Remembering Erving Goffman

Aaron Cicourel, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at the University of California San Diego, wrote this memoir and gave his approval for posting the present version in the Erving Goffman Archives. The memoir was received on February 18, 2009

As manifestações institucionais e cotidianas do habitus

The article explores the concept of habitus viewed as a process through which babies and children acquire capacities in their daily practices and experiences of socialization within contexts of family interaction, based on data from surveys conducted in Mexico City and Buenos Aires.O texto examina o conceito de habitus como processos de aquisição de capacidades por bebês e crianças, em meio às práticas e experiências cotidianas de socialização em ambientes de interação familiar, valendo-se de investigações empíricas empreendidas na Cidade do México e em Buenos Aires

‘We treat them all the same’: the attitudes, knowledge and practices of staff concerning old/er lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans residents in care homes

This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: Paul Simpson, Kathrynn Almack, and Pierre Walthery, ‘ “We treat them all the same”: the attitudes, knowledge and practices of staff concerning old/er lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans residents in care homes’, Ageing and Society, first published online 29 December 2016, available online at DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X1600132X Copyright: © Cambridge University Press 2016. Content in the UH Research Archive is made available for personal research, educational, and non-commercial purposes only. Unless otherwise stated, all content is protected by copyright, and in the absence of an open license, permissions for further re-use should be sought from the publisher, the author, or other copyright holder.The distinct needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) residents in care homes accommodating older people have been neglected in scholarship. On the basis of a survey of 187 individuals, including service managers and direct care staff, we propose three related arguments. First, whilst employees’ attitudes generally indicate a positive disposition towards LGBT residents, this appears unmatched by the ability to recognise such individuals and knowledge of the issues and policies affecting LGBT people. Statements such as, ‘We don’t have any [LGBT residents] at the moment’ and ‘I/we treat them all the same’ were common refrains in responses to open-ended questions. They suggest the working of heteronormativity which could deny sexual and identity difference. Second, failure to recognise the distinct health and social care needs of LGBT residents means that they could be subject to a uniform service, which presumes a heterosexual past and cisgender status (compliance with ascribed gender), which risks compounding inequality and invisibility. Third, LGBT residents could be obliged to depend largely on the goodwill, knowledge and reflexivity of individual staff (including people of faith) to meet care and personal needs, though such qualities were necessary but not sufficient conditions for inclusion and no substitute for collective practices (involving commitment to learn about LGBT issues) that become integral to care homes’ everyday functioning. A collective approach is key to advancing inclusion, implementation of legal rights to self-expression and securing equality through differentiated provision.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

How the mass media report social statistics: A case study concerning research on end-of-life decisions

This is the post-print version of the final paper published in Social Science & Medicine. The published article is available from the link below. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. Copyright @ 2010 Elsevier B.V.The issue of whether it is right to be concerned about the accuracy with which mass media report social scientific research is explored through a detailed case study of media reporting of two surveys of UK doctors' end-of-life decision-making. Data include press releases, emails and field notes taken during periods of media interest supplemented by a collection of print and broadcast media reports. The case study contributes to existing knowledge about the ways in which mass media establish, exaggerate and otherwise distort the meaning of statistical findings. Journalists ignored findings that did not fit into existing media interest in the 'assisted dying' story and were subject to pressure from interest groups concerned to promote their own interpretations and viewpoints. Rogue statistics mutated as they were set loose from their original research report context and were 'laundered' as they passed from one media report to another. Yet media accounts of the research, fuelling an already heated public debate about ethical issues in end-of-life care, arguably acted as a conduit for introducing new considerations into this debate, such as the role played by sedation at the end of life, the extent to which euthanasia is practiced outside the law, and the extent of medical opposition to the legalisation of assisted dying. The expectation that accuracy and comprehensiveness should be the sole criteria for judging journalists' reports is, finally, considered to be unrealistic and it is argued that social scientists need to understand and adapted to the conditions under which mass media reporting operates if they are to succeed in introducing the findings of social research into public debates.The Nuffield Foundation, the National Council for Palliative Care, Age Concern, the Motor Neurone Disease Association, the Multiple Sclerosis Society, Help the Hospices, Macmillan Cancer Support, and Sue Ryder Care

‘Ethnic group’, the state and the politics of representation

The assertion, even if only by implication, that ‘ethnic group’ categories represent ‘real’ tangible entities, indeed identities, is commonplace not only in the realms of political and policy discourse but also amongst contemporary social scientists. This paper, following Brubaker (2002), questions this position in a number of key respects: of these three issues will dominate the discussion that follows. First, there is an interrogation of the proposition that those to whom the categories/labels refer constitute sociologically meaningful ‘groups’ as distinct from (mere) human collectivities. Secondly, there is the question of how these categories emerge, i.e. exactly what series of events, negotiations and contestations lie behind their construction and social acceptance. Thirdly, and as a corollary to the latter point, we explore the process of reification that leads to these categories being seen to represent ‘real things in the world’ (ibid.)

Pragmatic abilities in narrative production: a cross-disorder comparison

We aimed to disentangle contributions of socio-pragmatic and structural language deficits to narrative competence by comparing the narratives of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD; n=25), non-autistic children with language impairments (LI; n=23), and children with typical development (TD; n=27). Groups were matched for age (6½ to 15 years; mean: 10;6) and non-verbal ability; ASD and TD groups were matched on standardized language scores. Despite distinct clinical presentation, children with ASD and LI produced similarly simple narratives that lacked semantic richness and omitted important story elements, when compared to TD peers. Pragmatic errors were common across groups. Within the LI group, pragmatic errors were negatively correlated with story macrostructure scores and with an index of semantic–pragmatic relevance. For the group with ASD, pragmatic errors consisted of comments that, though extraneous, did not detract from the gist of the narrative. These findings underline the importance of both language and socio-pragmatic skill for producing coherent, appropriate narratives

Constructing ‘exceptionality’: a neglected aspect of NHS rationing

The principle of exceptionality involves assessing whether a patient is sufficiently different from the generality of patients to justify providing a treatment, such as an expensive cancer drug, not approved for routine funding. In England, individual requests for certain high-cost treatments are considered by funding request panels that examine exceptionality alongside treatment efficacy and cost as the main criteria for funding. This was also the case in Wales until September 2017. Our paper draws on audio recordings of panel meetings and interviews in a Welsh Health Board to investigate how exceptionality was constructed in discussions. It focuses on the combination of different decision criteria in meeting talk, particularly regarding the discourses associated with efficacy and exceptionality. Exceptionality is a malleable category that raised questions about the evidence-based nature of panel decision making. For example, the paper discusses the use of subgroup data from trials and the difficulty of deciding how small a subgroup of patients should be before it is deemed exceptional. Determining exceptionality has been a key mechanism for deciding that a minority of NHS patients can still receive high-cost treatments not routinely provided for all. As a neglected rationing mechanism