The relationship between power and illness is the subject of limited discussion despite it being one of the most important issues in health-related policies and services. In an effort to correct this, Contesting Illness engages critically with processes through which the meanings and effects of illness shape and are shaped by specific sets of practices. Featuring original contributions by researchers working in a number of disciplines, this collection examines intersections of power, contestation, and illness with the aid of various critical theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches. The contributors explore experiences of illness, diagnosis, and treatment, and analyse wider discursive and policy contexts within which people become ill and engage with health care systems. Though each essay is unique in its approach, they are linked together by a shared focus on contestation as a conceptual tool in considering the relationship between power and illness. Rather than focus on a single example, the contributors address different contested illnesses (chronic fatigue syndrome and environmental illness, for instance) as well as the contested dimensions of illnesses that are accepted as legitimate such as cancer and autism. Contesting Illness offers valuable insights into the assumptions, practices, and interactions that shape illness in the twenty-first century. Contributors Jan Angus Pia H. Bülow Peter Conrad Joyce Davidson Helen Gremillion Maren Klawiter Joshua Kelley Steve Kroll-Smith Katherine Lippel Pamela Moss Michael Orsini Michael J. Prince Annie Potts Mary Ellen Purkis Sharon Dale Stone Cheryl Stults Katherine Teghtsoonian Jane M. Ussher Catherine van Mossel

The politics and science of health and disease remain contested terrain among scientists, health practitioners, policy makers, industry, communities, and the public. Stakeholders in disputes about illnesses or conditions disagree over their fundamental causes as well as how they should be treated and prevented. This thought-provoking book crosses disciplinary boundaries by engaging with both public health policy and social science, asserting that science, activism, and policy are not separate issues and showing how the contribution of environmental factors in disease is often overlooked.

What makes a disease real? Why is it that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia are doubted when they say they are in pain, and cannot access the same benefits of patient-hood that others can? What defines the limits of our belief and, ultimately, compassion, when it comes to disease? These are the questions approached in this book, which draws upon patients’ experiences and situates them among a diverse set of literatures, from the history and philosophy of medicine to the sociology of health and disease. The question of a patient’s identity and their understanding of disease is often assumed to emerge from their relationship with healthcare, but the case is made here that other, inter-personal factors are more salient. What a patient with a contested illness comes up against is not simply a medical categorisation – it is a prevailing notion of disease across society, and one they struggle to assimilate themselves into. Contested Illness in Context will appeal to students and researchers interested in fields such as the history and philosophy of medicine, the sociology of health and illness, medical anthropology, or disease and illness generally. It may also interest patients and doctors who struggle with difficult medical cases.

While many doctors claim that Lyme disease—a tick-borne bacterial infection—is easily diagnosed and treated, other doctors and the patients they care for argue that it can persist beyond standard antibiotic treatment in the form of chronic Lyme disease. In Divided Bodies, Abigail A. Dumes offers an ethnographic exploration of the Lyme disease controversy that sheds light on the relationship between contested illness and evidence-based medicine in the United States. Drawing on fieldwork among Lyme patients, doctors, and scientists, Dumes formulates the notion of divided bodies: she argues that contested illnesses are disorders characterized by the division of bodies of thought in which the patient's experience is often in conflict with how it is perceived. Dumes also shows how evidence-based medicine has paradoxically amplified differences in practice and opinion by providing a platform of legitimacy on which interested parties—patients, doctors, scientists, politicians—can make claims to medical truth.

This book critically compares conflicting perspectives and overlapping themes within the study of disability and illness across recent decades. With fresh interpretation of traditional theory in medical sociology and informed commentary on theoretical debates in disability studies, it is provocative reading for students and scholars in this field.

What makes a disease real? Why is it that patients with chronic fatigue syndrome or fibromyalgia are doubted when they say they are in pain, and cannot access the same benefits of patient-hood that others can? What defines the limits of our belief and, ultimately, compassion, when it comes to disease? These are the questions approached in this book, which draws upon patients' experiences and situates them among a diverse set of literatures, from the history and philosophy of medicine to the sociology of health and disease. The question of a patient's identity and their understanding of disease is often assumed to emerge from their relationship with healthcare, but the case is made here that other, inter-personal factors are more salient. What a patient with a contested illness comes up against is not simply a medical categorisation - it is a prevailing notion of disease across society, and one they struggle to assimilate themselves into. Contested Illness in Context will appeal to students and researchers interested in fields such as the history and philosophy of medicine, the sociology of health and illness, medical anthropology, or disease and illness generally. It may also interest patients and doctors who struggle with difficult medical cases.

"Autism has become an all-too-common diagnosis here in the United States. Typically diagnosed in early childhood, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is identified based on developmental delays in three areas: language, social skills, and particular behaviors. But what Americans know and think about autism is shaped by our social relationship to health, disease, and our country's medical system. The Western Disease explores the ways that Somali recent immigrants make sense of their children's diagnosis of autism. Having never heard of the disease before migrating to North America, they often determine that since autism doesn't exist in Somalia, it must be a Western disease. Many even believe it is Somalis' forced migration to North America that has rendered their children vulnerable to the development of autism. As Decoteau shows, autism--as a category, identity, and diagnosis--does not exist in Somalia because the infrastructure for its emergence is absent. When Somalis say that autism does not exist in Somalia, however, they mean that the disorder is Western in nature--that it is caused by environmental and health conditions unique to life in North America. Following Somali parents as they struggle to make sense of their children's illness and advocate for alternative care, Decoteau untangles the complicated ways immigration, race, and class affect the Somali relationship to the disease, and how this helps us understand our distinctly American approach to healthcare"--