liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Alternative names
Publications (10 of 85) Show all publications
Poole, J., Ward, J., DeLuca, E., Shildrick, M., Abbey, S., Mauthner, O. & Ross, H. (2016). Grief and loss for patients before and after heart transplant. Heart & Lung, 45(3), 193-198
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Grief and loss for patients before and after heart transplant
Show others...
2016 (English)In: Heart & Lung, ISSN 0147-9563, E-ISSN 1527-3288, Vol. 45, no 3, p. 193-198Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objectives

The purpose of the study was to examine the loss and grief experiences of patients waiting for and living with new hearts.

Background

There is much scholarship on loss and grief. Less attention has been paid to these issues in clinical transplantation, and even less on the patient experience.

Methods

Part of a qualitative inquiry oriented to the work of Merleau-Ponty, a secondary analysis was carried out on audiovisual data from interviews with thirty participants.

Results

Patients experience loss and three forms of grief. Pre-transplant patients waiting for transplant experience loss and anticipatory grief related to their own death and the future death of their donor. Transplanted patients experience long-lasting complicated grief with respect to the donor and disenfranchised grief which may not be sanctioned.

Conclusions

Loss as well as anticipatory, complicated and disenfranchised grief may have been inadvertently disregarded or downplayed. More research and attention is needed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Philadelphia, PA, USA: Mosby, Inc., 2016
Keywords
Grief; Transplantation; Heart; Qualitative; Merleau-Ponty; Disenfranchised
National Category
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-126230 (URN)10.1016/j.hrtlng.2016.01.006 (DOI)000375819900006 ()26897722 (PubMedID)
Note

Funding agencies: Faculty of Community Services at Ryerson University

Available from: 2016-03-18 Created: 2016-03-18 Last updated: 2017-11-30Bibliographically approved
Shildrick, M. (2016). Gut Feminism [Review]. Contemporary Women's Writing, 10(1), 143-145
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Gut Feminism
2016 (English)In: Contemporary Women's Writing, ISSN 1754-1476, E-ISSN 1754-1484, Vol. 10, no 1, p. 143-145Article, book review (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

n/a

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2016
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-127574 (URN)10.1093/cww/vpw002 (DOI)000373718100014 ()
Available from: 2016-05-04 Created: 2016-05-03 Last updated: 2017-11-30
Gewarges, M., Poole, J., De Luca, E., Shildrick, M., Abbey, S., Mauthner, O. & Ross, H. (2015). Canadian Society of Transplantation Members Views on Anonymity in Organ Donation and Transplantation. Transplantation Proceedings, 47(10), 2799-2804
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Canadian Society of Transplantation Members Views on Anonymity in Organ Donation and Transplantation
Show others...
2015 (English)In: Transplantation Proceedings, ISSN 0041-1345, E-ISSN 1873-2623, Vol. 47, no 10, p. 2799-2804Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background. Anonymity has been central to medical, psychosocial, and societal practices in organ donation and transplantation. The purpose of this investigation was to explore transplant professionals views on anonymity in the context of organ transplantation. Methods. The study consisted of an electronic 18-item survey distributed to the Canadian Society of Transplantation membership, asking about anonymity vs open communication/contact between organ recipients and donor families. Results. Of the 541 members surveyed, 106 replied. Among respondents, 71% felt that organ recipients and donor families should only communicate anonymously, yet 47% felt that identifying information could be included in correspondence between consenting recipients and donor families. When asked whether organ recipients and donor families should be allowed to meet, 53% of respondents agreed, 27% disagreed, and 20% neither agreed nor disagreed. With social media facilitating communication and eliminating the ability to maintain donor/recipient anonymity, 38% of respondents felt that a reexamination of current policies and practices pertaining to anonymity was necessary. Conclusion. In conclusion, there was no dominant position on the issue of anonymity/communication between donor families and transplant recipients. Further research and discussion concerning the views of healthcare professionals, organ recipients, and donor families on the mandate of anonymity is needed and may influence future policy.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2015
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-124521 (URN)10.1016/j.transproceed.2015.09.042 (DOI)000367416500001 ()26707291 (PubMedID)
Available from: 2016-02-02 Created: 2016-02-01 Last updated: 2017-11-30
Shildrick, M. (2015). Chimerism and immunitas: the emergence of a posthumanist biophilosophy. In: S. Wilmer and A. Zukauskaite (Ed.), Resisting Biopolitics : Philosophical, Political and Performative Strategies (pp. 95-109). New York: Routledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Chimerism and immunitas: the emergence of a posthumanist biophilosophy
2015 (English)In: Resisting Biopolitics : Philosophical, Political and Performative Strategies / [ed] S. Wilmer and A. Zukauskaite, New York: Routledge , 2015, p. 95-109Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The chapter draws on biomedical research, including my own around organ transplantation,  to look specifically at how the event of (micro)chimerism contests the discourse of the self’s immunity to the other. In the face of a socio-cultural imaginary that insists on the singularity of the human, the authorised discourse remains, nevertheless, largely unchanged, stressing the importance of securing immunity not only in biomedicine - where the search is for a functional explanation of (micro)chimerism that will preserve the status quo - but also in biopolitics. I speculate on the problematic in a way that turns to Esposito's thinking of immunitas and to the Deleuzian concept of assemblage as a better model for organic life, including human life.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
New York: Routledge, 2015
Series
Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy ; 71
Keywords
chimerism, immune system, biopolitics, Esposito
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-120322 (URN)978-1-138-78948-7 (ISBN)
Available from: 2015-07-30 Created: 2015-07-30 Last updated: 2015-08-26Bibliographically approved
Shildrick, M. (2015). Death, debility and disability. Feminism and Psychology, 25(1), 155-160
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Death, debility and disability
2015 (English)In: Feminism and Psychology, ISSN 0959-3535, E-ISSN 1461-7161, Vol. 25, no 1, p. 155-160Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2015
Keywords
Assisted dying, disability, Deleuze, neoliberalism, relationality
National Category
Ethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-114715 (URN)10.1177/0959353514562816 (DOI)000349373700028 ()
Available from: 2015-03-03 Created: 2015-03-03 Last updated: 2017-12-04
Shildrick, M. & Steinberg, D. L. (2015). Estranged Bodies: Shifting paradigms and the biomedical imaginary. Body & Society, 21(3)
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Estranged Bodies: Shifting paradigms and the biomedical imaginary
2015 (English)In: Body & Society, ISSN 1357-034X, E-ISSN 1460-3632, Vol. 21, no 3Article in journal, Editorial material (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This introductory article provides a contextual and theoretical overview to this special issue of Body & Society. The special issue presents five selected case studies – focusing on the contexts of transplantation, psychiatry, amputation and war, and a transvalued media ecology of cancer – to offer meditations on a number of interlinked questions. The first of these is the entanglement of biomedical governance – political/economic as well as self-disciplinary – with the nexus of estrangement, which can denote both the distancing of otherness and self-division. Second is the realm of feeling, of phantasmatic projection and of the ways in which the biopolitical becomes reciprocally, discursively, enmeshed in a wider cultural imaginary. Third is the shifting terrain of gender and feminist politics, a key dimension of which is the necessary reworking of feminist thought in the wake of a radically altered biomedical and biotechnological landscape. Under the rubric of Estranged Bodies, the collection considers themes of dissolution and the fragility of the body/subject read through bodily catastrophe, radical body modification and extreme medical intervention. Also considered is the notion of assemblage – the provisional coming together of disparate parts – which encourages a rethinking of questions of reconstituted, displaced and re-placed bodies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2015
Keywords
biomedicine, bodies, estrangement
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-120320 (URN)10.1177/1357034X15586242 (DOI)000360821800001 ()
Available from: 2015-07-30 Created: 2015-07-30 Last updated: 2018-01-11
Mauthner, O., De Luca, E., Poole, J., Abbey, S., Shildrick, M. & Ross, H. (2015). Heart transplants:: Identity disruption, bodily integrity and interconnectedness. Health, 19(6), 578-594
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Heart transplants:: Identity disruption, bodily integrity and interconnectedness
Show others...
2015 (English)In: Health, ISSN 1363-4593, Vol. 19, no 6, p. 578-594Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Of heart transplant recipients, 30 per cent report ongoing or episodic emotional issues post-transplant, which are not attributable to medications or pathophysiological changes. To this end, our team theorized that cardiac transplantation introduces pressing new questions about how patients incorporate a transplanted heart into their sense of self and how this impacts their identity. The work of Merleau-Ponty provided the theoretical underpinning for this project as it rationalizes how corporeal changes  affect one’s self and offer an innovative framework to access these complex aspects of living with a transplanted heart. We  used visual methodology and recorded 25 semi-structured interviews videographically. Both visual and verbal data were analyzed  at the same time in an iterative process. The most common theme was that participants expressed a disruption to their own identity and bodily integrity. Additionally, participants reported interconnectedness with the donor, even when the transplanted  heart was perceived as an intruder or stranger. Finally, transplant recipients were very vivid in their descriptions and speculation of how they imagined the donor. Receiving an anonymous donor organ from a stranger often leaves the recipient with questions  about who they themselves are now. Our study provides a nuanced understanding of heart transplant recipients’ embodied experiences of self and identity. Insights gained are valuable to educate transplant professionals to develop new supportive interventions both pre- and post-transplant, and to improve the process of informed consent. Ultimately, such insights could be used to enable heart transplant recipients to incorporate the graft optimally over time, easing distress and improving recovery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2015
Keywords
heart transplant; identity; intercorporeality; qualitative research; visual methodology
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-114719 (URN)10.1177/1363459314560067 (DOI)000364372400002 ()25445153 (PubMedID)
Available from: 2015-03-03 Created: 2015-03-03 Last updated: 2016-08-31
Shildrick, M. (2015). living on; not getting better. Feminist review (Print) (111), 10-24
Open this publication in new window or tab >>living on; not getting better
2015 (English)In: Feminist review (Print), ISSN 0141-7789, E-ISSN 1466-4380, no 111, p. 10-24Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The contemporary emergence of the concept debility, which pertains to a broad swathe of humanity whose ordinary lives simply persist without ever getting better, shares a time span with an acute critique of neo-liberal biopolitics. Where capital has historically relied on a population that through its labour necessarily becomes debilitated, the newer model of understanding references the intrinsic profitability of debility itself. The two dimensions overlap and co-exist, but what I shall pursue here are the implications of recognising that, at the most fundamental level, it is in the interests of neo-liberalism to produce and sustain bodies as debilitated and therefore susceptible to a range of market commodities that hold out the promise of therapeutic interventions into the relative failures of physical, cognitive and affective embodiment. In previous work, I have argued strongly for the inherent vulnerability of all bodies, but in considering here a more overtly politicised context, it becomes possible to readdress the questions posed by Jasbir Puar: which bodies are made to pay for "progress"? Which debilitated bodies can be reinvigorated for neoliberalism, and which cannot? And at the present moment, writing at a time of imposed austerity, I would add, what, if anything, is lost in the deployment of the term debility instead of disability?

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD, 2015
Keywords
debility; neo-liberalism; biopolitics
National Category
Gender Studies Social Work
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-123145 (URN)10.1057/fr.2015.22 (DOI)000364728300002 ()
Available from: 2015-12-07 Created: 2015-12-04 Last updated: 2017-12-01
Lundgren, S., Shildrick, M. & Lawrence, D. (2015). Rethinking bibliometric data concerning gender studies: A response to Söderlund and Madison. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1389-1398
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Rethinking bibliometric data concerning gender studies: A response to Söderlund and Madison
2015 (English)In: Scientometrics, ISSN 0138-9130, E-ISSN 1588-2861, Vol. 105, no 3, p. 1389-1398Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Comment to the article ‘Characteristics of gender studies publications: Abibliometric analysis based on a Swedish population database’ by Therese So¨derlund andGuy Madison (Scientometrics, 2015). From the position of relevant expertise within genderstudies and bibliometrics, this text offers a critique of the present study and some suggestionsof alternative ways forward. It analyses (1) the object of study of the article (theterms used to denominate the field, keywords and methods to make sample selection), (2)technical issues and the question of language in relation to international citations andimpact factor, and (3) the views presented in the article regarding gender studies andpolitical ideology.

Keywords
Gender studies, Knowledge production, Feminist theory, Intersectionality, Transdisciplinary
National Category
Gender Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-121867 (URN)10.1007/s11192-015-1767-3 (DOI)000365130100003 ()
Note

Funding agencies: Swedish Research Council; Orebro University

Available from: 2015-10-12 Created: 2015-10-12 Last updated: 2017-12-01
Shildrick, M. (2015). Review of Women and the gift: beyond the given and the all-giving, by Morny Joy [Review]. Journal of Gender Studies, 24(3), 373-376
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Review of Women and the gift: beyond the given and the all-giving, by Morny Joy
2015 (English)In: Journal of Gender Studies, ISSN 0958-9236, E-ISSN 1465-3869, Vol. 24, no 3, p. 373-376Article, book review (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

n/a

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor and Francis (Routledge): SSH Titles, 2015
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-118028 (URN)10.1080/09589236.2014.960306 (DOI)000353418300015 ()
Available from: 2015-05-21 Created: 2015-05-20 Last updated: 2017-12-04
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-9360-0931

Search in DiVA

Show all publications