Measuring difference, numbering normal provides a detailed study of the technological construction of disability by examining how the audiometer and spirometer were used to create numerical proxies for invisible and inarticulable experiences. Measurements, and their manipulation, have been underestimated as crucial historical forces motivating and guiding the way we think about disability. Using measurement technology as a lens, this book draws together several existing discussions on disability, healthcare, medical practice, embodiment and emerging medical and scientific technologies at the turn of the twentieth century. As such, this work connects several important and usually separate academic subject areas and historical specialisms. The standards embedded in instrumentation created strict but ultimately arbitrary thresholds of normalcy and abnormalcy. Considering these standards from a long historical perspective reveals how these dividing lines shifted when pushed. The central thesis of this book is that health measurements are given artificial authority if they are particularly amenable to calculability and easy measurement. These measurement processes were perpetuated and perfected in the interwar years in Britain as the previously invisible limits of the body were made visible and measurable. Determination to consider body processes as quantifiable was driven by the need to compensate for disability occasioned by warfare or industry. This focus thus draws attention to the biopower associated with systems, which has emerged as a central area of concern for modern healthcare in the second decade of the twenty-first century.
any kind of solution – an oft-repeated criticism of medicalhumanities researches. Nonetheless, the prevalent assumption in the clinic is that patients’ sensory experience of a symptom is directly related to measurable physiological disease. Indeed, the paradigm of symptom assessment following through consequent diagnosis depends on our faith that the relationship between symptom experience and measurement is accurate. 13 While I am not advocating for an enduring state of pessimistic meta-induction in which we are unable to trust in scientific progress because of
’, Sociology of Health and Illness , 17 : 3 ( 1995 ), 393 – 404 , p. 395.
21 Goldberg , D. S. , ‘ Pain, Objectivity and History: Understanding Pain Stigma ’, MedicalHumanities , 42 ( 2017 ), 238 – 243 , p. 240.
22 Daston and Galison, Objectivity , p. 125.
23 Gooday , G. , The Morals of Measurement: Accuracy, Irony, and Trust in Late Victorian Electrical Practice ( Cambridge : Cambridge University Press , 2004 ). p. 68 .
24 Stone , D. , Breeding Superman: Nietzsche, Race and Eugenics in Edwardian and Interwar Britain ( Liverpool : Liverpool
3 Carel , H. , and Kidd , I. , ‘ Epistemic Injustice in Healthcare: A Philosophical Analysis ’, Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy , 17 : 4 ( 2014 ), 529 – 540 .
4 Scully , J. L. , ‘ From “She Would Say That, Wouldn’t She?” to “Does She Take Sugar?” Epistemic Injustice and Disability ’, International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics , 11 : 1 ( 2018 ), 106 – 124 .
5 Carel , H. , ‘ Breathless: Philosophical Lessons from Respiratory Illness ’, Journal of MedicalHumanities , 6 : 1 ( 2014 ), 1 – 6 .
6 See Barnes , E. , The
164 ‘Breathlessness’, p. 1140.
165 Malpass , A. , McGuire , C. , and Macnaughton , J. , ‘ The Body Says It: The Difficulty of Measuring and Communicating Sensations of Breathlessness ’, MedicalHumanities (under review).
166 Johnson , M. J. , Kanaan , M. , Richardson , G. , Nabb , S.‚ et al., ‘ A Randomised Controlled Trial of Three or One Breathing Technique Training Sessions for Breathlessness in People with Malignant Lung Disease ’, BMC Medicine , 13 : 1 ( 2015 ), 213.
167 Hayen , A. , Herigstad , M. , and Pattinson
Contextualising colonial and post-colonial nursing
Helen Sweet and Sue Hawkins
what is particular and what is more universal about nursing’s uptake and development in different countries,
but also enables us to explore different methodological approaches
Helen Sweet and Sue Hawkins
to the subject, as has already been the case with the fast-developing
field of ‘medicalhumanities’ for some time. This multifaceted view
of colonial and post-colonial nursing, therefore, brings together contributions from scholars working in different disciplines and from a
variety of perspectives, geographical, historiographical and, to some
Balance, malleability and anthropology: historical contexts
provoke the behaviour of adolescents.
What I am instead arguing is that a certain strand of thinking about malleability becomes influential and intertwined with certain philosophical approaches in the history of medicine and wider medicalhumanities. Cohn describes a certain kind of anthropological history, reading it explicitly against ideas of ‘nature’:
All culture is constructed. It is the product of human thought. This product may over time become fixed ways
of historians and researchers in the medicalhumanities have drawn attention to the ‘rich and complex interplay’ between various scientific and cultural ‘languages and systems of representation’ operating in the late nineteenth century.
The fin-de-siècle preoccupation with fatigue is here treated in these terms: not simply as the consequence of certain scientific ideas or empirical findings, nor as an isolated cultural phenomenon, but as the result of a complex exchange of ideas, images, and concepts
symposium. For an overview, see Abi McNiven, ‘Critical
MedicalHumanities Symposium – Review’. Available online at http://
medicalhumanities.wordpress.com (accessed 6 February 2014).
73 Joan Scott, ‘History-Writing as Critique’, in Jenkins et al. (eds),
Manifestos for History, pp. 19–39.
74 See Sheila Jasanoff (ed), States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of
Science and the Social Order (London: Routledge, 2004).
75 On the co-production of biological and ethical norms, see Jasanoff,
‘Making the Facts of Life’; Giuseppe Testa, ‘More than Just a Nucleus:
Cloning and the