IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v45y1997i5p669-676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A qualitative study of sexual harassment of female doctors by patients

Author

Listed:
  • Schneider, Margaret
  • Phillips, Susan P.

Abstract

This paper reports the qualitative data from a study of sexual harassment of female family physicians by patients. In addition to the everyday harassment that any woman might encounter in a work setting, the physicians in this study also reported types of harassment which are unique to the practice of medicine. These include opportunistic harassment such as exposure of the genitals, inappropriately touching the physician when the examination requires close contact, excessive discussion of sexual matters for apparent erotic gratification, and acting out behaviours from non-competent patients. Other reported behaviours were not, strictly speaking, sexual harassment but were troublesome nonetheless, including spontaneous erections during physical examinations, physically intimidating behaviour, and ambiguous behaviours which were sexual in nature, but difficult to interpret. The findings are discussed in the context of theory pertaining to contrapower harassment. It is concluded that for some patients the gender of the physician takes precedence over her occupational status and, this combined with the unique characteristics of the doctor/patient relationship, can make the practice of family medicine more conducive to sexual harassment than other professions.

Suggested Citation

  • Schneider, Margaret & Phillips, Susan P., 1997. "A qualitative study of sexual harassment of female doctors by patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 669-676, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:45:y:1997:i:5:p:669-676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(96)00384-X
    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:45:y:1997:i:5:p:669-676. 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.