Why do medical professional regulators dismiss most complaints from members of the public? Regulatory illiteracy, epistemic injustice, and symbolic power

Simple item page
dc.check.date2019-07-10
dc.check.infoAccess to this article is restricted until 12 months after publication by request of the publisher.en
dc.contributor.authorO'Donovan, Órla
dc.contributor.authorMadden, Deirdre
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-10T11:03:50Z
dc.date.available2018-10-10T11:03:50Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-10
dc.date.updated2018-10-10T10:52:32Z
dc.description.abstractDrawing on an analysis of complaint files that we conducted for the Irish Medical Council (Madden and O’Donovan 2015), this paper offers three possible explanations for the gap between the ubiquity of official commitments to taking patients’ complaints seriously and medical professional regulators’ dismissal—as not warranting an inquiry—of the vast majority of complaints submitted by members of the public. One explanation points to the “regulatory illiteracy” of many complainants, where the remit and threshold of seriousness of regulators is poorly understood by the general public. Another points to possible processes of “institutional epistemic injustice” (Fricker 2007; Anderson 2012) that unjustly undermine the credibility of certain complainants, such as those with low levels of formal education. A third explanation highlights the marginalization of the general public from “symbolic power” (Bourdieu 1989) to define what matters in medical professional regulation. The paper is offered in a spirit of ideas in progress and raising questions rather than definitive insights into the regulatory process.en
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.description.versionAccepted Versionen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.citationO’Donovan, O. and Madden, D. (2018) 'Why Do Medical Professional Regulators Dismiss Most Complaints From Members of the Public? Regulatory Illiteracy, Epistemic Injustice, and Symbolic Power', Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, (10 pp.). doi:10.1007/s11673-018-9869-2en
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11673-018-9869-2
dc.identifier.endpage10en
dc.identifier.issn1872-4353
dc.identifier.journaltitleJournal of Bioethical Inquiryen
dc.identifier.startpage1en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10468/6999
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringer Verlagen
dc.relation.urihttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11673-018-9869-2
dc.rights© Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. 2018. This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Journal of Bioethical Inquiry. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9869-2en
dc.subjectInstitutional epistemic injusticeen
dc.subjectSymbolic poweren
dc.subjectPatients' complaintsen
dc.subjectMedical professional regulationen
dc.subjectRegulatory illiteracyen
dc.titleWhy do medical professional regulators dismiss most complaints from members of the public? Regulatory illiteracy, epistemic injustice, and symbolic poweren
dc.typeArticle (peer-reviewed)en
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
6507_IJBI_accepted_version_copy.pdf
Size:
107.34 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Accepted version
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Applied Social Studies - Journal Articles