4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Sociocultural barriers to cervical screening in South Auckland, New Zealand

Journal

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
Volume 65, Issue 1, Pages 138-150

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.02.042

Keywords

cervical screening; New Zealand; women's health; bodies; culture; health beliefs; ethnicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cervical screening has been subject to intense media scrutiny in New Zealand in recent years prompted by a series of health system failings through which a number of women developed cervical cancer despite undergoing regular smears. This paper considers why underscreening persists in a country where cervical screening has a high profile. It explores how the promotion of cervical screening has impacted on the decisions of women to undergo a smear test. Ideas of risk and the new public health are deployed to develop a context for thinking about screening as a form of governing the body. Qualitative interviews with 17 women who were overdue for a cervical smear were undertaken in 2001-2002, yielding understandings of their knowledge of screening and their reasons for postponement. Nine providers of screening services were also interviewed. Concurrent with socioeconomic limitations, concerns over exposing one's body loomed large in women's reasons for delaying being screened. In particular, feelings of shyness and embarrassment were encountered among Maori and Pacific women for whom exposing bodies in the process of smear taking compromises cultural beliefs about sacredness. We conclude that medicalization of the body has, paradoxically, assisted many women in dealing with the intrusion of screening. For others, compliance with the exhortations to be screened brings a high emotional and cultural cost which should at least be considered in health policy debates. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available