Edge Hill University, Faculty of Health, Social Care & Medicine, St Helens Road, Ormskirk L39 4QP, UK.
University of Chester, Chester, UK.
Epilepsy Behav. 2023 Nov;148:109485. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2023.109485. Epub 2023 Oct 17.
This paper focuses on the struggles for legitimacy expressed by people with non-epileptic attack disorder (NEAD), one of the most common manifestations of functional neurological disorder presenting to emergency and secondary care services. Nonepileptic attacks are episodes of altered experience, awareness, and reduced self-control that superficially resemble epileptic seizures or other paroxysmal disorders but are not associated with physiological abnormalities sufficient to explain the semiological features. "Organic" or medicalized explanations are frequently sought by patients as the only legitimate explanation for symptoms, and consequently, a diagnosis of NEAD is often contested. Drawing on narrative interviews with patients from a small exploratory study and using a sociological perspective, we propose that a psychological account of NEAD does not provide a sufficiently legitimate path into a socially sanctioned sick role. This is a reflection of the dominance of biomedicine and the associated processes of medicalization. These processes are, we argue, the sole route to achieving legitimacy. The stress-based or psychologically oriented explanations offered to patients in contemporary medical models of the etiology of NEAD engender an uncertain identity and social position and fail to provide many patients with an account of the nature or origin of their symptoms that they find satisfactory or convincing. These struggles for legitimacy (shared by others with functional or somatoform conditions) are sharpened by key features of the contemporary healthcare landscape, such as the increasing framing of health through a lens of 'responsibilization'.
本文聚焦于非癫痫性发作障碍(NEAD)患者为争取合法性所做出的努力。NEAD 是一种常见的功能性神经障碍表现,多在急诊和二级医疗保健服务中出现。非癫痫性发作是一种体验、意识和自我控制改变的发作,表面上类似于癫痫发作或其他阵发性障碍,但与足以解释症状特征的生理异常无关。患者经常寻求“器质性”或医学解释作为症状的唯一合理解释,因此,NEAD 的诊断经常受到争议。本研究通过对来自小型探索性研究的患者进行叙事访谈,并运用社会学视角,提出 NEAD 的心理解释并不能为其提供足够合理的途径来获得社会认可的病患角色。这反映了生物医学的主导地位以及与之相关的医学化过程。我们认为,这些过程是获得合法性的唯一途径。在 NEAD 病因的当代医学模型中向患者提供的基于压力或心理导向的解释,导致了他们身份和社会地位的不确定,并且未能为许多患者提供他们认为满意或有说服力的关于其症状性质或来源的解释。这些为争取合法性所做出的努力(与其他功能性或躯体形式障碍患者共享)因当代医疗保健领域的一些关键特征而变得更加尖锐,例如通过“责任化”视角来构建健康的概念。