Our study focuses on exploring the embodied experiences of genetic inheritance within and between bodies. Drawing on insights from studies on embodied experiences and family risk we examine how interviewees perceive their vulnerability, negotiate family narratives, genetic inheritance, and the transmission of genetic knowledge within families. To answer these questions, we conducted an interpretative phenomenological analysis, based on 10 in-depth interviews with patients with thrombophilia diagnosis and venous thromboembolic disease, in Hungary. Three Experiential Themes were identified: The body as a repository of risk (1), Family heritage (2), and The borderline of thrombophilia—liminality (3). Our study has found that patients living with thrombophilia interpret their bodies as repositories of genetic risk. It seems that an important aspect of adapting to thrombophilia is the creation of genetically vulnerable identities. Alongside the new identity(ies), living with risk can induce newly discovered forms of familial responsibility, within the common identification experience of family history and succession. Based on our research, we see that individuals living with thrombophilia experience the liminality of borderlands. In some cases, however, the space between health and illness represents a dynamic permeability for people with thrombophilia, which can be triggered by medical uncertainty in addition to individual experiences and life events.
AbughanimehOKMararRITahboubM, et al. (2022) Hereditary thrombophilia testing among hospitalized patients: Is it warranted?Cureus14(5): e24855.
2.
ArmstrongDMichieSMarteauT (1998) Revealed identity: A study of the process of genetic counseling. Social Science & Medicine47(11): 1653–1658.
3.
BeckU (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Publications.
4.
BoardmanFClarkC (2022) “We’re kind of like genetic nomads”: Parents’ experiences of biographical disruption and uncertainty following in/conclusive results from newborn cystic fibrosis screening. Social Science & Medicine301: 114972.
5.
BuryM (1982) Chronic illness as biographical disruption. Sociology of Health and Illness4(2): 167–182. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11339939.
6.
ChilibeckGLockMSehdevM (2011) Postgenomics, uncertain futures and the familiarization of susceptibility genes. Social Science & Medicine72(11): 1768–1775.
7.
ConradPGabeJ (1999) Introduction: Sociological perspectives on the new genetics: an overview. Sociology of Health & Illness21(5): 505–516.
8.
CoxSMcKellinW (1999) “There’s this thing in our family”: Predictive testing and the construction of risk for Huntington Disease. Sociology of Health & Illness21(5): 622–646.
9.
CsordasTJ (1990) Embodiment as a paradigm for anthropology. Ethos18(1): 5–47.
10.
DeanM (2016) “It’s not if I get cancer, it’s when I get cancer”: BRCA-positive patients’ (un)certain health experiences regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk. Social Science & Medicine163: 21–27.
11.
De StefanoVRossiE (2013) Testing for inherited thrombophilia and consequences for antithrombotic prophylaxis in patients with venous thromboembolism and their relatives. A review of the Guidelines from Scientific Societies and Working Groups. Thrombosis and Haemostasis110: 697–705.
12.
EislerIFlinterFGreyJ, et al. (2017) Training genetic counselors to deliver an innovative therapeutic intervention: Their views and experience of facilitating multi-family discussion groups. Journal of Genetic Counseling26(2): 199–214.
13.
EmslieCHuntKWattG (2003) A chip off the old block? Lay understandings of inheritance among men and women in mid-life. Public Understanding of Science12(1): 47–65.
14.
FeatherstoneKAtkinsonPBharadwajA, et al. (2006) Risky Relations: Family, Kinship and the New Genetics. Oxford: Berg.
15.
FinklerK (2000) Experiencing the New Genetics—Family and Kinship on the Medical Frontier. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
16.
FoucaultM (1973) The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perception. London: Tavistock.
17.
FrankAW (1995) The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness and Ethics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18.
GabeJ (1995) Health, medicine and risk: The need for a sociological approach. In: GabeJ (ed.) Medicine, Health and Risk: Sociological Approaches (p.1–19). Oxford: Blackwell.
19.
GiddensA (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford University Press.
20.
GoldmanAMetcalfeAMacLeodR (2018) The process of disclosure: Mothers’ experiences of communicating X-linked carrier risk information to at-risk daughters. Journal of Genetic Counseling27(5): 1265–1274.
21.
GraffignaGLeoneDVegniE (2014) “Am I carrier?” The patient’s lived experience of thrombophilia genetic screening and its outcome. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine2(1): 696–712.
22.
HagenN (2018) The lived experience of Huntington’s disease: A phenomenological perspective on genes, the body and the lived experience of a genetic disease. Health22(1): 72–86.
23.
HallowellN (1999) Doing the right thing: Genetic risk and responsibility. Sociology of Health & Illness 21(5): 597–621.
24.
HallowellNLawtonJ (2002) Negotiating present and future selves: Managing the risk of hereditary ovarian cancer by prophylactic surgery. Health6(4): 423–443.
25.
HayesC (1992) Genetic testing for Huntington’s Disease—a family issue. New England Journal of Medicine327: 1449–1451.
26.
HeinsenLLWahlbergAVandel PetersenH (2021) Surveillance life and the shaping of ‘genetically at risk’ chronicities in Denmark. Anthropology & Medicine29: 29–44.
27.
Hesse-BiberS (2014) The genetic testing experience of BRCA-positive women: Deciding between surveillance and surgery. Qualitative Health Research2014; 24(6): 773–789.
28.
JenkinsNLawtonJDouglasM, et al. (2013) Inter-embodiment and the experience of genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia. Sociology of Health & Illness35(4): 529–543.
KenenR (1994) The human genome project: creator of the potentially sick, potentially vulnerable and potentially stigmatized? In: RobinsonI (ed.) Life and Death Under High Technology Medicine (p.49–63). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
31.
KerrA (2004) Genetics and Society: A Sociology of Disease. London and New York, NY: Routledge.
32.
KerrME (2000) One Family’s Story: A Primer on Bowen Theory. The Bowen Center for the Study of the Family. http://www.thebowencenter.org
33.
KesslerS (1979) 12. The genetic counselor as psychotherapist. Birth Defects Original Article Series15(2): 187–200
34.
KlitzmanR (2009) “Am I my genes?”: Questions of identity among individuals confronting genetic disease. Genetics in Medicine11(12): 880–889.
35.
LawtonJ (2003) Lay experiences of health and illness: Past research and future agendas. Sociology of Health and Illness25: 23–40.
36.
LederD (1990a) Flesh and blood: A proposed supplement to Merleau-Ponty. Human Studies13: 209–219.
37.
LederD (1990b) The Absent Body. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38.
LuptonD (1993) Risk as moral danger: the social and political functions of risk discourse in public health. International Journal of Health Services23(3): 425–435.
39.
LynchMMEhrenthalDBSandovalK (2018) Influence of family on thrombophilia-related pregnancy outcomes: A qualitative study. Patient Education and Counseling101(6): 1066–1071.
40.
MacLeodRMetcalfeAFerrer-DuchM (2020) A family systems approach to genetic counseling: Development of narrative interventions. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 2021; 30: 22–29.
41.
MendesÁPanequeMSousaL, et al. (2016) How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counseling: A systematic review of research evidence. European Journal of Human Genetics24(3): 315–325.
42.
MiddletonATavernerMMoretonM, et al (2023) The genetic counselor role in the United Kingdom Position on behalf of the Association of Genetic Nurses and Counsellors (AGNC), Endorsed by the Genetic Counsellor Registration Board (GCRB) and Academy for Healthcare Science (AHCS). European Journal of Human Genetics31: 13–15.
43.
NordgrenA (2008) Genetics and Identity. Community Genetics11(5): 252–266.
44.
NovasCRoseN (2000) Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Economy and Society29(4): 485–513.
45.
OliveiraCRMendesÁSequeirosJ, et al. (2020) Management of information within Portuguese families with Huntington disease: A transgenerational process for putting the puzzle together. European Journal of Human Genetics28: 1210–1217.
46.
OliveriSPravettoniG (2017) Capturing how individuals perceive genetic risk information: a phenomenological perspective. Journal of Risk Research21(2): 259–267.
47.
OliveriSPravettoniGFiorettiC, et al. (2016) Let the individuals directly concerned decide: a solution to tragic choices in genetic risk information. Public Health Genomics19: 307–313.
48.
ParsonsEAtkinsonP (1992) Lay constructions of genetic risk. Sociology of Health and Illness14(4): 437–455.
49.
ReesS (2018) No one scans you and says “you’re alright now”: The experience of embodied risk for young women living with a history of breast cancer. Health, Risk & Society20: 7–8, 312–324.
50.
RichardsMPM (1993) The new genetics: Some issues for social scientists. Sociology of Health and Illness15: 567–586.
51.
RobertsonA (2000) Embodying risk, embodying political rationality: Women’s accounts of risks for breast cancer. Health, Risk & Society2(2): 219–235.
52.
RosendaalFR (2005) Venous thrombosis: The role of genes, environment, and behavior. Hematology1: 1–12.
53.
SaukkoPMEllardSRichardsSH, et al. (2007) Patients’ understanding of genetic susceptibility testing in mainstream medicine: qualitative study on thrombophilia. BMC Health Services Research7: 82.
54.
SaukkoPMRichardsSHShepherdMH, et al. (2006) Are genetic tests exceptional? Lessons from a qualitative study on thrombophilia. Social Science Medicine63: 1947–1959.
55.
SmithJADancygerCWallaceM, et al. (2011) The development of a methodology for examining the process of family communication of genetic test results. Journal of Genetic Counseling20: 23–34.
SmithJANizzaIE (2022) Essentials of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
58.
SnellKH’elenI (2019) “Well, I knew this already”—explaining personal genetic risk information through narrative meaning-making. Sociol. Health Illness42(3): 496–509.
59.
SontagS (1983) Illness as a Metaphor. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
60.
SpringgayS (2008) Body Knowledge and Curriculum: Pedagogies of Touch in Youth and Visual Culture. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
61.
UnderhillMLLallyRMKiviniemiMT, et al. (2012) Living my family’s story: Identifying the lived experience in healthy women at risk for hereditary breast cancer. Cancer Nursing35(6): 493–504.
62.
UnterscheiderJKaneSCCuttsB, et al. (2017) The role of thrombophilia testing in women with adverse pregnancy outcomes. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist19(2): 163–172.
63.
VegniELeoneDGraffignaG, et al. (2013) To be or not to be: The patient’s view of thrombophilia testing. Patient Education and Counseling90: 386–391.
64.
WalterFEmeryJBraithwaiteD, et al. (2004) Lay understanding of familial risk of common chronic diseases: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research, Annals of Family Medicine2(6): 583–594.
65.
WeissG (1999) Body Images: Embodiment as Intercorporeality. London and New York, NY: Routledge.
66.
Werner-LinA (2022) Embodied risk for families with Li-Fraumeni syndrome: Like electricity through my body. Social Science & Medicine301: 114905.
67.
WhiteMEpstonD (1990) Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends. New York, NY: Norton.
68.
WhitmarshIDavisAMSkinnerD, et al. (2007) A place for genetic uncertainty: parents valuing an unknown in the meaning of disease. Social Science & Medicine65(6): 1082–1083.
69.
WildeMH (2003) Embodied knowledge in chronic illness and injury. Nursing Inquiry10(3): 170–176.
70.
WilliamsSJ (2006) Medical sociology and the biological body: Where are we now and where do we go from here?Health10(1): 5–30.
71.
WilsonS (2007) “When you have children, you’re obliged to live”: Motherhood, chronic illness and biographical disruption. Sociology of Health & Illness29(4): 610–626.
