IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v321y2023ics0277953623001260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenging the logic of lifesaving in the intensive care unit

Author

Listed:
  • van Beinum, Amanda

Abstract

Intensive care units are considered life-saving medical services and a vital component of healthcare systems. These specialized hospital wards contain the life support machines and technical expertise to sustain seriously ill and injured bodies. However, as the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated, intensive care is an expensive, finite resource which is not necessarily available to all citizens, and which may be unjustly rationed. As a result, the intensive care unit may contribute more towards biopolitical narratives of investment in lifesaving than measurable improvements in population health. Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork and a decade of involvement in clinical research, this paper examines everyday activities of lifesaving in the intensive care unit and interrogates epistemological assumptions upon which they are organized. A closer look at how healthcare professionals, medical devices, patients, and families accept, refuse, and modify imposed boundaries of bodily finitude reveals how activities of lifesaving often lead to uncertainty and may even impose harm when they deny possibilities for desired death. Refiguring death as a personal ethical threshold, rather than inherently tragic ending, challenges the power of the logic of lifesaving and instead insists on greater attention towards improving conditions for living.

Suggested Citation

  • van Beinum, Amanda, 2023. "Challenging the logic of lifesaving in the intensive care unit," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:321:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623001260
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623001260
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115769?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.

    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:321:y:2023:i:c:s0277953623001260. 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.