Search results

While web logs often are taken to be “Internet diaries,” unlike diaries that are private and serve only the needs of their authors, public blogs serve as a technological tool, allowing for the formation of Internet communities and challenges to institutional and/or cultural narratives.

I analyzed narratives constructed in two years of blog posts for each of five individuals with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). I sought to understand the relationship between personal stories of contested illness and broader illness narratives.

My findings suggest these personal illness stories operate within the artificial confines of the dominant models of a given society. Blogs are used not only as a chronicle of day-to-day happenings, but as a means of engaging with traditional illness narratives, challenging cultural narratives about CFS, and of resisting institutional narratives concerning the illness process.

This study brings voices of people with contested illnesses into the discourse on disability, where their perspectives have historically been poorly represented. The study also suggests that blogs can become sites of resistance and social change by providing a space in which counternarratives can be constructed and circulated.

The purpose of this paper is to unpack the tenuous relationship between medical sociology and disability studies, particularly as it relates to the work of Irving Zola.

Many attribute the division between these disciplines to their starkly different and oft competing approaches to disability; however, I argue that a closer examination reveals a number of commonalities between the two.

I use Irving K. Zola’s extensive body of scholarship to demonstrate the connections between these divergent approaches to disability, and imagine what his legacy has to offer to the advancement of a diverse sociology of disability.

Neither focus is more correct than the other, as considering these bodies of work together presents a number of opportunities to advance a more comprehensive sociological theory – not just of disability – but of ableism and its intersections with other forms of oppression as well.

Markets for free from foods have undergone extensive growth as consumers attempt to manage their health in increasingly novel ways. This research explores the making of consumer perceptions about the health of gluten-free foods.

This research employs qualitative methods including in-depth interviews with consumers of gluten-free foods and content analysis of online consumer comments.

Findings illustrate how consumers leverage personal responsibility, social commentary and political criticism in ways that forge essential connections with traditional medical authority. In particular, consumers blend diverse views together by expressing reverence, positioning complementarity and framing temporality.

This research highlights the productive role of consumers in shaping what constitutes health-related concerns and widens the scope of explanatory factors beyond product- and individual-level differences. This research is set in the context of gluten-free foods and draws on interview data from a single set of consumers. Future research could consider other free from markets including, for example, soy-free foods and corn-free foods, both of which implicate some of the most common ingredients in food products and potential regional differences both within and outside of North America.

This research offers insights into the marketing of gluten-free foods and free from foods in general, specifically the participation of consumers in legitimising the need for these foods on the basis of health.

I weave together multiple streams of work across disciplines including food marketing, contested illnesses and institutional logics to further our understanding of the dynamic nature of contemporary markets for free from foods.

This chapter examines how personal testimonies at four town hall listening sessions on the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) proposed regulations reflect and affect the institutional narrative of “who counts” as disabled, and “what counts” as a reasonable accommodation in the United States.

I use the full transcripts of four town hall meetings to analyze the stories told.

Despite changes to public policy intended to broaden the meaning and scope of “disability,” narrative analysis demonstrates how difficult it is to change the fixed and narrow institutionalized beliefs about who counts as “really disabled” and therefore in “real need” of accommodations.

This study suggests a theoretical framework for conceptualizing disability; highlights the importance of narratives in public policy; and suggests the need for more complex understandings of what constitutes reasonable accommodation of disability in the workplace. The study illustrates the value of a narrative approach to understanding disability policy and policymaking more generally.

Purpose – To examine debates within the transgender rights movement over the GID diagnosis in order to demonstrate how diagnosis can be resisted as a source of stigma and social control at the same time that it is embraced as a means of legitimating experience and gaining access to resources, including medical services.

Methodology/approach – This chapter draws on qualitative data from: in-depth interviews with transgender rights activists and advocates, participant observation in transgender health care and activism settings, and content analysis of print and web-based materials on transgender health.

Findings – Transgender rights activists and advocates overwhelmingly reject the pathologization of gender variance. However, some actors advocate complete demedicalization, while others advocate diagnostic reform. Actors' advocacy for each position is influenced by the perceived costs versus benefits of diagnosis.

Social implications – The findings of this research shed light on the multiple and often contradictory effects of diagnosis. Diagnoses can both normalize and stigmatize. They can function to allow or deny access to medical services and they can support or act as barriers to legal rights and protections. Understanding these contradictory effects is essential to understanding contests over diagnosis, including the contemporary debate over GID.

Originality/value of paper – Through examination of an intra-constituent contest over diagnosis, this research demonstrates the need to distinguish medicalization from pathologization and illustrates the importance of examining the multiple and contradictory effects of diagnosis, both in and outside of medical settings.

Health social movements address several issues: (a) access to, or provision of, health care services; (b) disease, illness experience, disability and contested illness; and/or (c) health inequality and inequity based on race, ethnicity, gender, class and/or sexuality. These movements have challenged a variety of authority structures in society, resulting in massive changes in the health care system. While many other social movements challenge medical authority, a rapidly growing type of health social movement, “embodied health movements” (EHMs), challenge both medical and scientific authority. Embodied health movements do this in three ways: (1) they make the body central to social movements, especially with regard to the embodied experience of people with the disease; (2) they typically include challenges to existing medical/scientific knowledge and practice; and (3) they often involve activists collaborating with scientists and health professionals in pursuing treatment, prevention, research, and expanded funding. We present a conceptual framework for understanding embodied health movements as simultaneously challenging authority structures and allying with them, and offer the environmental breast cancer movement as an exemplar case.

This paper seeks to explore what disclosing illness and disability in the workplace means to workers with chronic illness and disabilities. It aims to argue that beginning analysis from the meanings of these workers contributes to a nuanced understanding of their situations; gaining this view requires knowing how individuals define their health as well as their meanings, risks, and dilemmas of disclosing illness and disability; understanding the employee's perspective and actions helps employers to make useful accommodations for illness and disability; and this analysis can offer researchers and managers in international business a starting‐point for making comparisons with worksites across the globe.

The analysis derives from qualitative data in which issues concerning disclosure emerged as a recurring theme, and on studies reported in literatures that illuminate ill and disabled workers' views and experience. The paper draws on material from 185 qualitative interviews with North Americans who have chronic illnesses and disabilities and on interview data reported in the research literature that illuminate ill and disabled workers' views and experience.

In all these data, issues concerning disclosure emerged as a recurring theme. Beginning analysis from the meanings of the workers contributes to a nuanced understanding of their situations that involves learning how individuals define their health as well as their meanings of the risks and dilemmas of disclosing illness and disability.

The practical implications of this analysis include: aiding employers to understand the employee's perspective and actions, providing considerations for making useful accommodations for illness and disability, and offering researchers and managers in international business a starting‐point for making comparisons with worksites across the globe.

The paper examines how workers with chronic illness and disabilities feel about disclosing their conditions, with a view, inter alia, to helping employers to compare their situation with other worksites worldwide.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the informal micro-level mechanisms through which caregivers maximize their health literacy and caregiving skill-set, particularly in cases of emergent, pervasive health disorders. Specifically, I investigate how important micro-level social factors, such as lay self-education and local community networks, mitigate extensive experiences of medical uncertainty that are associated with caring for a child with autism. This study theorizes a series of processes of becoming lay health care professionals (HCP), which serve as effective health care interventions and ways to secure vital resources for patients and their families.

This study uses qualitative research methods in the form of 50 individual intensive interviews with primary caregivers of at least one child under the age of 18 with an official autism diagnosis, as well as two years of participant-observation at two primary sites that are autism parent and caregiver resource meetings, both located in Northern California.

This study first demonstrates the major institutional limits and gaps involved in health-related caregiving for children with autism. Next, I define the processes through which caregivers challenge these institutional constraints and fight for life altering resources for their families, which include becoming a lay diagnostician and expert caregiver. Here, I demonstrate a sophisticated set of health literacy skills and key local community-based ties that caregivers develop and rely on, which affords families the tools to overcome diverse institutional obstacles in health-seeking and health care access.

The families in this study are predominantly white, middle-class, and reside in California. For future research, the scope of the study could be expanded by increasing the sample size and including greater geographic and demographic diversity.

This study contributes vital, yet missing, pieces to the autism puzzle, which currently focuses on prevention, the fight for a so-called “cure,” and the role of vaccines in disorder prevalence. In the meantime, families are living with autism each day and are struggling for understanding and knowledge, and to secure adequate support services. In doing so, this study sheds light on current institutional gaps and limits in health care and delivery for children with autism, and suggests specific effective health care interventions applicable to other cases of emergent illnesses and disorders.