IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v331y2023ics0277953623004239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“You just want to feel safe when you go to a healthcare professional:” Intimate partner violence and patient safety

Author

Listed:
  • Maras, Shelly A.

Abstract

Since the early 1990s, researchers and policymakers in the United States have addressed the concept of patient safety in healthcare systems. Traditionally, scholars have conceptualized patient safety as health care that is free from medical error and harm. However, sociologists have called for a more complex understanding of patient safety that includes relational aspects of safety. Although marginalized groups face unique threats to safety, intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors have been largely overlooked within the literature on patient safety. This study addresses that gap. Using the case of IPV, I find that survivors construct healthcare spaces as ideologically safe, but their experiences do not reflect this. Survivors' narratives reveal that patient safety is complex, multi-faceted, and relational. I argue that experiences of safety, or lack thereof, are situated within larger systems of organizational power, relational power hierarchies, and systems of inequalities. These findings have implications when considering how to improve IPV survivors’ safety in healthcare settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Maras, Shelly A., 2023. "“You just want to feel safe when you go to a healthcare professional:” Intimate partner violence and patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:331:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623004239
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623004239
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116066?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. Doherty, Carole & Saunders, Mark N.K., 2013. "Elective surgical patients' narratives of hospitalization: The co-construction of safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 29-36.
    2. Waring, Justin J., 2009. "Constructing and re-constructing narratives of patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1722-1731, December.
    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. Fischer, Michael Daniel & Ferlie, Ewan, 2013. "Resisting hybridisation between modes of clinical risk management: Contradiction, contest, and the production of intractable conflict," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 30-49.
    2. Ovretveit, John, 2009. "The contribution of new social science research to patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1780-1783, December.
    3. Turner, Simon & Higginson, Juliet & Oborne, C. Alice & Thomas, Rebecca E. & Ramsay, Angus I.G. & Fulop, Naomi J., 2014. "Codifying knowledge to improve patient safety: A qualitative study of practice-based interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 169-176.
    4. Ferlie, Ewan & Mcgivern, Gerry & FitzGerald, Louise, 2012. "A new mode of organizing in health care? Governmentality and managed networks in cancer services in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 340-347.
    5. McGivern, Gerry & Fischer, Michael D., 2012. "Reactivity and reactions to regulatory transparency in medicine, psychotherapy and counselling," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 289-296.
    6. Nicolini, Davide & Waring, Justin & Mengis, Jeanne, 2011. "Policy and practice in the use of root cause analysis to investigate clinical adverse events: Mind the gap," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 217-225, July.
    7. Iedema, Rick, 2009. "New approaches to researching patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1701-1704, December.
    8. Ducey, Ariel & Donoso, Claudia & Ross, Sue & Robert, Magali, 2020. "From anatomy to patient experience in pelvic floor surgery: Mindlines, evidence, responsibility, and transvaginal mesh," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    9. Spendlove, Zoey, 2018. "Medical revalidation as professional regulatory reform: Challenging the power of enforceable trust in the United Kingdom," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 64-71.
    10. Martin, Graham P. & Chew, Sarah & Dixon-Woods, Mary, 2021. "Why do systems for responding to concerns and complaints so often fail patients, families and healthcare staff? A qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).
    11. Litorp, Helena & Mgaya, Andrew & Mbekenga, Columba K. & Kidanto, Hussein L. & Johnsdotter, Sara & Essén, Birgitta, 2015. "Fear, blame and transparency: Obstetric caregivers' rationales for high caesarean section rates in a low-resource setting," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 232-240.
    12. Martin, Graham P. & McKee, Lorna & Dixon-Woods, Mary, 2015. "Beyond metrics? Utilizing ‘soft intelligence’ for healthcare quality and safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 19-26.
    13. Doherty, Carole & Saunders, Mark N.K., 2013. "Elective surgical patients' narratives of hospitalization: The co-construction of safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 29-36.
    14. Szymczak, Julia E., 2014. "Seeing risk and allocating responsibility: Talk of culture and its consequences on the work of patient safety," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-259.

    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:331:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623004239. 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.