Medical women -- towards full integration? An analysis of the specialty choices made by two cohorts of Norwegian doctors
In Norway, as in most Western countries, doctors' choice of specialty has been strongly gendered. Female physicians have tended both to specialise to a lesser degree and to enter other specialties than male colleagues. In spite of the increase of women in medicine, previous studies have not managed to show any changes in this pattern. Comparing data from two cohorts of Norwegian doctors, authorised in 1970-73 and 1980-83 respectively, this article demonstrates that changes are in fact taking place. The changes are, however, not unequivocal. Firstly, women in these cohorts specialise to a very high degree and just as much as their male colleagues. Secondly, women doctors of the 1980s cohort spread their choice of specialisation over more fields than their predecessors did. They have, for example, started to enter surgery, although still not as often as men. Thirdly, proportionally more doctors of the 1980s cohort than the 1970s cohort have chosen general practice as their main specialty, and this applies to both women and men. Fourthly, there are tendencies towards an increasing concentration of women in some disciplines such as obstetrics and gynaecology, as well as paediatrics. These changes in doctors' pattern of specialisation are discussed as consequences of socially shaped individual preferences, structural aspects of the Norwegian health system and the existence of gendered closure mechanisms within specific medical fields. Although the medical profession still appears as a gender differentiated community, the article gives a more dynamic and in some respects a more optimistic picture than earlier studies.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 52 (2001)
Issue (Month): 3 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:52:y:2001:i:3:p:331-343. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.