Search

Abstract: This paper revisits the concept of medicalisation and considers its value as a framework for understanding the ongoing development of new reproductive technologies, and their impact on women’s reproductive decision-making. This evaluation is drawn from a qualitative discourse analysis of the public debate about the first extended cycle oral contraception (ECOC) to suppress menstruation in the United States of America in 2003/2004, and subsequent interviews with women living in Australia who had already extended their cycles without it being medically approved for widespread practice. Firstly, the debates about menstrual suppression are couched within a discussion of the ongoing usefulness of medicalisation as an analytical tool. It is posited that medicalisation occurs in a particular social and cultural moment, and is a dynamic process where dominant social relations can be both reproduced and challenged. Secondly, qualitative interviews with women about practices of menstrual suppression are used to explore the productive nature of agency in this particular medicalisation contest. Specifically, the ways in which these women engage with the discourses of ‘risk’, ‘choice’ and ‘nature’, as canvassed by menstrual suppression advocates, reveal accommodation and modification as much as resistance and contradiction. This paper suggests that if the concept of medicalisation is to have ongoing traction as a frame of analysis, such a critique must incorporate a generative discussion of agency. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper explores how drug treatment clients exercise agency while finding their ability to act curtailed by the strictures of treatment itself. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 77 male and female drug treatment clients collected in an Australian study of drug treatment and mental health, the experience of methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) and that of commonly prescribed medications for depression (antidepressants) are examined. The ways that clients engage with MMT and antidepressants are detailed, illustrating how both types of treatment can make clients feel dependent, but can also motivate clients to modify their treatment regimens. These modifications are “tactical” responses generated within the constraints of treatment regulations and can also be against clinical recommendations e.g. stopping treatment. Rather than seeing this as “non-compliance”, it is suggested that the negotiation of treatment is an inevitable response of clients trying to adapt to imperfect treatment conditions, who may have understandable anxieties about taking medication. The ways in which treatment providers might better acknowledge the capacities of MMT clients to engage with or modify treatment are discussed, as is the need to acknowledge drug treatment clients’ anxieties about dependency and pharmaceutical drugs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]