Search

This paper explores the moral implications of treatment of young people with functional somatic symptoms. Based on an ethnographic field study at a Danish pain clinic for youngsters (age 8 to 18), the paper seeks to unearth the cultural, moral values that clinical practice steers by and upholds, and the implications this has for the assessment and management of ill body-selves. Through an exposition of the general practice of the clinic and an investigation of two specific cases of youngsters, it is found that the assessment of symptoms and selves and the goals of treatment are informed by cultural ideals of 'the good self' and 'the good life' in which agency and work ethic – both pertaining to the notion of individual responsibility – figure as prevalent virtues. The study underpins the findings of other researchers who have found that ideals of individual autonomy and responsibility for own life and health permeate the Western health care system and the discourses of ill individuals. The contribution of this article is to portray in ethnographic detail how such a cultural ethics manifests in practice and what implications this have for the treatment of young people with functional symptoms at a specific location and in specific cases. The two cases illustrate that the underlying norms and values can give rise to very different moral assessments of symptoms and selves within the same diagnostic category. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To explore why interpersonal continuity with a regular doctor is valuable to patients. Design, setting, and subjects. A qualitative study based on 22 interviews with patients, 12 who saw their regular general practitioner (GP) and 10 who saw an unfamiliar GP. The patients were selected after an observed consultation and sampled purposively according to reason for encounter, age, and sex. The research question was answered by means of psychological theory. Results. A need for attachment was a central issue for the understanding of the value of interpersonal continuity for patients. The patients explained that they preferred to create a personal relationship with their GP and the majority expressed a degree of vulnerability in the doctor–patient relationship. The more sick or worried they were the more vulnerable and the more in need of a regular GP. Furthermore, patients stated that it was difficult for them to change GP even if they had a poor relationship. Conclusion. Attachment theory may provide an explanation for patients' need to see a regular GP. The vulnerability of being a patient creates a need for attachment to a caregiver. This need is fundamental and is activated in adults when they are sick or scared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]