IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v191y2017icp186-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experience as knowledge: Disability, distillation and (reprogenetic) decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Boardman, Felicity K.

Abstract

‘Experiential knowledge’ is increasingly recognised as an important influence on reproductive decision-making. ‘Experiential knowledge of disability’ in particular is a significant resource within prenatal testing/screening contexts, enabling prospective parents to imagine and appraise future lives affected by disability. However, the concept of ‘experiential knowledge’ has been widely critiqued for its idiosyncrasy, its impermanence and consequently its perceived inferiority to (medical) knowledge. This paper explores some of these key critiques of experiential knowledge through an analysis of its constitution and uses in the context of reproductive decision-making. Seventeen UK-resident women with Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), or with SMA in their family, took part in two in-depth interviews: one in 2007–9 and the other in 2013–4. By comparing and contrasting these women's accounts at two time points, this paper demonstrates the stark contrast between ‘lived experience’ of SMA (the visceral everyday realities of life with the condition) and the various way(s) this experience was transformed into, and presented as, ‘knowledge’ through the processes of making, and accounting, for reproductive decisions. The analysis highlights that multiple, distinct and sometimes competing experiential frameworks are used to conceptualise SMA across time and context. However, rather than evidence of its fallibility, this finding highlights that ‘knowledge’ is an inappropriate vessel with which to capture and transfer ‘experiential knowledge’. Rather, we need to consider how to value such insight in ways that harnesses its inherent strength without leaving it vulnerable to the epistemological critiques attracted by labelling it ‘knowledge’.

Suggested Citation

  • Boardman, Felicity K., 2017. "Experience as knowledge: Disability, distillation and (reprogenetic) decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 186-193.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:191:y:2017:i:c:p:186-193
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.09.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953617305476
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.09.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edgar Burns, 2010. "Developing Email Interview Practices in Qualitative Research," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 15(4), pages 24-35, November.
    2. Raspberry, Kelly Amanda & Skinner, Debra, 2011. "Negotiating desires and options: How mothers who carry the fragile X gene experience reproductive decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(6), pages 992-998, March.
    3. Caron-Flinterman, J. Francisca & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W. & Bunders, Joske F.G., 2005. "The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(11), pages 2575-2584, June.
    4. Young, Bridget & Dixon-Woods, Mary & Findlay, Michelle & Heney, David, 2002. "Parenting in a crisis: conceptualising mothers of children with cancer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(10), pages 1835-1847, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tian, Xiaoli & Zhang, Sai, 2022. "Expert or experiential knowledge? How knowledge informs situated action in childcare practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    2. Werner-Lin, Allison & Forbes Shepherd, Rowan & Young, Jennifer L. & Wilsnack, Catherine & Merrill, Shana L. & Greene, Mark H. & Khincha, Payal P., 2022. "Embodied risk for families with Li-Fraumeni syndrome: Like electricity through my body," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ziewitz, Malte, 2017. "Experience in action: Moderating care in web-based patient feedback," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 99-108.
    2. Stockl, Andrea, 2007. "Complex syndromes, ambivalent diagnosis, and existential uncertainty: The case of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1549-1559, October.
    3. Ernst, Mareike & Brähler, Elmar & Klein, Eva M. & Jünger, Claus & Wild, Philipp S. & Faber, Jörg & Schneider, Astrid & Beutel, Manfred E., 2020. "What's past is prologue: Recalled parenting styles are associated with childhood cancer survivors' mental health outcomes more than 25 years after diagnosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    4. Pinar, Candas & Almeling, Rene & Gadarian, Shana Kushner, 2018. "Does genetic risk for common adult diseases influence reproductive plans? Evidence from a national survey experiment in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 62-68.
    5. Buchbinder, Mara & Timmermans, Stefan, 2011. "Newborn screening and maternal diagnosis: Rethinking family benefit," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(7), pages 1014-1018.
    6. Zheng, Nan & Wei, Yingqi & Zhang, Yabin & Yang, Jingjing, 2016. "In search of strategic assets through cross-border merger and acquisitions: Evidence from Chinese multinational enterprises in developed economies," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 177-186.
    7. Rojatz, Daniela & Forster, Rudolf, 2017. "Self-help organisations as patient representatives in health care and policy decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(10), pages 1047-1052.
    8. Boardman, Felicity Kate, 2014. "The expressivist objection to prenatal testing: The experiences of families living with genetic disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 18-25.
    9. Maslen, Sarah & Harris, Anna, 2021. "Becoming a diagnostic agent: A collated ethnography of digital-sensory work in caregiving intra-actions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    10. Matias Ramirez & Javier Hernando Garcia Estevez & Oscar Yandy Romero Goyeneche & Claudia E Obando Rodriguez, 2020. "Fostering place-based coalitions between social movements and science for sustainable urban environments: A case of embedded agency," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(7-8), pages 1386-1411, November.
    11. Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia & Brage, Eugenia, 2017. "What is not, but might be: The disnarrated in parents' stories of their child's cancer treatment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 16-22.
    12. Beck, Susanne & Brasseur, Tiare-Maria & Poetz, Marion & Sauermann, Henry, 2022. "Crowdsourcing research questions in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    13. Deml, Michael J. & Notter, Julia & Kliem, Paulina & Buhl, Andrea & Huber, Benedikt M. & Pfeiffer, Constanze & Burton-Jeangros, Claudine & Tarr, Philip E., 2019. "“We treat humans, not herds!”: A qualitative study of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers’ individualized approaches to vaccination in Switzerland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    14. Lehoux, Pascale & Poland, Blake & Daudelin, Genevieve, 2006. "Focus group research and "the patient's view"," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(8), pages 2091-2104, October.
    15. Natalie Tyldesley-Marshall & Sheila Greenfield & Susan J. Neilson & Jenny Adamski & Sharon Beardsmore & Martin English & Andrew Peet, 2020. "Exploring the Role of ‘Shadowing’ as a Beneficial Preparatory Step for Sensitive Qualitative Research with Children and Young People with Serious Health Conditions," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, January.
    16. Timmermans, Stefan & Freidin, Betina, 2007. "Caretaking as articulation work: The effects of taking up responsibility for a child with asthma on labor force participation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1351-1363, October.
    17. Goven, Joanna, 2008. "Assessing genetic testing: Who are the "lay experts"?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 1-18, January.
    18. Serrano-Aguilar, P. & Trujillo-Martín, M.M. & Ramos-Goñi, J.M. & Mahtani-Chugani, V. & Perestelo-Pérez, L. & Posada-de la Paz, M., 2009. "Patient involvement in health research: A contribution to a systematic review on the effectiveness of treatments for degenerative ataxias," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 920-925, September.
    19. Santiago Alzugaray & Maria Go-i & Leticia Mederos & Sofia Robaina, 2014. "Knowledge policies for inclusive development: lessons from Uruguay," Chapters, in: Gabriela Dutrénit & Judith Sutz (ed.), National Innovation Systems, Social Inclusion and Development, chapter 7, pages 199-220, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Miguel García-Martín & Carmen Amezcua-Prieto & Bassel H Al Wattar & Jan Stener Jørgensen & Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas & Khalid Saeed Khan, 2020. "Patient and Public Involvement in Sexual and Reproductive Health: Time to Properly Integrate Citizen’s Input into Science," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-12, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:191:y:2017:i:c:p:186-193. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.