What is this thing called “health”? An ontology for person-centred care

Alexandra Pârvan
{"title":"What is this thing called “health”? An ontology for person-centred care","authors":"Alexandra Pârvan","doi":"10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article person-centredness is understood as a method, and ontology is presented as one of its building tools. Ontology is at work in clinicians and patients in the form of underlying conceptions about the mode of existence of realities pertinent to healthcare, such as: disease, health, body, or person. These unrecognized assumptions affect the communication of diagnosis, the design of treatment, the therapeutic relation, patient self-care, or patient positioning towards treatment. The ontology “instinctively” at work in both clinicians and patients is identified, discussed, and shown to have ancient roots (referred to as the “Platonic split”), to conflict with what can count as person-centred care today, and be unlikely to work well in long-term treatment. The clinical complications it generates are illustrated with possible cases of “substantialization” of disease; differences between this metaphysical concept, denoting a specific form of understanding and living with disease and various psychological terms ( viz ., externalization, somatisation, denial) are explained. The article, then, introduces an alternative ontology, called “transgressive” and considered more likely to facilitate health-with-disease in the long-term. It clarifies what distinguishes it from other approaches in the health-within-illness literature, and analyses two real-life cases of two very different chronic conditions that illustrate the “transgressive ontology” and its health-producing effects. Adopting this health-generating ontology is yet one other way to provide what I call “metaphysical care” or self-care.","PeriodicalId":72966,"journal":{"name":"European journal for person centered healthcare","volume":"438 1","pages":"103-118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal for person centered healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/EJPCH.V8I1.1825","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this article person-centredness is understood as a method, and ontology is presented as one of its building tools. Ontology is at work in clinicians and patients in the form of underlying conceptions about the mode of existence of realities pertinent to healthcare, such as: disease, health, body, or person. These unrecognized assumptions affect the communication of diagnosis, the design of treatment, the therapeutic relation, patient self-care, or patient positioning towards treatment. The ontology “instinctively” at work in both clinicians and patients is identified, discussed, and shown to have ancient roots (referred to as the “Platonic split”), to conflict with what can count as person-centred care today, and be unlikely to work well in long-term treatment. The clinical complications it generates are illustrated with possible cases of “substantialization” of disease; differences between this metaphysical concept, denoting a specific form of understanding and living with disease and various psychological terms ( viz ., externalization, somatisation, denial) are explained. The article, then, introduces an alternative ontology, called “transgressive” and considered more likely to facilitate health-with-disease in the long-term. It clarifies what distinguishes it from other approaches in the health-within-illness literature, and analyses two real-life cases of two very different chronic conditions that illustrate the “transgressive ontology” and its health-producing effects. Adopting this health-generating ontology is yet one other way to provide what I call “metaphysical care” or self-care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
所谓的“健康”是什么?以人为本的护理本体
在这篇文章中,以人为本被理解为一种方法,本体被提出作为其构建工具之一。本体论在临床医生和患者中发挥作用,其形式是关于与医疗保健相关的现实存在模式的潜在概念,例如:疾病、健康、身体或人。这些未被认识到的假设影响了诊断沟通、治疗设计、治疗关系、患者自我护理或患者对治疗的定位。在临床医生和病人身上“本能地”起作用的本体论被识别、讨论,并被证明具有古老的根源(被称为“柏拉图式分裂”),与今天可以算作以人为本的护理相冲突,并且不太可能在长期治疗中发挥作用。它产生的临床并发症以疾病“实体化”的可能病例说明;解释了这一形而上学概念与各种心理学术语(即外化、躯体化、否认)之间的差异,这一概念表示一种特定形式的理解和与疾病共存。然后,这篇文章介绍了另一种本体论,称为“越轨”,被认为更有可能促进长期的疾病健康。它阐明了它与疾病中的健康文献中的其他方法的区别,并分析了两种截然不同的慢性病的两个现实案例,这些案例说明了“越界本体论”及其对健康的影响。采用这种产生健康的本体论是提供我所说的“形而上关怀”或自我关怀的另一种方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ethical and epistemic roles of narrative in person-centred healthcare Person-Centred Healthcare versus Patient Centricity - what is the difference and how are pharmaceutical companies aiming to secure internal representation of the patient voice? Moving past phronesis: clinical reasoning in person-centered care Persons over models: shared decision-making for person-centered medicine lifestyle and degeneracy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1