Abstract
Based on ethnographic fieldwork among Danes undergoing CT scans as part of follow-up testing for potential lung cancer, we explore how access to technologies generates diagnostic uncertainty and trends of continuous testing. Our research is set in the context of a welfare state that has cultivated forms of government whose public health branches focus on early diagnosis and cancer control. Many studies on biotechnologies emphasise subject-making and power relations. Inspired by the work of Veena Das, we adopt an approach that focuses on the entanglement of diagnostic investigations with everyday life. We argue that being followed establishes a mode of being which we call ‘in the meantime’. Life in the meantime is equally characterised by a dramatic mode of being—that is, waiting for death—and an ambiguous mode of being: feeling quite well. As with any life crisis, it involves some sense of agency. We show in this paper how life in the meantime informs an ordinary ethics that encourages three ethical concerns in everyday life: firstly, how to inhabit life in the meantime? Secondly, what good is the testing for? And finally, what is a good death?
Highlights
In the telephone conversation, the doctor tried to explain to me what the lung change could be
Through the case of Jan and his wife, Bente, we explore in this article the experiences of those who are tested and subject to follow-up CT scans for potential lung cancer in Denmark
Often because of, access to ‘the best of technology’, diagnosing severe illnesses is an uncertain guessing game that can spiral into myriad uncertainties and searches for closure
Summary
The doctor tried to explain to me what the lung change could be. ‘It could be a lot of things,’ he said It could be former pneumonias, and Jan has worked with asbestos so it could be due to that. The doctor pointed out to me two or three times: ‘It is not about cancer!’ After a pause, he added, ‘But Jan still needs to be followed.’. This statement by Bente about Jan’s diagnosis shows how the diffuse entity of ‘lung change’ carries with it the diagnostic exercise of ‘follow-up’ and the experience of uncertainty ‘in the meantime’. What are the ethical implications for everyday living with regards to this form of testing, which is itself disconnected from diagnostic certainty?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
