Whose Good Death? Valuation and Standardization as Mechanisms of Inequality in Hospitals.

IF 6.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Health and Social Behavior Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-15 DOI:10.1177/00221465221143088
Katrina E Hauschildt
{"title":"Whose Good Death? Valuation and Standardization as Mechanisms of Inequality in Hospitals.","authors":"Katrina E Hauschildt","doi":"10.1177/00221465221143088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although most clinicians have come to perceive invasive life-sustaining treatments as overly aggressive at the end of life, some of the public and greater proportions of some socially disadvantaged groups have not. Drawing on 1,500+ hours of observation in four intensive care units and 69 interviews with physicians and patients' family members, I find inequality occurs through two mechanisms complementary to the cultural health capital and fundamental causes explanations prevalent in existing health disparities literature: in valuation, as the attitudes and values of the socially disadvantaged are challenged and ignored, and in standardization, as the outcomes preferred by less advantaged groups are defined as inappropriate and made harder to obtain by the informal and formal practices and policies of racialized organizations. I argue inequality is produced in part because wealthier and White elites shape institutional preferences and practices and, therefore, institutions and clinical standards to reflect their cultural tastes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51349,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health and Social Behavior","volume":" ","pages":"221-236"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10267289/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health and Social Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00221465221143088","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although most clinicians have come to perceive invasive life-sustaining treatments as overly aggressive at the end of life, some of the public and greater proportions of some socially disadvantaged groups have not. Drawing on 1,500+ hours of observation in four intensive care units and 69 interviews with physicians and patients' family members, I find inequality occurs through two mechanisms complementary to the cultural health capital and fundamental causes explanations prevalent in existing health disparities literature: in valuation, as the attitudes and values of the socially disadvantaged are challenged and ignored, and in standardization, as the outcomes preferred by less advantaged groups are defined as inappropriate and made harder to obtain by the informal and formal practices and policies of racialized organizations. I argue inequality is produced in part because wealthier and White elites shape institutional preferences and practices and, therefore, institutions and clinical standards to reflect their cultural tastes.

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
谁的美好死亡?作为医院不平等机制的估价和标准化。
尽管大多数临床医生已经认识到,在生命的最后阶段,侵入性维持生命疗法过于激进,但部分公众和更多的社会弱势群体却不这么认为。通过对四个重症监护病房超过 1500 小时的观察,以及对医生和病人家属的 69 次访谈,我发现不平等是通过两种机制产生的,这两种机制是对现有健康差异文献中盛行的文化健康资本和根本原因解释的补充:一是估值机制,因为社会弱势群体的态度和价值观受到了挑战和忽视;二是标准化机制,因为较弱势群体所偏好的结果被种族化组织的非正式和正式做法和政策定义为不恰当,并使其更难获得。我认为,不平等之所以产生,部分原因在于较富裕的白人精英塑造了机构的偏好和做法,因此,机构和临床标准也反映了他们的文化品味。
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Journal of Health and Social Behavior is a medical sociology journal that publishes empirical and theoretical articles that apply sociological concepts and methods to the understanding of health and illness and the organization of medicine and health care. Its editorial policy favors manuscripts that are grounded in important theoretical issues in medical sociology or the sociology of mental health and that advance theoretical understanding of the processes by which social factors and human health are inter-related.
期刊最新文献
Disparities in the Life Course Origins of Dual Functionality. No Socioeconomic Inequalities in Mortality among Catholic Monks: A Quasi-Experiment Providing Evidence for the Fundamental Cause Theory. The Heterogeneous Effects of College Education on Outcomes Related to Deaths of Despair. Work-Family Life Course Trajectories and Women’s Mental Health: The Moderating Role of Defamilization Policies in 15 European Territories Spatial and Ethno-national Health Inequalities: Health and Mortality Gaps between Palestinians and Jews in Israel.
×
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