The Role of Socially Embedded Concepts in Breast Cancer Screening: An Empirical Study with Australian Experts

Public Health Ethics 9 (3):276-289 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is not clear whether breast cancer screening is a public health intervention or an individual clinical service. The question is important because the concepts best suited for ethical reasoning in public health might be different to the concepts commonly employed in biomedical ethics. We consider it likely that breast screening has elements of a public health intervention and used an empirical ethics approach to explore this further. If breast screening has public health characteristics, it is probable that policy and practice experts will employ socially embedded concepts when reasoning about it. We gathered data on whether and how these concepts existed in the discussion and reasoning of Australian breast screening experts. We found that experts employed these concepts when talking about the purpose and practices of breast screening, and the behaviour of breast screening professionals and consumers. Experts gave varied judgements about breast screening based on reasoning with these concepts, considering it to be more or less successful in contributing to the public interest and in incorporating socially embedded concepts into its operational agenda. Our findings are compatible with breast screening having public health characteristics. We advocate for the incorporation of socially embedded concepts in breast screening policy and practice.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,296

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Population screening.Ainsley J. Newson & A. Dawson - forthcoming - Public Health Ethics. Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice.
Breast cancer screening in younger women: evidence and decision making.J. Mark Elwood - 1997 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 3 (3):179-186.
Breast cancer incidence: what do the figures mean?Ann Johnson & Jane Shekhdar - 2005 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 11 (1):27-31.
When Evidence Is Contested.Karen J. Maschke - 2014 - Hastings Center Report 44 (3):inside back cover-inside back co.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-04-20

Downloads
38 (#433,096)

6 months
10 (#308,815)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stacy Carter
University of Sydney

Citations of this work

Add more citations