Embodied health movements: new approaches to social movements in health

Abstract

Social movements organised around health-related issues have been studied for almost as long as they have existed, yet social movement theory has not yet been applied to these movements. Health social movements (HSMs) are centrally organised around health, and address: (a) access to or provision of health care services; (b) health inequality and inequity based on race, ethnicity, gender, class and/or sexuality; and/or (c) disease, illness experience, disability and contested illness. HSMs can be subdivided into three categories: health access movements seek equitable access to health care and improved provision of health care services; constituencybased health movements address health inequality and health inequity based on race, ethnicity, gender, class and/or sexuality differences; and embodied health movements (EHMs) address disease, disability or illness experience by challenging science on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention. These groups address disproportionate outcomes and oversight by the scientific community and/or weak science. This article focuses on embodied health movements, primarily in the US. These are unique in three ways: 1) they introduce the biological body 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. This article employs various elements of social movement theory to offer an approach to understanding embodied health movements, and provides a capsule example of one such movement, the environmental breast cancer movement.

Health and the Value of Inheritance: The meanings surrounding a rare genetic disease

“…As Rose underlines (2013), these studies have mostly been conducted in countries with advanced liberal economies and health care systems based on a logic of choice (Mol 2008), historically recognized forms of social engagement in campaigns for health care (Epstein 1996, Brown et al 2004) and a strong market conception linked to the development of scientific research (Dumit 2012, Petryna 2011). …”

Uneasy allies: pro‐choice physicians, feminist health activists and the struggle for abortion rights

“…The unanticipated strength and scope of the anti-abortion response to Roe has pushed these formerly uneasy allies into a tighter bond, in response to such a formidable opponent. Indeed, we can argue that as one observes the activities of each of these groups over time, it would appear that they have to a considerable degree blurred roles (Brown et al 2004). Comparing the 1970s with the present, feminist supporters of abortion have changed in the direction of becoming less activist and more bureaucratic; physicians, on the other hand, have taken on the role of political activists within medicine.…”

Developing a ‘critical’ approach to patient and public involvement in patient safety in the NHS: learning lessons from other parts of the public sector?

“…42 To broaden the debate on harm, Sharpe and Faden 43 have pointed to the need for a broader knowledge framework for the evaluation of medical harm and the imposition of risk that is based upon a more patient centred ethos. 43 This paper argues that further development of PPI in patient safety must go beyond a largely atheoretical approach in order to understand and address concerns about how different groups experience service provision.…”