Search

This paper explores the intersection of gender and class concerning welfare clients with medically unexplained symptoms. The study is conducted in Denmark using qualitative interviews with welfare officers and clients. The paper's focus is on how issues of gender and class intersect in the negotiation of illness among welfare officers and clients. The particular client group in question consists of individuals that are defined by their lack of a bio-medical diagnosis. Their 'lack' of identity accentuates how gender and class become central in the categorisation practices, constructing the ill person as either bio-medically sick or as a person who may be suffering but only from diffuse psychological problems. The paper shows that it is predominantly poorly educated women without a bio-medical diagnosis that welfare officers describe as suffering from psychological problems despite the fact that the women themselves focus on physical ailments in their illness stories. Men and better-educated women are described by the welfare officers as tired and exhausted or truly stressed after a long working life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on a qualitative study of the onset of acquired hearing impairment. The focus of attention is why a person seeks treatment. The Danish welfare state serves the population 'in need' such as those with an audiological need and gives them guidance on becoming hearing aid wearers in order to rehabilitate them back to 'normalcy'. However, within audiological research, noncompliance has attracted much attention as investigations have shown that more than 20 percent of hearing aids are very seldom, if ever, in use and 19 percent are used only occasionally. As shown in the paper the form a problem takes is in large part a product of micro-political struggles. Hence, at the onset 'need' is often embedded in social pressure from significant others. The paper examines these two discursive frameworks and their constitution of (hearing) problems and concludes that norms of disease are complex and epistemologically contested and can help explain why noncompliance is dominant when it comes to hearing rehabilitation for hearing impaired adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]