-120, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:gender:v:28:y:2021:i:s1:p:89-100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0968-6673 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.