IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v29y1989i2p245-252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The interpretation of self-care: A difference in outlook between clients and home-nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Van Agthoven, W. M.
  • Plomp, H. N.

Abstract

In this article, the client's interpretation of self-care and that of home-nurses are compared [1. Agthoven W.M. van and Zorg op Maat. Het afstemmingsproces tussen wijkverpleging, kliënt en informele zorgverlener. Instituut voor Sociale Geneeskunde, Vrije Universiteit (The process of directing self-care, informal and formal assistance). Department of Social Medicine, Free University, Amsterdam, 1985.] Self-care is defined, by two components: the decision (as to) what to do and the execution of the care. In estimating the client's capacity for self-care a limited number of discrepancies play a role on the physical level and many more on the psychosocial level. It is particularly in psychosocial care that a severe distortion occurs if the professional helper makes an estimate of the client's capacity to cope with the psychological and social aspects of care. The client finds himself much more capable, in this respect, than the home-nurse. Moreover, the client estimates the role of this professional helper in providing advice and guidance much lower than the helper in providing advice and guidance much lower than the helper indicates. Varioius discrepancies in outlook of client and home-nurse concerning self-care were indicated in the study and discussed in relation to Freidsons concept 'social construction of illness' and Scheff's ideas about 'negotiating responsibility'.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Agthoven, W. M. & Plomp, H. N., 1989. "The interpretation of self-care: A difference in outlook between clients and home-nurses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 245-252, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:29:y:1989:i:2:p:245-252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(89)90173-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    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:29:y:1989:i:2:p:245-252. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.