Full article (pdf)
Full article (pdf) Full article (pdf)
International Journal of Ageing and Later Life could discuss with your home help.’’ However, Mrs Stein agreed that she would really try to do these things on her own, and the health advisor said: ‘‘But that is so good because that is of course the only way you get back your energy,’’ and Mrs Stein repeated but complained: ‘‘Well, then, that is the only way I can get back my energy. I think ... but I get so tired. And then I fall asleep on the couch and then I can’t take part in any of the arrangements downstairs.’’ Autonomy and resistance During a home visit, the work of care is occasionally challenged or even resisted. For example, more than anything, Mr Holten (age 78) preferred to sit in his good chair whilst Mrs Holten did all the housework, drove the car, kept the flat and the summerhouse, and maintained all the social relationships. When the health advisor urged Mr Holten to increase his level of activity and go for a daily walk, he frowned and replied: I’m fine as it is!! In another example of an attempted but unsuccessful health negotiation, we shall meet Mr and Mrs Havemann, an old couple who has been together for many years. The couple has an unhealthy lifestyle; they both smoke a lot, sometimes substitute a meal with alcohol and Mrs Havemann has had a potentially life threatening medical condition. During a visit in their home, the health advisor suggests that the couple prepare some vegetables to eat with their dinner and maybe cut down on sauce and potatoes instead. Mr Havemann is not able to move well or do household chores but the couple has a well-known ritual of Mr Havemann peeling potatoes the one thing he can do and Mrs Havemann frying the meat and making the sauce every evening. When presented to the health promoting suggestion of adjusting their eating habits, Mrs Havemann is upset: All this trendy new food, she says, they can stuff it! Thus totally denying to enter any negotiation or shared care process that the health advisor tries to initiate. The problem here is not that Mr and Mrs Havemann do not want a long and healthy life together but rather that when presented with a possible adjustment, the couple experiences an eitheror choice between two contradictions, health and a treasured daily ritual. Given this choice, Mrs Havemann can only reject the idea of eating healthier as she cannot possibly reject the couple’s shared daily cooking ritual. This is an example where the citizen never 18
A healthy body in old age enters the negotiation but perceives the situation as choices of already fixed solutions, maybe because they are presented as such. Consequently, a logic of choice characterises the home visit; the choices available and their potential drawbacks are not meaningful to the Havemanns so they end up choosing the well-known daily life in the flat where the advise of health campaigns, doctors and advisors have no power. Both Mr Holten and Mr Havemann probably knew that the advice they got would do them good, at least in a strict medical way, so why did they reject it so clearly? They both accepted the health-promoting visit, which seems to indicate a certain interest in a care of the self and still they were upset by the health-promoting suggestions they got. In the cases where the citizens refused to partake in a health negotiation with the health advisor, or even to receive a home visit at all, something else other than unwillingness to stay or become healthy was probably at stake. I will argue that they had the same wish for health as the other citizens but another perception of the home visits: These citizens might anticipate or experience the home visits in the sense of an asymmetrical care rationale, where they are met by health choices of fixed, already negotiated solutions, but there is also something else at stake, different perceptions of autonomy; statements by three of the seven individually recruited informants whom we interviewed support this view. These citizens had rejected the home visits and claimed a health advisor’s visit to be potentially dangerous in terms of losing one’s autonomy through being told to eat or act differently and through being unwillingly moved to a nursing home. In the 13 participant observation cases, we did not meet any citizens who spoke of the visits as representing a risk though this could be due to a bias caused by feeling grateful that somebody cares for your health, even though the care in this case is formalised, public and paid for (Lewinter 2008). The independently recruited citizens were all healthy in a medical sense and had no or little contact with their GP’s but the mere fact or thought of the welfare state being in one’s home through the health advisor’s visit might contribute to a negative sense of being urged to live differently even though you are a mature adult with own, well established practices. In the municipality in our study, some 60% of aged citizens reject the home visits and in the study itself, half of the independently recruited 19
- Page 1 and 2: International Journal of Ageing and
- Page 3 and 4: A healthy body in old age to the bi
- Page 5 and 6: A healthy body in old age The PHV P
- Page 7 and 8: A healthy body in old age functiona
- Page 9 and 10: A healthy body in old age creates r
- Page 11 and 12: A healthy body in old age knowledge
- Page 13 and 14: A healthy body in old age health ad
- Page 15 and 16: A healthy body in old age there is
- Page 17: A healthy body in old age and was w
- Page 21 and 22: A healthy body in old age discussed
- Page 23 and 24: A healthy body in old age New perce
- Page 25: A healthy body in old age Holstein,
International Journal of Ageing and Later Life<br />
could discuss with your home help.’’ However, Mrs Stein agreed that she<br />
would really try to do these things on her own, and the health advisor<br />
said: ‘‘But that is so good because that is of course the only way you get<br />
back your energy,’’ and Mrs Stein repeated but complained: ‘‘Well, then,<br />
that is the only way I can get back my energy. I think ... but I get so tired.<br />
And then I fall asleep on the couch and then I can’t take part in any of<br />
the arrangements downstairs.’’<br />
Autonomy and resistance<br />
During a home visit, the work of care is occasionally challenged or even<br />
resisted. For example, more than anything, Mr Holten (age 78) preferred to<br />
sit in his good chair whilst Mrs Holten did all the housework, drove the car,<br />
kept the flat and the summerhouse, and maintained all the social relationships.<br />
When the health advisor urged Mr Holten to increase his level of<br />
activity and go for a daily walk, he frowned and replied: I’m fine as it is!!<br />
In another example of an attempted but unsuccessful health negotiation,<br />
we shall meet Mr and Mrs Havemann, an old couple who has been<br />
together for many years. The couple has an unhealthy lifestyle; they both<br />
smoke a lot, sometimes substitute a meal with alcohol and Mrs Havemann<br />
has had a potentially life threatening medical condition. During a visit in<br />
their home, the health advisor suggests that the couple prepare some<br />
vegetables to eat with their dinner and maybe cut down on sauce and<br />
potatoes instead. Mr Havemann is not able to move well or do household<br />
chores but the couple has a well-known ritual of Mr Havemann peeling<br />
potatoes the one thing he can do and Mrs Havemann frying the<br />
meat and making the sauce every evening. When presented to the<br />
health promoting suggestion of adjusting their eating habits, Mrs<br />
Havemann is upset: All this trendy new food, she says, they can stuff it!<br />
Thus totally denying to enter any negotiation or shared care process<br />
that the health advisor tries to initiate. The problem here is not that<br />
Mr and Mrs Havemann do not want a long and healthy life together but<br />
rather that when presented with a possible adjustment, the couple<br />
experiences an eitheror choice between two contradictions, health and<br />
a treasured daily ritual. Given this choice, Mrs Havemann can only reject<br />
the idea of eating healthier as she cannot possibly reject the couple’s<br />
shared daily cooking ritual. This is an example where the citizen never<br />
18
Change language