Suchergebnisse

1. Information keeping/seeking -- 2. Gender, choice and time -- 3. Imaging and imagining genetics -- 4. Men, masculinity and decision-making -- 5. Gendering 'good' and 'bad' genes -- 6. Family, friends and heredity -- 7. Transforming social divisions.

Although grief can have a profound effect on the workplace, the long-term lived experience of working after bereavement remains under researched. But how is grief experienced at work? And to what extent does this experience vary according to type of loss and form of work? Drawing on data collected through a qualitative online survey (n = 220), this article provides a sociological exploration of experiences of work after bereavement. The article will argue that while grief can be silenced in the workplace, work can also provide an important source of relational connection for bereaved individuals. It concludes by reflecting on the need to move beyond linear approaches to grief and work, highlighting the important intersection of social relations and place. By analysing experiences through a relational lens, this article seeks to offer an original contribution to the sociology of work, and to grief theory as applied in the workplace.

Research often highlights the complex nature of 'lay' interpretations of family genetic history particularly regarding women and breast cancer. While clinical studies have established genetic links for certain diseases affecting men, less is known about men's understandings of family history and health. This omission relates perhaps to the focus in existing health research on hegemonic masculinity, whereby 'macho stoicism' inhibits men's ability to 'do health' productively. Drawing on survey data, this article shows that men frequently engage in positive health practices regarding family history. While not always clear on the specific role of genetics, men do make lifestyle changes and seek medical advice in response to patterns of hereditary disease. The article concludes that while men's views sometimes indicate hegemonic or 'macho' approaches to health, more often they suggest a departure from them. The implications of this should be considered in future theory and policy on gender, genetics and health.

This piece has been written in response to a recent article published in the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) which exposed the red tape restricting health research in the UK's National Health Service (NHS). Whilst the THES article was critical of NHS ethical review and research governance, it still views a streamlined version of the process as necessary for the protection of researchers and respondents. Drawing on the recent experience of applying for ethical approval and research governance for a qualitative study on gender and genetics, this paper examines the review process and the restrictive paperwork and procedures that surround it, focusing in particular on the impact this has on social science research. The argument will be put forward that while all research, whether clinical or social, is hampered by the bureaucracy surrounding the review process, social research is further alienated by it. This is because the paperwork and processes involved are set up to evaluate clinical, not social, research. Furthermore, the process is caught up in a culture of fear that breeds mistrust towards 'outsiders' wishing to conduct research in the NHS. The revision of NHS ethical review has to go further than mere bureaucratic streamlining - it needs to be made more relevant and accessible to health researchers working across a range of disciplines.

Social scientists have increasingly shown how qualitative research can be an emotional experience for researchers. Literature on this subject has tended to focus on the emotionally upsetting impact of data collection, often framing this as a form of emotional labour which can be managed by researchers adopting confessional style narratives throughout the research process. But what about the potentially life-affirming impacts of emotions in research? And what happens when confessional style narratives create, rather than dilute, emotional trauma? We use our experiences of conducting qualitative research on two very emotive topics – baby loss and sibling bereavement – to explore the role of emotions in research. We go beyond the predominant focus on doing research to shed light on emotions in the wider research process (from recruitment to impact). We will highlight the dual-edged nature of emotions in research, emphasising some of the more beneficial impacts. Drawing on the Weberian concept of Verstehen which focuses on the importance of understanding, we will also develop a more nuanced form of emotion management in this context. In doing so, we offer an original contribution to methodological discussions in this field, as well as to more conceptual debates on emotional labour.