Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Health professionals, their medical interventions and uncertainty : a study focusing on women at midlife

By Frances Griffiths, Eileen Green and Gillian Bendelow


Health professionals face a tension between focusing on the individual and attending to health issues for the population as a whole. This tension is intrinsic to medicine and gives rise to medical uncertainty, which here is explored through accounts of three medical interventions focused on women at midlife: breast screening, hormone replacement therapy and bone densitometry. The accounts come from interviews with UK health professionals using these medical interventions in their daily work. Drawing on the analysis of Fox [(2002). Health and Healing: The public/private divide (pp. 236–253). London: Routledge] we distinguish three aspects of medical uncertainty and explore each one of them in relation to one of the interventions. First is uncertainty about the balance between the individual and distributive ethic of medicine, explored in relation to breast screening. Second is the dilemma faced by health professionals when using medicial evidence generated through studies of populations and applying this to individuals. We explore this dilemma for hormone replacement therapy. Thirdly there is uncertainty because of the lack of a conceptual framework for understanding how new micro knowledge, such as human genetic information, can be combined with knowledge of other biological and social dimensions of health. The accounts from the bone denistometry clinic indicate the beginnings of an understanding of the need for such a framework, which would acknowledge complexity, recognising that factors from many different levels of analysis, from heredity through to social factors, interact with each other and influence the individual and their health. However, our analysis suggests biomedicine continues to be dominated by an individualised, context free, concept of health and health risk with individuals alone responsible for their own health and for the health of the population. This may continue to dominate how we perceive responsibilities for health until we establish a conceptual framework that recognises the complex interaction of many factors at macro and micro level affecting health.\ud \u

Topics: R1
Publisher: Elsevier
Year: 2005
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2003). A normal biological process? Brittle bones, HRT and the patient-doctor encounter.
  2. (1986). Breast Cancer Screening: Report to the Health Minister of England,
  3. (2003). Changing women: an analysis of difference and diversity in women's accounts of their experiences of menopause. In
  4. (2003). Committee on Safety of Medicines and Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency doi
  5. (2002). Compexity in Health Care: An introduction. In
  6. (2003). Complexity and Health Care: An Introduction Abingdon:
  7. (2004). Complexity for Clinicians London:
  8. (1998). Complexity theory and the social sciences London: Routledge Byrne,
  9. (2001). Education and Debate: Bone densitometry is not a good predictor of hip fracture. doi
  10. (1996). Evidence in consultations: interpreted and individualised. doi
  11. (2002). Explaining risks; turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. doi
  12. (2003). Feminism and the idea of 'the biological'.
  13. (2002). Gender equity and socioeconomic inequality: a framework for the patterning of women's health. doi
  14. (1998). Going with the flow: some central discourses in conceptualising and articulating the embodiment of emotional states.
  15. (1997). Governing the Risky Self: how to become healthy, wealthy and wise. In
  16. (1998). Growing old gracefully" as opposed to "mutton dressed as lamb". In
  17. (2003). Health Buckingham: OUP
  18. (1998). Holism in Twentieth-Century Medicine, Greater than the parts Holism in Biomedicine doi
  19. (2002). I saw the panic rise in her eyes and evidence-based medicine went out of the door.' An exploratory qualitative study of the barriers to secondary prevention in the management of coronary heart disease. Family Practice, doi
  20. (2003). Managing health risks to women's midlife bodies: the patient-professional encounter.
  21. (1996). Modern medicine: lay perspectives and experiences London: UCL Press 16Willis,
  22. (2002). Narratives of Risk: women at midlife, medical 'experts' and health technologies. doi
  23. (1996). New reproductive technologies: the views of women undergoing treatment. In
  24. (2002). Reckoning with risk London doi
  25. (2004). Research Grants Database. doi
  26. (2001). Royal College of Physicians and Bone and Teeth Society of Great Britain
  27. (2003). Study Collaborators doi
  28. (2002). Successful Aging' with Hormone Replacement Therapy: It May Be Sexist, But What If It Works? Science as Culture, doi
  29. (1976). The Birth of the Clinic London: Tavistock Fox, doi
  30. (1984). The Captured Womb: a history of the medical care of pregnant women Oxford: Basil doi
  31. (1994). The Evolution of Dissipative Social Systems. doi
  32. (2005). The nature of medical evidence and its inherent uncertainty for the clinical consultation: the example of midlife women.
  33. (1995). The Rise of Surveillance Medicine. doi
  34. (1987). The woman in the body Milton Keynes:
  35. (1976). Toward a Theory of Medical Fallibility. doi
  36. (2003). Understanding older women's health care concerns: a qualitative study. doi
  37. (2002). Understanding risk: women's perceived risk of menopause-related disease and the value they place on preventive hormone replacement therapy. Family Practice, doi
  38. (1992). Unit, Royal College of Physicians. doi
  39. (1996). Women and the new paradigm of health and medicine. doi
  40. (1999). Women's control and choice regarding HRT. doi
  41. (2002). Women's use of hormone replacement therapy for disease prevention; results of a community survey.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.