FADYL JK and NICHOLLS DA. Nursing Inquiry 2013; 20: 23–29 Foucault, the subject and the research interview: a critique of methodsResearch interviews are a widely used method in qualitative health research and have been adapted to suit a range of methodologies. Just as it is valuable that new approaches are explored, it is also important to continue to examine their appropriate use. In this article, we question the suitability of research interviews for ‘history of the present’ studies informed by the (...) work of Michel Foucault – a form of qualitative research that is being increasingly employed in the analysis of healthcare systems and processes. We argue that several aspects of research interviewing produce philosophical and methodological complications that can interfere with achieving the aims of the analysis in this type of study. The article comprises an introduction to these tensions and examination of them in relation to key aspects of a Foucauldian philosophical position, and discussion of where this might position researchers when it comes to designing a study. (shrink)

This article aims to do two things. The first of these is to introduce the concept of reflexive body techniques into the debate on body modification/maintenance. The value of the concept in relation to this debate, in part, is that it ensures that we conceive of the body as both a subject and an object, modifier and modified, and that we thereby avoid the trap of conceptualizing modification in dualistic (mind/body or body/society) terms. Second, the article seeks to explore the (...) pattern of distribution of practices of modification (conceived as reflexive body techniques) through society and to reflect upon the potential usefulness of multi-dimensional scaling as a tool for doing this. This aim is related to the first aim as it is argued that the concept of reflexive body techniques serves to identify and anchor practices ofmodification in a way that is amenable to both quantitative and qualitative forms of analysis, as well as theoretical investigation. (shrink)

Foucault’s argument that a major break occurred in the nature of power in the European Eighteenth century—an unprecedented socialization of medicine and concern for the health of bodies and populations, the birth of biopolitics—has become since the 1990s a dominant narrative among sociologists but is rarely if ever scrutinized in its premises. This article problematizes Foucault’s periodization about the politics of health and the way its story has been solidified into an uncritical account. Building on novel historiographic work, it challenges (...) the modernist bias of histories of biopolitics and public health and considers an earlier and more plural history of collective practices of health of which the story told by Foucault is just one important episode. Finally, it discusses the implications of this revised model for wider sociological debates on the link between modernity, health and the body. (shrink)

This narrative critically reviews my contribution to the development and maturation of a sociology of complementary and alternative medicine. Through the application of qualitative methodologies, my work has documented the emergence of a ‘new’ medical pluralism, focussing on the professional development of CAM as practiced by non-medically qualified practitioners and nurses and midwives, and has provided an understanding for the groundswell of appeal of CAM to both users and practitioners. With reference to neo-Weberian, Foucauldian and feminist theories of occupational formation, (...) the research has provided insight into CAM ‘professional projects’, detailing the attempts to secure market share, broker trust relations, and discipline work conduct. My work has also revealed the enduring capacity of biomedicine to shape CAM practice and health care delivery. As a consequence, CAM is described as being situated in a position of ‘mainstream marginality’ – popular, but peripherally located in state-sanctioned health care, with an appeal to groups of users and practitioners who themselves feel marginalised. As such, my work has contributed to an appreciation of the attractions of CAM and its empowering potentials, and the dynamics of biomedical power, professionalisation and professionalism in relation to jurisdictional battles for market share. Through critical reflection on my work, however, I note there is space for further exploration into: the opportunities for affective change and collaboration that can be fostered in integrated/integrative clinics; the ways in which biomedical dominance might be mutating; the different ways in which wellbeing, efficacy and evidence might be conceptualised; the possibility of integrating post-colonial theory and anthropology with sociology to produce a globalised analysis of medical pluralisms. (shrink)