IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v146y2015icp164-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From patient deference towards negotiated and precarious informality: An Eliasian analysis of English general practitioners' understandings of changing patient relations

Author

Listed:
  • Brown, Patrick
  • Elston, Mary Ann
  • Gabe, Jonathan

Abstract

This article contributes to sociological debates about trends in the power and status of medical professionals, focussing on claims that deferent patient relations are giving way to a more challenging consumerism. Analysing data from a mixed methods study involving general practitioners in England, we found some support for the idea that an apparent ‘golden age’ of patient deference is receding. Although not necessarily expressing nostalgia for such doctor-patient relationships, most GPs described experiencing disruptive or verbally abusive interactions at least occasionally and suggested that these were becoming more common. Younger doctors tended to rate patients as less respectful than their older colleagues but were also more likely to be egalitarian in attitude. Our data suggest that GPs, especially younger ones, tend towards a more informal yet limited engagement with their patients and with the communities in which they work. These new relations might be a basis for mutual respect between professionals and patients in the consulting room, but may also generate uncertainty and misunderstanding. Such shifts are understood through an Eliasian framework as the functional-democratisation of patient-doctor relations via civilising processes, but with this shift existing alongside decivilising tendencies involving growing social distance across broader social figurations.

Suggested Citation

  • Brown, Patrick & Elston, Mary Ann & Gabe, Jonathan, 2015. "From patient deference towards negotiated and precarious informality: An Eliasian analysis of English general practitioners' understandings of changing patient relations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 164-172.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:146:y:2015:i:c:p:164-172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.10.047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953615301866
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.10.047?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annandale, Ellen & Hunt, Kate, 1998. "Accounts of disagreements with doctors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 119-129, January.
    2. Lupton, Deborah, 1997. "Consumerism, reflexivity and the medical encounter," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 373-381, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samant, Mayuri & Calnan, Michael & Kane, Sumit, 2024. "A critical analysis of newspaper accounts of violence against doctors in India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
    2. Sally Dowling, 2024. "Broken (Again) – Making Sense of Ankle Fracture, Hospitalisation, and Early Recovery: An Autoethnography," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 29(2), pages 507-524, June.

    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. Epstein, Steven, 2016. "The politics of health mobilization in the United States: The promise and pitfalls of “disease constituencies”," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 246-254.
    2. Chiu, Stephen W.K. & Ko, Lisanne S.F. & Lee, Rance P.L., 2005. "Decolonization and the movement for institutionalization of Chinese medicine in Hong Kong: a political process perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 1045-1058, September.
    3. Magnus Lindelow, 2003. "Understanding spatial variation in the utilization of health services: does quality matter?," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/2004-12, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    4. Setti Rais Ali & Paul Dourgnon & Lise Rochaix, 2018. "Social Capital or Education: What Matters Most to Cut Time to Diagnosis?," Working Papers halshs-01703170, HAL.
    5. Dew, Kevin & Roorda, Mathea, 2001. "Institutional innovation and the handling of health complaints in New Zealand: an assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 27-44, July.
    6. Greco, Cinzia, 2015. "The Poly Implant Prothèse breast prostheses scandal: Embodied risk and social suffering," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 150-157.
    7. Stefan Stremersch & Vardit Landsman & Sriram Venkataraman, 2013. "The Relationship Between DTCA, Drug Requests, and Prescriptions: Uncovering Variation in Specialty and Space," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 89-110, June.
    8. Dyer, Thomas Anthony & Owens, Janine & Robinson, Peter Glenn, 2014. "The acceptability of care delegation in skill-mix: The salience of trust," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 170-178.
    9. Ewa Malchrowicz-Mośko & Joanna Poczta, 2018. "Running as a Form of Therapy Socio-Psychological Functions of Mass Running Events for Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Ebeling, Mary, 2011. "'Get with the Program!': Pharmaceutical marketing, symptom checklists and self-diagnosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(6), pages 825-832, September.
    11. Copelton, Denise A. & Valle, Giuseppina, 2009. ""You don't need a prescription to go gluten-free": The scientific self-diagnosis of celiac disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 623-631, August.
    12. Greenfield, Geva & Pliskin, Joseph S. & Feder-Bubis, Paula & Wientroub, Shlomo & Davidovitch, Nadav, 2012. "Patient–physician relationships in second opinion encounters – The physicians’ perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(7), pages 1202-1212.
    13. Duran, Eduardo, 2021. "Diagnostic slippage: Medical uncertainty and engaged patienthood in the case of atypical disorders," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    14. Shachar, Leeor, 2022. "“You become a slightly better doctor”: Doctors adopting integrated medical expertise through interactions with E-patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    15. Persson, Asha & Newman, Christy, 2006. "Potency and vulnerability: Troubled 'selves' in the context of antiretroviral therapy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 1586-1596, September.
    16. Chinn, Deborah, 2011. "Critical health literacy: A review and critical analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 60-67, July.
    17. Prussing, Erica & Sobo, Elisa J. & Walker, Elizabeth & Kurtin, Paul S., 2005. "Between 'desperation' and disability rights: a narrative analysis of complementary/alternative medicine use by parents for children with Down syndrome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 587-598, February.
    18. Sarradon-Eck, Aline & Sakoyan, Juliette & Desclaux, Alice & Mancini, Julien & Genre, Dominique & Julian-Reynier, Claire, 2012. ""They should take time": Disclosure of clinical trial results as part of a social relationship," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 873-882.
    19. Advocat, Jenny & Lindsay, Jo, 2010. "Internet-based trials and the creation of health consumers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 485-492, February.
    20. Timmermans, Stefan & Tietbohl, Caroline, 2018. "Fifty years of sociological leadership at Social Science and Medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 209-215.

    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:eee:socmed:v:146:y:2015:i:c:p:164-172. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.