Search

Copyright of Current Sociology is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on the author's response to comments made by Rolf Torstendahl and Maria Malatesta on the author's paper on professions. According to the author, Malatesta correctly says that the break of modernity is nonetheless unambiguous in the fields of law and medicine. This is the reason why historians who look for earlier instances of professionalism anywhere, face a stark alternative. They either look for such instances in other occupational fields or else by default begin the story of professionalism, wrongly, in mid-19th-century London, England, or, with early 19th-century universities in Germany. Torstendahl is more forceful in suggesting improvement and on several occasions gets a bit disquieted. He begins by praising the clarity and credibility of the author's criticisms as a point of departure, and then adds--rightly--that the proposed alternative suggested by the author is hardly elaborated, and so is not self-evidently compelling.

Copyright of Current Sociology is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The focus of this article is on post-migration entitlement and access to health security of women international migrants in England who are in vulnerable circumstances. Here ‘health security’ is defined as the protection of health within a broader public health context. The aim is to understand the factors underlying migrants’ vulnerabilities and how national and local health policies and practices respond in allowing or denying them rights to healthcare, thus impacting their ability to safeguard their health. This article is predominantly concerned with experiences of access to healthcare of categories of migrant women who may be in vulnerable situations including asylum seekers, refugees, refused asylum seekers or other undocumented migrant women, women with no recourse to public funds who are supported by local authorities, trafficked women, Roma women, women with limited fluency in English, and migrants from the European Union (EU) with no health insurance card. By examining empirical evidence of such women’s experiences of entitlement and access to healthcare we are able to gain theoretical insight into the relationship between migration, gender and human (health) security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines gender discourses embedded in gender equality policies in the health sector. Gender mainstreaming was first adopted by a number of international and intergovernmental, regional and national actors some time ago, yet there is limited evidence of progress in addressing gender justice in health. Failures in gender equality policies have often been attributed to the lack of gender-disaggregated data, combined with a lack of resources, training and skills. In addition, studies have identified problems originating in the shift from participatory approaches to technocratic solutions, and the persistence of underlying gender relations of power. However, gender equality policies may also contribute to gender discourse in ways which reinforce and perpetuate inequalities between men and women. This article draws on Bacchi’s ‘what is the problem represented to be’ (WPR) approach to policy analysis, to explore responses of primary care organisations in England to legislation requiring public sector organisations to tackle gender discrimination and promote equality of opportunity between men and women. The article adopts a critical discourse approach to gender equality documents and suggests that such texts construct women and men as essentially different, reinforcing specific forms of masculinity and male performance and notions of male disadvantage in health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the globe the concept of gender mainstreaming is indicative of substantive transformations, and healthcare is a particularly important policy arena. Yet existing research reveals only modest success in the implementation of gender policies in national healthcare systems, despite the availability of complex tools and guidelines. This article introduces an approach that links gender mainstreaming with approaches into policy transfer as dynamic processes of translation involving active players. In a scoping exercise the authors select England and Germany as case studies and draw on document analysis, other secondary sources and additional expert information. The analysis reveals varieties of translation of gender mainstreaming into national healthcare systems – even within the legal framework of the European Union – and the crucial relevance of feminist actors. The study raises more general questions on the nature of international policy-making in relation to national and local healthcare institutions and policy entrepreneurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Current Sociology is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

When making decisions about prenatal diagnosis, couples not only draw on their understanding of the condition but also broader aspects of their cultural identity. This article looks at how faith and religion mediate attitudes towards screening, prenatal diagnosis and termination of pregnancy for sickle cell and thalassaernia disorders. The article specifically reports on a qualitative study, which used focus groups from a variety of faith communities (Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and Christian), at risk of haemoglobin disorders, living in England. Our findings suggest that the decision about whether or not to have diagnostic testing generally related to attitudes towards the termination of pregnancy. The consequences of the condition were as important as religious beliefs to most people. More generally, faith beliefs emerged as negotiable and contingent: realized within a broader moral framework. Religion was felt not to be prescriptive and reproductive decisions were seen as personal. When making decisions, people utilize faith within a broader context of individual, family and social relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]