Davies Celia
School of Health and Social Welfare, The Open University, Milton Keynes.
Sociol Health Illn. 2003;25:172-90.
The task of examining just how the concept of 'organisations' has fared in Sociology of Health and Illness in its first 25 years is in some ways unrewarding. The answer has to be -'not at all well'. But why is this and does it matter? Part one of this paper considers what research on health care organisations was being conducted in the early years of the Journal and why that work was not viewed with favour by sociologists. Part two examines the growing gulf between those who saw themselves principally as responding to the call for a sociology of health and illness informed by broader sociological theory, and those who regarded themselves more as analysts of health policy and practice. Postmodernism, curiously, has begun to open up something of a route back. Just what might be done to create a closer rapprochement between those calling for theory and those wanting to address some of the day to day challenges of the delivery and experience of health care in the 21st century are topics for the final section.
考察“组织”这一概念在健康与疾病社会学领域头25年里的发展情况,在某些方面是没有什么收获的。答案必然是——“根本不好”。但原因何在,这重要吗?本文第一部分思考了在该期刊早期对医疗保健组织进行了哪些研究,以及为何社会学家不看好这项工作。第二部分审视了那些主要认为自己是在响应以更广泛社会学理论为依据的健康与疾病社会学呼声的人与那些更多将自己视为健康政策与实践分析师的人之间日益扩大的差距。奇怪的是,后现代主义已开始开辟出一条回归之路。在呼吁理论的人和希望应对21世纪医疗保健提供与体验方面一些日常挑战的人之间,究竟能做些什么来实现更紧密的和解,这是最后一部分要探讨的话题。