Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare
It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people’s embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people’s embodiment isn’t limited to the clinical interaction. It has also...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Monash bioethics review 2023-12, Vol.41 (Suppl 1), p.20-48 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 48 |
---|---|
container_issue | Suppl 1 |
container_start_page | 20 |
container_title | Monash bioethics review |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Roberts, Joseph T F |
description | It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people’s embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people’s embodiment isn’t limited to the clinical interaction. It has also been directed at healthcare regulation and welfare policy. In this paper, I examine the arguments for taking embodiment seriously in both medical practice and welfare policy, concluding we have good reasons to take better account of people’s embodiment. I then set out two challenges to taking embodiment seriously in public policy. First, given the amount of variation in how people are embodied, there is strong possibility that adjusting policy to benefit particular individuals based on an appreciation of their embodied experiences could be detrimental towards other individuals. The second challenge concerns how to ensure that people’s testimony about their first-person embodied experience is subject to adequate scrutiny without this resulting in epistemic injustice. I argue that the solution to both of these challenges is to devise a just procedure for soliciting people’s testimony and taking it into account in the policy development process. As such, I also provide an outline of what a just procedure should look like. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2907281899</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2907281899</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-aec422207df2dc270f049d1d16bc39c4f78299e8e613b2adbb28cc0470cdd62e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EgvL4ARbIEuuAPU7jmB2qeElIbGBtOfakTUnjYCei_XsM5bFj47Fnzr1jXUJOObvgjMnLmLOpgoyByBjjpcjWO2SSapEVkhe76S6AZyCn4oAcxrhMkOIq3ycHQiqYirKYEP9sXptuTnFVedessBtoxND4MbYb2nS0H6u2sbT36dxQ0znaB2OHxuIVNc73w6fYpKa36MZgWmr69DB2QQdPF2jaYfEle8e2NgGPyV5t2ogn3_WIvNzePM_us8enu4fZ9WNmhWRDZtDmAMCkq8FZkKxmuXLc8aKyQtm8liUohSUWXFRgXFVBaS3LJbPOFYDiiJxvfdNn3kaMg176MXRppQbFJJS8VCpRsKVs8DEGrHUfmpUJG82Z_sxYbzPWKWP9lbFeJ9HZt_VYrdD9Sn5CTYDYAjGNujmGv93_2H4AVmmJiw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2907281899</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Roberts, Joseph T F</creator><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Joseph T F</creatorcontrib><description>It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people’s embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people’s embodiment isn’t limited to the clinical interaction. It has also been directed at healthcare regulation and welfare policy. In this paper, I examine the arguments for taking embodiment seriously in both medical practice and welfare policy, concluding we have good reasons to take better account of people’s embodiment. I then set out two challenges to taking embodiment seriously in public policy. First, given the amount of variation in how people are embodied, there is strong possibility that adjusting policy to benefit particular individuals based on an appreciation of their embodied experiences could be detrimental towards other individuals. The second challenge concerns how to ensure that people’s testimony about their first-person embodied experience is subject to adequate scrutiny without this resulting in epistemic injustice. I argue that the solution to both of these challenges is to devise a just procedure for soliciting people’s testimony and taking it into account in the policy development process. As such, I also provide an outline of what a just procedure should look like.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1321-2753</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1836-6716</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37925386</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Dissent and Disputes ; Education ; Ethics ; Feminism ; Humans ; Medical practices ; Philosophy ; Policy Making ; Public Policy ; Theory of Medicine/Bioethics</subject><ispartof>Monash bioethics review, 2023-12, Vol.41 (Suppl 1), p.20-48</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s).</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0002-9261-7694</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37925386$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Joseph T F</creatorcontrib><title>Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare</title><title>Monash bioethics review</title><addtitle>Monash Bioeth. Rev</addtitle><addtitle>Monash Bioeth Rev</addtitle><description>It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people’s embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people’s embodiment isn’t limited to the clinical interaction. It has also been directed at healthcare regulation and welfare policy. In this paper, I examine the arguments for taking embodiment seriously in both medical practice and welfare policy, concluding we have good reasons to take better account of people’s embodiment. I then set out two challenges to taking embodiment seriously in public policy. First, given the amount of variation in how people are embodied, there is strong possibility that adjusting policy to benefit particular individuals based on an appreciation of their embodied experiences could be detrimental towards other individuals. The second challenge concerns how to ensure that people’s testimony about their first-person embodied experience is subject to adequate scrutiny without this resulting in epistemic injustice. I argue that the solution to both of these challenges is to devise a just procedure for soliciting people’s testimony and taking it into account in the policy development process. As such, I also provide an outline of what a just procedure should look like.</description><subject>Dissent and Disputes</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Feminism</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical practices</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Policy Making</subject><subject>Public Policy</subject><subject>Theory of Medicine/Bioethics</subject><issn>1321-2753</issn><issn>1836-6716</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EgvL4ARbIEuuAPU7jmB2qeElIbGBtOfakTUnjYCei_XsM5bFj47Fnzr1jXUJOObvgjMnLmLOpgoyByBjjpcjWO2SSapEVkhe76S6AZyCn4oAcxrhMkOIq3ycHQiqYirKYEP9sXptuTnFVedessBtoxND4MbYb2nS0H6u2sbT36dxQ0znaB2OHxuIVNc73w6fYpKa36MZgWmr69DB2QQdPF2jaYfEle8e2NgGPyV5t2ogn3_WIvNzePM_us8enu4fZ9WNmhWRDZtDmAMCkq8FZkKxmuXLc8aKyQtm8liUohSUWXFRgXFVBaS3LJbPOFYDiiJxvfdNn3kaMg176MXRppQbFJJS8VCpRsKVs8DEGrHUfmpUJG82Z_sxYbzPWKWP9lbFeJ9HZt_VYrdD9Sn5CTYDYAjGNujmGv93_2H4AVmmJiw</recordid><startdate>20231201</startdate><enddate>20231201</enddate><creator>Roberts, Joseph T F</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9261-7694</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231201</creationdate><title>Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare</title><author>Roberts, Joseph T F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-aec422207df2dc270f049d1d16bc39c4f78299e8e613b2adbb28cc0470cdd62e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Dissent and Disputes</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Feminism</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical practices</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Policy Making</topic><topic>Public Policy</topic><topic>Theory of Medicine/Bioethics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Joseph T F</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Monash bioethics review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Roberts, Joseph T F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare</atitle><jtitle>Monash bioethics review</jtitle><stitle>Monash Bioeth. Rev</stitle><addtitle>Monash Bioeth Rev</addtitle><date>2023-12-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>Suppl 1</issue><spage>20</spage><epage>48</epage><pages>20-48</pages><issn>1321-2753</issn><eissn>1836-6716</eissn><abstract>It is a common refrain amongst phenomenologists, disability theorists, and feminist legal theorists that medical practice pays insufficient attention to people’s embodiment. The complaint that we take insufficient account of people’s embodiment isn’t limited to the clinical interaction. It has also been directed at healthcare regulation and welfare policy. In this paper, I examine the arguments for taking embodiment seriously in both medical practice and welfare policy, concluding we have good reasons to take better account of people’s embodiment. I then set out two challenges to taking embodiment seriously in public policy. First, given the amount of variation in how people are embodied, there is strong possibility that adjusting policy to benefit particular individuals based on an appreciation of their embodied experiences could be detrimental towards other individuals. The second challenge concerns how to ensure that people’s testimony about their first-person embodied experience is subject to adequate scrutiny without this resulting in epistemic injustice. I argue that the solution to both of these challenges is to devise a just procedure for soliciting people’s testimony and taking it into account in the policy development process. As such, I also provide an outline of what a just procedure should look like.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>37925386</pmid><doi>10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x</doi><tpages>29</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9261-7694</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1321-2753 |
ispartof | Monash bioethics review, 2023-12, Vol.41 (Suppl 1), p.20-48 |
issn | 1321-2753 1836-6716 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2907281899 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Dissent and Disputes Education Ethics Feminism Humans Medical practices Philosophy Policy Making Public Policy Theory of Medicine/Bioethics |
title | Taking embodiment seriously in public policy and practice: adopting a procedural approach to health and welfare |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T22%3A40%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Taking%20embodiment%20seriously%20in%20public%20policy%20and%20practice:%20adopting%20a%20procedural%20approach%20to%20health%20and%20welfare&rft.jtitle=Monash%20bioethics%20review&rft.au=Roberts,%20Joseph%20T%20F&rft.date=2023-12-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=Suppl%201&rft.spage=20&rft.epage=48&rft.pages=20-48&rft.issn=1321-2753&rft.eissn=1836-6716&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s40592-023-00183-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2907281899%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2907281899&rft_id=info:pmid/37925386&rfr_iscdi=true |