IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v62y2006i10p2500-2512.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Death, depression and 'defensive expansion': Closing down smoking as an issue for discussion in GP consultations

Author

Listed:
  • Pilnick, Alison
  • Coleman, Tim

Abstract

This paper examines routine primary care consultations in the UK where smoking is discussed using data from a larger study of the factors influencing discussion of smoking between general practitioners (GPs) and patients. In this study, consultations have been analysed with a focus on the termination of discussion about smoking, using an approach that is informed by the conversation analytic (CA) literature on professional/client interaction. In interviews from the previous larger study, GPs suggested two main reasons for not pursuing discussion of smoking in consultations. One reason was an overarching fear of damaging the GP/patient relationship. The second reason related to clinical judgement, where it was feared that an attempt to stop smoking might exacerbate a patient's existing condition, particularly their mental health. This paper suggests that, while this latter scenario of clinical judgement is borne out by the consultation data, there are two more subtle patient behaviours which are associated with GPs abandoning further discussion of smoking: patients' 'troubles telling', where the issue of smoking is de-emphasised in the face of other 'troubles', and 'defensive expansion', where the patient over-emphasises deficiencies to curtail discussion. Greater awareness of the situations in which doctors end discussion of smoking will help GPs to develop ideas for alternative approaches in these circumstances which could result in more meaningful, effective engagement between doctors and their patients who smoke when smoking is discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Pilnick, Alison & Coleman, Tim, 2006. "Death, depression and 'defensive expansion': Closing down smoking as an issue for discussion in GP consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2500-2512, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:62:y:2006:i:10:p:2500-2512
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(05)00558-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Pilnick, Alison & Coleman, Tim, 2003. ""I'll give up smoking when you get me better": patients' resistance to attempts to problematise smoking in general practice (GP) consultations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 135-145, July.
    2. Beach, W. A. & Dixson, C. N., 2001. "Revealing moments: formulating understandings of adverse experiences in a health appraisal interview," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 25-44, January.
    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. Wheat, H. & Barnes, R.K. & Aveyard, P. & Stevenson, F. & Begh, R., 2022. "Brief opportunistic interventions by general practitioners to promote smoking cessation: A conversation analytic study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    2. Benwell, Bethan & Rhys, Catrin S., 2018. "Negotiating relevance in pre-operative assessments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 218-226.

    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. Wheat, H. & Barnes, R.K. & Aveyard, P. & Stevenson, F. & Begh, R., 2022. "Brief opportunistic interventions by general practitioners to promote smoking cessation: A conversation analytic study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    2. Landmark, Anne Marie Dalby & Svennevig, Jan & Gulbrandsen, Pål, 2016. "Negotiating treatment preferences: Physicians' formulations of patients' stance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 26-36.
    3. de Kok, B.C. & Widdicombe, S. & Pilnick, A. & Laurier, E., 2018. "Doing patient-centredness versus achieving public health targets: A critical review of interactional dilemmas in ART adherence support," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 17-25.
    4. Kushida, Shuya & Kawashima, Michie & Abe, Tetsuya, 2020. "Why this clinic now? A context-sensitive aspect of accounting for visits," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    5. Bergen, Clara, 2020. "The conditional legitimacy of behavior change advice in primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    6. 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.

    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:62:y:2006:i:10:p:2500-2512. 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.