Difference between revisions of "Speer2009a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
 
|Editor(s)=Alice F. Freed; Susan Ehrlich;
 
|Editor(s)=Alice F. Freed; Susan Ehrlich;
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Institutional talk; questions; transsexual; psychiatry; Medical EMCA
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Institutional talk; questions; transsexual; psychiatry; Medical EMCA
|Key=Speer2010
+
|Key=Speer2009a
 
|Publisher=Oxford University Press
 
|Publisher=Oxford University Press
|Year=2010
+
|Year=2009
 
|Address=Oxford
 
|Address=Oxford
 
|Booktitle=“Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse
 
|Booktitle=“Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse

Revision as of 12:23, 25 November 2019

Speer2009a
BibType INCOLLECTION
Key Speer2009a
Author(s) Susan A. Speer
Title Pursuing views and testing commitments: hypothetical questions in the psychiatric assessment of transsexual patients
Editor(s) Alice F. Freed, Susan Ehrlich
Tag(s) EMCA, Institutional talk, questions, transsexual, psychiatry, Medical EMCA
Publisher Oxford University Press
Year 2009
Language
City Oxford
Month
Journal
Volume
Number
Pages 133–158
URL Link
DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306897.003.0007
ISBN 978-0-19-530689-7
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title “Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This chapter, written by Susan Speer, considers the role of hypothetical questions (HQs) in interactions between psychiatrists and transsexual patients in a British gender identity clinic. The psychiatrists studied in this chapter perform a gatekeeping function vis‐à‐vis their transsexual patients in that they must diagnosis the patients as true transsexuals before the patients can receive publically funded sex reassignment surgery. Speers argues that the psychiatrists use hypothetical questions in this context as a diagnostic tool, specifically, as a way of testing the patients' commitment to a sex change. In particular, the psychiatrists use HQs to construct hypothetical scenarios about the negative consequences of treatment and query the patients as to how they would “feel, behave, or cope” given such a scenario.

Notes