Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Discursive research: themes and debates
- Part I Psychology in action
- Part II Professionals and clients
- 7 When patients present serious health conditions as unlikely: managing potentially conflicting issues and constraints
- 8 Arguing and thinking errors: cognitive distortion as a members' category in sex offender group therapy talk
- 9 Members' and analysts' interests: ‘formulations’ in psychotherapy
- 10 ‘Suppose it wasn't possible for you to go any further with treatment, what would you do?’ Hypothetical questions in interactions between psychiatrists and transsexual patients
- Part III Youth and institutions
- Appendix: transcription notation
- References
- Index
7 - When patients present serious health conditions as unlikely: managing potentially conflicting issues and constraints
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 November 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Discursive research: themes and debates
- Part I Psychology in action
- Part II Professionals and clients
- 7 When patients present serious health conditions as unlikely: managing potentially conflicting issues and constraints
- 8 Arguing and thinking errors: cognitive distortion as a members' category in sex offender group therapy talk
- 9 Members' and analysts' interests: ‘formulations’ in psychotherapy
- 10 ‘Suppose it wasn't possible for you to go any further with treatment, what would you do?’ Hypothetical questions in interactions between psychiatrists and transsexual patients
- Part III Youth and institutions
- Appendix: transcription notation
- References
- Index
Summary
Introduction
Patients not only describe their symptoms during medical visits, they frequently present possible explanations for those symptoms (Gill, 1995, 1998; Raevaara, 1998, 2000; Stivers, 2002; Gill et al., 2004; Gill and Maynard, 2006). Although patients often display uncertainty about their candidate explanations (Gill, 1998), they typically portray them as reasonable, and at least somewhat likely, possibilities. For this study, we analysed instances in which patients offered serious health conditions (a heart problem, appendicitis) as candidate explanations for symptoms and portrayed those candidate explanations as unlikely to be the case, as improbable, while also implicitly or explicitly directing the doctors to investigate and confirm that they were indeed improbable.
This study is part of a larger project of analysing the range of practices that patients use when they present medically serious conditions as candidate explanations. For this project, we examined a subset of those practices: those used on occasions in which a patient presented a serious health condition as an unlikely candidate explanation. We selected this phenomenon because we were intrigued by the following observations:
Patients did not simply raise the spectre of serious health conditions as candidate explanations; they spent considerable effort displaying sceptical stances toward those candidate explanations, often by presenting reports that served as evidence for the improbability of the candidate explanations. We wondered what potentially conflicting issues and constraints the displays of scepticism were designed to address and how the discourse was designed to deal with those issues and constraints.
[…]
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Discursive Research in PracticeNew Approaches to Psychology and Interaction, pp. 127 - 146Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
- 10
- Cited by