Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2019-10
Bringing together the Listening Guide and Moral Self-Definition for narrative analysis of older people’s understanding of health-related decision-making
Identity and decision-making are interrelated concepts, but the relationship between them is complex particularly when an unwell person’s ability to make decisions is compromised. In this article we discuss how moral self-definition (Nelson, 2001;Walker, 1987) can be used within a Listening Guide (LG) analysis to extend analysis of the temporal relationship between identity and decisions. In this project, the LG was used to analyze interviews exploring older people’s understanding of medical decision-making when the unwell person’s capacity is diminished. The second step of the LG drew attention to the participants’ expression of decision-making voices and health-related identities, but the iterative and temporal relationship between identity and decisions was less well illuminated. Therefore, we applied the theoretical framework of moral self-definition within the third listening. The focus of this article is on how moral self-definition can be integrated as a theoretical framework within the contrapuntal listening to extend the LG analysis.
Beauboeuf-LafontantT (2007) The Listening Guide: using a voice-centered feminist tool to research ‘strength’ among black women. Conference papers, American Sociological Association1.
2.
Beauboeuf-LafontantT (2008) Listening past the lies that make us sick: a voice-centered analysis of strength and depression among black women. Qualitative Sociology31(4): 391–406.
3.
BeauchampTLChildressJF (2009) Principles of Biomedical Ethics (sixth edition) Oxford University Press, New York.
4.
BergerJTDeRenzoEGSchwartzJ (2008) Surrogate decision making: reconciling ethical theory and clinical practice. Annals of Internal Medicine149(1): 48–53.
5.
BrownLMGilliganC (1991) Listening for voice in narratives of relationship. New Directions for Child Development54(Winter): 43–62.
6.
ByrneACanavanJMillarM (2012) Participatory research and the voice-centred relational method of data analysis: is it worth it?International Journal of Social Research Methodology12(1): 67–77.
7.
DeVriesRGLowLKBogdan-LovisEL (2009) Choosing surgical birth desire and the nature of bioethical advice. In: LindemannHVerkerkMWalkerMU (eds) Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 42–64.
8.
DoddsS (2000) Choice and control in feminist bioethics. In: MackenzieCStoljarN (eds) Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspective on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 213–235.
9.
DoucetAMauthnerNS (2008) What can be known and how? Narrated subjects and the Listening Guide. Qualitative Research8(3): 399–409.
10.
EdwardsRWellerS (2012) Shifting analytic ontology: using I-poems in qualitative longitudinal research. Qualitative Research12(2): 202–217.
11.
FinsJJMaltbyBSFriedmannEGreeneMGNorrisKAdelmanRByockI (2005) Contracts, covenants and advance care planning: an empirical study of the moral obligations of patient and proxy. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management29(1): 55–68.
12.
GilliganC (1988) Adolescent development reconsidered. In: C. GilliganWardJTaylorJBardigeB (eds) Mapping the Moral Domain: A Contribution of Women’s Thinking to Psychological Theory and Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, vii–xxxix.
13.
GilliganCEddyJ (2017) Listening as a path to psychological discovery: an introduction to the Listening Guide. Perspectives on Medical Education6(2): 76–81.
14.
GilliganCSpencerRWeinbergMKBertschT (2006) On the Listening Guide: a voice-centered relational method. In: Hesse-BiberSNLeavyP (eds) Emergent Methods in Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 253–272.
15.
GilliganCSpencerRWeinbergMKBertschT (2003) On the Listening Guide: a voice-centered relational method. In: CamicPMRhodesJEYardleyL (eds) Qualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design, Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 157–172.
16.
HawkinsNADittoPHDanksJHSmucker WilliamD (2005) Micromanaging death: process preferences, values and goals in end-of-life medical decision making. The Gerontologist45(1): 107–117.
17.
LindemannH (2009) Holding on to Edmund: the relational work of identity. In: LindemannHVerkerkMWalkerMU (eds) Naturalized Bioethics: Toward Responsible Knowing and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 65–79.
18.
LittleMO (1998) Care: from theory to orientation and back. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy23(2): 190–209.
19.
MaddenM (2000) The Good Girl Bad Girl Dilemma: Exploring Rural Maine Girl’s Sexual Desires, Behaviours and Relationships. University of Maine.
20.
MauthnerNS (2016) Un/re-making method: knowing/enacting posthumanist performative social research methods through ‘diffractive genealogies’ and ‘metaphysical practices’. In: Pitts-TaylorV (ed.) Dilemmas in Qualitative Research: Public Knowledge and Private Lives. New York: New York University Press, 258–283.
21.
MauthnerNS (1998) ‘It’s a woman’s cry for help’: a relational perspective on postnatal depression. Feminism and Psychology8(3): 325–355.
22.
MauthnerNDoucetA (1998) Reflections on a voice-centred relational method analysing maternal and domestic voices. In: RibbensJEdwardsR (eds) Feminist Dilemmas in Qualitative Research: Public Knowledge and Private Lives. London: Sage, 119–146.
23.
MilliganE (2008) Enhancing Ethical Practice in Prenatal Screening: Facilitating Women’s Ethical Choices. Queensland University of Technology.
24.
NelsonHL (2001) Damaged Identities, Narrative RepairCornell University Press, Ithica.
25.
NicholsonLJ (1993) Women, morality and history. In: LarrabeeMJ (ed.) An Ethic of Care: Feminist and Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York: Routledge, 87–101.
26.
PuchalskiCMZhongZSJacobsMMFoxELynnJHarroldJGalanosAPhillipsRSCaliffRTenoJM (2000) Patients who want their family and physician to make resuscitation decisions for them: observations from SUPPORT and HELP. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society48(S5): 84–90.
27.
RapleyT (2008) Distributed decision making: the anatomy of decisions-in-action. Sociology of Health and Illness30(3): 429–444.
28.
Robins-BrowneKHegarty KelseyLGuilleminMKomesaroffPAPalmerVJ (2017) The role of relational knowing in advance care planning. The Journal of Clinical Ethics28(2): 122–134.
29.
Roth-RaiderM (2014) The Listening Guide. In: CoghlanDBrydon-MillerM (eds) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 510–512.
30.
SehgalAGalbraithAAChesneyMSchoenfeldPCharlesGLoB (1992) How strictly do dialysis patients want their advance directives followed. The Journal of the American Medical Association267(1): 59–63.
31.
SlifeBD (2004) Taking practice seriously: towards a relational ontology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology24(2): 157–178.
32.
SulmasyDPHughesMTThompsonREAstrowABTerryPBKubJNolanMT (2007) How would terminally ill patients have others make decisions for them in the event of decisional incapacity? A longitudinal study. Journal American Geriatric Society55(12): 1981–1988.
33.
TayebMAAl-ZamelEFareedMMAbouellailHA (2010) A ‘good death’: perspectives of Muslim patients and health care providers. Annals of Saudi medicine30(3): 215–221.
34.
TerryPBVetteseMSongJFormanJHallerKBMillerDJStallingsRSulmasyDP (1999) End-of-life decision making: when patients and surrogates disagree. The Journal of Clinical Ethics10(4): 286–293.
35.
The President’s Council on Bioethics (2005) Taking Care: Ethical Caregiving in Our Aging SocietyWashington DC.
36.
WalkerMU (1987) Moral particularity. Metaphilosophy18(3–4): 171–185.
37.
WalkerMU (2003) What does the different voice say? Gilligan’s women and moral philosophy. In: WalkerMU (2003) Moral Contexts. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 57–70.
38.
WoodcockC (2016) The listening guide: a how-to approach on ways to promote educational democracy. International Journal of Qualitative Methods15(1): 1–10.
