• Andrew Edgar, Celia Kitzinger, and Jenny Kitzinger.
• Centre for Applied Ethics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
• J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Jun 1; 21 (3): 374379374-9.

Rationale, Aims And ObjectivesChronic disorders of consciousness (CDoC) pose significant problems of understanding for both medical professionals and the relatives and friends of the patient. This paper explores the tensions between the different interpretative resources that are drawn upon by lay people and professionals in their response to CDoC.MethodsA philosophical analysis of data from 51 interviews with people who have relatives who are (or have been) in a vegetative or minimally conscious state.ResultsThe medical specialist and the lay person tend to draw on two different interpretative frameworks: a medical science framework, which tends to construct the patient in terms of measurable physical parameters, and an interpretative framework that encompasses the uniqueness of the patient and the relative's relationship to them as a social being.ConclusionsThese differences potentially lead to ruptures in communication between medical professionals and relatives such that that an increased self-consciousness of the framing assumptions being made will facilitate communication and enrich understanding of CDoCs.© 2014 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

13 keywords...

hide…