As COVID-19 crosses the globe, disabled people are subject to new medical and discursive realities. Focusing on the consequences of the latter, we utilize news reports from Canada and the UK to argue the current language of pre-existing conditions represents disability as non-life, explaining away the material realities facing disabled persons. This language ignores the distribution of care work in our societies, poverty, and other forms of exclusion facing disabled people and the population more generally. Work on ventilator users points to these existing inequalities, obscured as they may be. This story is not new. Outlining existing narratives within disability studies challenging disability as deadly biological and economic deficiency and situating the 'pre-existing' terminology therein, we look to work in disability studies and bioethics to challenge the disability-death equation. We end reviewing counter-narratives by and for disabled people, highlighting the ongoing and life-affirming resistance throughout the disability rights movement.
For those with chronic, progressive conditions, high quality clinical care requires attention to the human dimensions of illness-emotional, social, and moral aspects-which co-exist with biophysical dimensions of disease. Reflexivity brings historical, institutional, and socio-cultural influences on clinical activities to the fore, enabling consideration of new possibilities. Continuing education methodologies that encourage reflexivity may improve clinical practice and trainee learning, but are rare. We piloted a dialogical methodology with a children's rehabilitation team to foster reflexivity (patient population: young people with Duchenne's or Becker's muscular dystrophy). The methodology involved three facilitated, interactive dialogues with the clinical team. Each dialogue involved clinicians learning to apply a social theory (Mol's The Logic of Care) to ethnographic fieldnotes of clinical appointments, to make routine practice less familiar and thus open to examination. Discourse analyses that preserve group dynamics were completed to evaluate the extent to which the dialogues spurred reflexive dialogue within the team. Overall, imagining impacts of clinical care on people's lives-emphasized in the social theory applied to fieldnotes-showed promise, shifting how clinicians interpreted routine practices and spurring many plans for change. However, this reflexive orientation was not sustained throughout, particularly when examining entrenched assumptions regarding 'best practices'. Clinicians defended institutional practices by co-constructing the metaphor of balancing logics in care delivery. When invoked, the balance metaphor deflected attention from emotional, social, and moral impacts of clinical care on patients and their families. Emergent findings highlight the value of analysing reflexivity-oriented dialogues using discourse analysis methods.
Although the human aspects of care were important to clinicians in the MD clinic, the routines and nature of the clinic meant these were frequently sidelined for biomedical objectives. We present collaboratively produced practical recommendations toward addressing this disjunction between ideals and practice including developing flexibility to tailor appointment frequency, composition, and length; providing time and physical space for psychosocial aspects of care; and clinician skill building to support child/family expression of "negative" emotions; and discussion of sociopolitical aspects of MD such as living with disability stigma. The study offers a set of considerations that, taking into account individual differences, offer insights for similar clinics elsewhere.
Clinicians’ positive demeanor and “strengths based” focus can include working to create a cheerful atmosphere in health care environments, cheering for improvements in assessment outcomes, and cheering up clients in situations of decline. Drawing from philosopher Karen Barad’s theories of inclusions and exclusions, we investigated what comes to matter (and what is excluded from mattering) when there is cheerfulness, cheering, and so forth (cheer*) in the day-to-day practices of a neuromuscular clinic. We worked collaboratively with clinicians, young people with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and their families to co-examine the clinic in three iterative exploratory method spaces: (a) group “dialogues” with clinicians; (b) consultative interviews with children, families, and clinicians; and (c) transdisciplinary research team analysis sessions. Cheer* made some things matter in the clinic (“normal” physical function, “positive” emotions, test scores, compliance); and excluded others (grief and loss, “non-normative” bodies and lives, alternative practices, embodied knowledge). We discuss implications across health care settings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.