Author
Abstract
The debate within the sociology of professions reflects the widely felt need in the field of sociology, to integrate the often conflicting analytical models that developed during the twentieth century. In this research, there is a clear need to overcome the individual-frame dichotomy in order to understand not only the microfoundations of social structures, but also the change in them over time. As such, studying the medical profession seems to be a particularly interesting field of research. In their job, doctors go through and mirror the clinical context of their relationship with/ interdependence on their patients (micro), the communitarian and organizational contexts (meso) to which they belong, and the healthcare and social systems (macro) which they inhabit. However, some recent contributions regarding the debate on professions could once again lock on to the codification and typification of different models of profession that historical and sociological research has always put forward rather than on those conceptual devices that are capable of reading the mechanisms of what they are and what they will become. In this situation, drawing from Elias' work would be recommendable not only for further analytical categories but also for an epistemic choice that is able to guide the study toward those necessarily interactive dynamics that are at the base of the genesis and transformation of a profession which continues to be the hub of the society.
Suggested Citation
Giovanna Vicarelli, 2010.
"For a comparative historical analysis of the medical profession,"
Stato e mercato, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 3, pages 395-424.
Handle:
RePEc:mul:jl9ury:doi:10.1425/33148:y:2010:i:3:p:395-424
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:mul:jl9ury:doi:10.1425/33148:y:2010:i:3:p:395-424. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.rivisteweb.it/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.