Screening for disease is an integral component of UK preventative health policy, and there are proposals to introduce a screening programme for the sexually transmitted infection Chlamydia trachomatis. In recent years, however, debates over screening have been characterized by increasing scepticism about the individual benefits of participating in such initiatives. This article explores factors that may contribute to this scepticism, in the context of a study that investigated the experience of women who had been diagnosed with chlamydia. We employ Bury’s concept of ‘risk to meanings’ to understand better the social process of the development of uncertainty in relation to a positive diagnosis. Three themes related to uncertainty and the ‘risk to meaning’ are explored here – the threat to self-image, disclosing diagnosis and anxiety about future health status. The implications for the proposed UK chlamydia screening programme are discussed, and the article suggests that the development and construction of scepticism occurs in the space between expectations stimulated by public health discourses of screening and the lived experience of individuals.
Anderson, C.M. and Nottingham, J. (1999). Bridging the knowledge gap and communicating uncertainties for informed consent in cervical cytology screening: We need unbiased information and a culture change. Cytopathology, 10, 221–228.
2.
Anon . (1999). Screening: From marvel to liability?British Medical Journal, 318(7188): 0-0.
3.
Austoker, J. (1999). Gaining informed consent for screening. British Medical Journal, 319, 722–723.
4.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
5.
Becker, M.H.E. (1974). The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Education Monographs, 2, 324–508.
6.
Bower, H. (1998). Britain launches pilot screening programme for chlamydia. British Medical Journal, 316, 1479-1479.
7.
Bury, M. (1982). Chronic illness as biographical disruption. Sociology of Health and Illness, 4, 167–182.
8.
Bury, M. (1988). Meanings at risk: The experience of arthritis. In R. Anderson and M. Bury (Eds.), Living with chronic illness: The experience of patients and their families. London: Unwin Hyman.
9.
Bury, M. (1991). The sociology of chronic illness: A review of research and prospects. Sociology of Health and Illness, 13, 451–468.
10.
Bush, J. (2000). ‘It’s just part of being a woman’: Cervical screening, the body and femininity. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 429–444.
11.
Carter, S. (1995). Boundaries of danger and uncertainty: An analysis of the technological culture of risk assessment. In J. Gabe (Ed.), Medicine, health and risk: Sociological approaches. Oxford: Blackwell.
12.
Cates, W. and Wasserheit, J.N. (1991). Genital chlamydial infections: Epidemiology and reproductive sequelae. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 164, 1771–1781.
13.
CDC . (1997). Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections – United States 1995. JAMA, 277, 952–995.
14.
CMO . (1998). Main report of the CMO’s Expert Advisory Group on chlamydia trachomatis. London: Department of Health.
15.
Davenport-Hines, R. (1990). Sex, death and punishment. London: Collins & Sons Ltd.
16.
Davison, C. , Davey Smith, G. and Frankel, S. (1991). Lay epidemiology and the prevention paradox: The implications of coronary candidacy for health education. Sociology of Health and Illness, 13, 1–18.
17.
Davison, C. , Macintyre, S. and Smith, G.D. (1994). The potential social impact of predictive genetic testing for susceptibility to common chronic diseases – A review and proposed research agenda. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 340–371.
18.
Dillner, L. (1999). Screening stories. British Medical Journal, 318, 882-882.
19.
Douglas, M. and Calvez, M. (1990). The self as risk taker: A cultural theory of contagion in relation to AIDS. Sociological Review, 38, 445–464.
20.
Foster, P. and Anderson, C.M. (1998). Reaching targets in the national cervical screening programme: Are current practices unethical?Journal of Medical Ethics, 24, 151–157.
21.
Green, J. (1997). Risk and misfortune: The social construction of accidents. London: UCL Press.
22.
Holgate, H.S. and Longman, C. (1998). Some people’s psychological experiences of attending a sexual health clinic and having a sexually transmitted infection. Journal of the Royal Society of Health, 118, 94–96.
23.
Howson, A. (1998). Surveillance, knowledge and risk: The embodied experience of cervical screening. Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine, 2, 195–215.
24.
Howson, A. (1999). Cervical screening, compliance and moral obligation. Sociology of Health and Illness, 21, 401–425.
25.
Lupton, D. (1995). The imperative of health: Public health and the regulated body. London: Sage Publications.
26.
Macintyre, S. (1977). Single and pregnant. London: Croom Helm Ltd.
27.
Macintyre, S. (1997). Social and psychological issues associated with the new genetics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 352(1357), 1095–1101.
28.
Marteau, T.M. (1994). Psychology and screening – Narrowing the gap between efficacy and effectiveness. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 1–10.
29.
Posner, T. (1991). What’s in a smear? Cervical screening, medical signs and metaphors. Science and Culture, 2, 167–188.
30.
Posner, T. (1993). Ethical issues and the individual woman in cancer screening programmes. Journal of Advances in Health and Nursing Care, 2, 55–69.
31.
Posner, T. and Vessey, M. (1988). Prevention of cervical cancer: The patient’s views. London: King Edward’s Hospital Fund for London.
32.
Redfern, N. and Hutchinson, S. (1994). Women’s experiences of repetitively contracting sexually transmitted diseases. Health Care for Women International, 15, 423–433.
33.
Rogers, R.W. (1983). Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation. In J.R. Cacioppo and R.E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychology: A sourcebook. New York: Guilford Press.
34.
Rose, G. (1985). Sick individuals and sick populations. International Journal of Epidemiology, 14, 32–38.
35.
Rose, N. (1990). Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self. London: Routledge.
36.
Sarfati, D. , Howden-Chapman, P., Woodward, A. and Salmond, C. (1998). Does the frame affect the picture? A study into how attitudes to screening for cancer are affected by the way benefits are expressed. Journal of Medical Screening, 5, 137–140.
37.
Scholes, D. , Holmes, K.K., Stergachis, A. and Stamm, W.E. (1996). Screening for chlamydia to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease. New England Journal of Medicine, 335, 1533-1533.
38.
Slaytor, E.K. and Ward, J.E. (1998). How risks of breast cancer and benefits of screening are communicated to women: Analysis of 58 pamphlets. British Medical Journal, 317, 263–264.
39.
Zimmerman, H. , Potterat, J., Dukes, R., Muth, J., Zimmerman, H., Fogle, J. and Pratts, C. (1990). Epidemiological differences between chlamydia and gonorrhea. American Journal of Public Health, 80, 1338–1342.
