Resisting blame and managing emotion in general practice: the case of patient suicide
Resisting blame and managing emotion in general practice: the case of patient suicide
UK Governing bodies are imposing increased forms of regulation on General Practitioners (GPs). This paper explores one example of such governance – the audit of GP practice through Critical Incident Reviews (CIRs) following patient suicide. Drawing on interviews with 16 GPs about their involvement in a CIR of a patient's suicide, we found that the review process initially provoked strong emotions of sadness and guilt as well as fear of blame. Ultimately, however, most GPs felt comforted by the CIRs because their findings confirmed that they were not responsible for the suicide. At the same time, the GPs indicated that such comfort was tenuous due to the broader blame culture and because they foresaw many future audits as part of an inflationary spiral of surveillance and risk management. While the GPs adopted strategies to manage and resist surveillance, the effects of CIRs on patient care may be mixed, with the potential both to improve clinical practice and contribute to adverse outcomes. We argue that CIRs paradoxically contain and create anxieties about suicide among GPs and society more broadly.
uk, suicide, audit, critical incident review, emotion, blame culture, general practitioners, risk management, governance
1714-1720
Kendall, Kathleen
7c1c7abc-513b-4da5-b99d-268cd1d8bc58
Wiles, Rose
5bdc597b-716c-4f60-9f45-631ecca25571
June 2010
Kendall, Kathleen
7c1c7abc-513b-4da5-b99d-268cd1d8bc58
Wiles, Rose
5bdc597b-716c-4f60-9f45-631ecca25571
Kendall, Kathleen and Wiles, Rose
(2010)
Resisting blame and managing emotion in general practice: the case of patient suicide.
Social Science & Medicine, 70 (11), .
(doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.045).
Abstract
UK Governing bodies are imposing increased forms of regulation on General Practitioners (GPs). This paper explores one example of such governance – the audit of GP practice through Critical Incident Reviews (CIRs) following patient suicide. Drawing on interviews with 16 GPs about their involvement in a CIR of a patient's suicide, we found that the review process initially provoked strong emotions of sadness and guilt as well as fear of blame. Ultimately, however, most GPs felt comforted by the CIRs because their findings confirmed that they were not responsible for the suicide. At the same time, the GPs indicated that such comfort was tenuous due to the broader blame culture and because they foresaw many future audits as part of an inflationary spiral of surveillance and risk management. While the GPs adopted strategies to manage and resist surveillance, the effects of CIRs on patient care may be mixed, with the potential both to improve clinical practice and contribute to adverse outcomes. We argue that CIRs paradoxically contain and create anxieties about suicide among GPs and society more broadly.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 19 February 2010
Published date: June 2010
Keywords:
uk, suicide, audit, critical incident review, emotion, blame culture, general practitioners, risk management, governance
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 144875
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/144875
ISSN: 0277-9536
PURE UUID: 41a516a7-2ab4-4166-8c41-d42148bbfcda
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 15 Apr 2010 12:01
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 00:48
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Rose Wiles
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics