Premium
Has menstruation been medicalised? Or will it never happen…
Author(s) -
Bransen Els
Publication year - 1992
Publication title -
sociology of health and illness
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.146
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1467-9566
pISSN - 0141-9889
DOI - 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11007176
Subject(s) - menstruation , harm , power (physics) , construct (python library) , psychology , epistemology , psychoanalysis , medicine , social psychology , philosophy , computer science , physics , quantum mechanics , programming language
Abstract In what terms do women speak about menstruation, and what does this mean for (power in) the relationship between expert/lay(wo)man and medicine/society? In this article the question is posed in the light of ‘medicalisation’, a notion that inter alia is used by the women's liberation movement to criticise medicine. Contrary to what ‘medicalisation theory’ suggests, women who were interviewed about ‘their experiences with, ideas about and life with menstruation’ are not simply parroting medicine. They construct their ‘own’ stories about their menstruation, which illustrate a dialogue with three ‘story genres’ about women and their (menstruating) bodies. In these genres respectively, ‘me’, the doctor and ‘nature’ are central figures. Although there seems to be no simple take‐over of medical language, this does not mean that ‘medical power’ is absent. It is possible to locate within each ‘story genre’ a space where the doctor has free play. In every genre s/he has a certain leeway to do good as well as to do harm.