Positive Health Online

Abstract

BROOM A and  TOVEY, School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Australia.  a.broom@vq.edu.av examine the results of a study on the provision of CAM to cancer patients in two distinct organisational contexts: the hospice and the hospital.

Background

The authors write that the integration of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) into cancer services is increasingly discussed as a potential part of UK health policy, but as yet there has been little sociological research examining this process.

Methodology

This study is based on interviews with medical specialists, nursing staff and CAM therapists. This research study focuses on how integration is managed in each organisation, examining professional boundary disputes and inter-professional dynamics. Discussion focuses on the rhetorical and practical strategies that are employed by a variety of differently positioned interviewees to negotiate the complexities of the interface of CAM and biomedicine.

Results

The results show significant differentiation in how differently positioned cancer clinicians view and utilise the biomedical hierarchy of evidence.

Conclusion

The authors argue that the integration of CAM should not be conceptualized as a mere challenge to biomedicine, or, as resulting in a linear process of de-professionalization. Rather, it should be seen as producing a complex array of processes, including strategic adaptation on the part of medical specialists and NHS organisations.

References

Broom A and  Tovey P. Therapeutic pluralism? Evidence, power and legitimacy in UK cancer services. Sociology of Health & Illness 29(4):551-69. May 2007.