4.2 Article

Psychosocial approaches and discursive gaps in intersex healthcare: findings from an Israeli-German action research study

Journal

CULTURE HEALTH & SEXUALITY
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages 441-456

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13691058.2020.1810779

Keywords

Intersex; care; awareness; intercultural project; action research

Funding

  1. Zukunft German-Israeli Future Forum
  2. Institute for Sex Research at the Universitatsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the past several decades, conflicting discourses have coexisted in the field of intersex studies, including the pathologising discourse of the biomedical disciplines and the affirmative, subjective psychosocial discourse of people born with intersex bodies and their advocates. Intersex activists call for a positive discourse on intersex bodies and a humanistic healthcare approach that accepts and protects intersex bodily autonomy to replace continuing harmful, traumatic treatments aimed at normalising variations of sex characteristics (VSC). Our awareness of the biomedical discursive dominance prompted us to initiateInter-Care and Awareness, an intercultural German-Israeli action research project. This paper introduces the project and explores intercultural approaches to psychosocial intersex care using an action research framework. We describe how the project's goals, processes and outcomes created educational material on intersex which uses positive language, explores intersex in the Jewish tradition, improves the support offered to parents of intersex children, and examines cross-cultural differences that arose in the encounters between the Israeli and German participants. The analysis points to sociocultural themes that reflect intersex people's current status in Israel and Germany. Implications regarding the implementation of similar projects in other countries are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available