Abstract

In encounters between general practitioners (GPs) and patients with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), the negotiation of the sick role is a social process. In this process, GPs not only use traditional biomedical diagnostic tools but also rely on their own opinions and evaluations of a patient’s particular circumstances in deciding whether that patient is legitimately sick. The doctor is thus a gatekeeper of legitimacy. This article presents results from a qualitative interview study conducted in Denmark with GPs concerning their approach to patients with MUS. We employ a symbolic interaction approach that pays special attention to the external validation of the sick role, making GPs’ accounts of such patients particularly relevant. One of the article’s main findings is that GPs’ criteria for judging the legitimacy of claims by those patients that present with MUS are influenced by the extent to which GPs are able to constitute these patients as people with social problems and problematic personality traits.

Highlights

  • In western countries, there are growing numbers of people who report pain throughout the body that cannot be medically diagnosed (Ring et al 2005)

  • We demonstrate how general practitioners (GPs) classify symptoms described by medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) patients and create opportunities to treat this group of people as legitimately sick individuals

  • In this article we have explored the negotiation of a legitimate sick role for patients with MUS in primary care

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There are growing numbers of people who report pain throughout the body that cannot be medically diagnosed (Ring et al 2005). We demonstrate how GPs classify symptoms described by MUS patients and create opportunities to treat this group of people as legitimately sick individuals.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call