Our genes, our selves: hereditary breast cancer and biological citizenship in Norway
In this paper we explore the rise of ‘the breast cancer gene’ as a field of medical, cultural and personal knowledge. We address its significance in the Norwegian public health care system in relation to so-called biological citizenship in this particular national context. One of our main findings is that, despite its claims as a measure for health and disease prevention, gaining access to medical knowledge of BRCA 1/2 breast cancer gene mutations can also produce severe instability in the individuals and families affected. That is, although gene testing provides modern subjects with an opportunity to foresee their biological destiny and thereby become patients in waiting, it undoubtedly also comes with difficult existential dilemmas and choices, with implications that resonate beyond the individual and into different family and love relations. By elaborating on this finding we address the question of whether the empowerment slogan, which continues to be advocated through various health, BRCA and breast cancer discourses, reinforces a naïve or an idealized notion of the actively responsible patient: resourceful enough to seek out medical expertise and gain sufficient knowledge, on which to base informed decisions, thereby reducing the future risk of developing disease. In contrast to this ideal, our Norwegian informants tell a different story, in which there is no apparent heroic mastery of genetic fates, but rather a pragmatic attitude to dealing with a dire situation over which they have little control, despite having complied with medical advice through national guidelines and follow-up procedures for BRCA 1/2 carriers. In conclusion we claim that the sense of safety that gene testing and its associated medical solutions allegedly promise to provide proved illusory. Although BRCA-testing offers the potential for protection from adverse DNA-heritage, administered through possibilities for self-monitoring and self-management of the body, the feeling of ‘being in good health’ has hardly been reinforced by the emergence of gene technology.
KeywordsBiological citizenship Genetic testing Hereditary breast cancer Subjectivity Gender Norway
We wish to thank the three women who contributed their illness stories to the ‘I am not the same’-study. Stavanger Breast Cancer Research Group at Stavanger University Hospital (SUS) approved use of data from the study above. Funding for this research was partly provided by Folke Hermanson Cancer Research Foundation and Inge Steensland Foundation, Stavanger, Norway. We are grateful for the assistance of senior Consultant/researcher Anne Irene Hagen at St.Olav’s Hospital in identifying the year that predictive BRCA gene testing commenced in Norway, and Hildegunn Høberg-Vetti at Haukeland University Hospital for up-to-date information about hereditary breast cancer prevalence in Norway. We also wish to thank Head of Section at the Department at Breast and Endocrine Surgery at SUS, Tone Hoel Lende, MD, for her contributions on the clinical context for BRCA councelling and treatment during an early discussion of our topic in 2015. Pål Krøger, MD, Head of the Department of Plastic Surgery at SUS, provided reflections on clinical experience with immidiate breast reconstruction.
- Boston Health Book Collective. 1971. Our bodies ourselves. Boston: Boston Women’s Health Book Collective.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Cancer Registry of Norway. 2014. Cancer in Norway 2013: Cancer incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence in Norway. Oslo: Cancer Registry of Norway.Google Scholar
- Carel, H. 2013. Illness. Durham: ACUMEN.Google Scholar
- Clarke, A.E., L. Mamo, J.R. Fosket, J.R. Fishman, and J.K. Shim. 2010. Biomedicalization: Technoscience, health and illness in the U.S. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
- Dommerud, T., and J. Westerveld. 2014. Valgte å fjerne brystene, livmor og eggstokkene. http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/Valgte-a-fjerne-brystene-livmor-og-eggstokkene-7604178.html. Assessed 7 Feb 2015.
- Dreifus. 2015. New York Times. 2015. February 9th. A never-ending genetic quest: Mary-Claire King’s pioneering gene work, from breast cancer to human rights.Google Scholar
- Ehn, B., J. Fykman, and O. Löfgren. 1993. Försvenskningen av Sverige. Det nationellas förvandlingar. [The Swedification of Sweden: The transformation of national markers]. Stockholm: Natur og kultur.Google Scholar
- Evans, D.G., J. Wisely, T. Clancy, F. Lalloo, M. Wilson, R. Johnson, J. Duncan, L. Barr, A. Gandhi, and A. Howell. 2015. Longer term effects of the Angelina Jolie effect: Increased risk-reducing mastectomy rates in BRCA carriers and other high-risk women. Breast Cancer Research 17: 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Flat and Fabulous. 2016. http://www.flatandfabulous.org/. Assessed 20 June.
- Frank, A.W. 2013. The wounded storyteller; body, illness and ethics, Second ed. Aufl. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Gripsrud, B. 2008. The cultural history of the breast. In A cultural encyclopedia of the body, ed. V. Pitts, 31–44. Westport: Greenwood Publishing.Google Scholar
- Gripsrud, B.H., H. Soiland, and K. Lode. 2014. Ekspressiv skriving som egenterapeutisk verktøy ett år etter brystkreftdiagnosen – resultater fra en norsk pilostudie [Expressive writing as a self-therapeutic tool one year after breast cancer diagnosis - Results from a Norwegian pilotstudie]. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Helseforskning 2: 45–61.Google Scholar
- Heemskerk-Gerritsen, B.A., M.B. Menke-Pluijmers, A. Jager, M.M. Tilanus-Linthorst, L.B. Koppert, I.M. Obdeijn, C.H. van Deurzen, J.M. Collee, C. Seynaeve, and M.J. Hooning. 2013. Substantial breast cancer risk reduction and potential survival benefit after bilateral mastectomy when compared with surveillance in healthy BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: A prospective analysis. Annals of Oncology 24(8): 2029–2035. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hoberg-Vetti, H., C. Bjorvatn, B.E. Fiane, T. Aas, K. Woie, H. Espelid, T. Rusken, et al. 2016. BRCA1/2 testing in newly diagnosed breast and ovarian cancer patients without prior genetic counselling: The DNA-BONus study. European Journal of Human Genetics 24(6): 881–888. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Høberg-Vetti, H. 2015. Gentesting for arvelig brystkreft. http://onkonytt.no/gentesting-for-arvelig-kreft/. Accessed 4 Aug.
- Jain, S.L. 2013. How cancer becomes us. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Jakobsen, S. E. 2014. Angelina Jolie har fått norske kvinner til å genteste seg: Etter at Jolie fortalte at hun hadde fjernet begge brystene i 2013, strømmer fortsatt norske kvinner til sykehusene for å bli testet for arvelig brystkreft. [Angelina Jolie has made Norwegian women undergo genetic testing: After Jolie said she had removed both breasts in 2013, Norwegian women are still pouring into hospitals to be tested for inherited breast cancer]. http://www.hegnar.no/Nyheter/Livsstil/2015/08/Angelina-Jolie-effekten-paavirker-norske-kvinner. Assessed 26 Aug.
- Jolie Pitt, A. 2015. March 24th Angelina Jolie Pitt: Diary of a surgery. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/opinion/angelina-jolie-pitt-diary-of-a-surgery.html. Assessed 24 May.
- Jolie Pitt, A. 2013. My medical choice. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/opinion/my-medical-choice.html. Accessed 14 May.
- Juvet, L.K., and I.N. Norderhaug. 2008. Gentester for brystkreft og eggstokkreft. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services.Google Scholar
- Kitzinger, J. 2007. Framing and frame analysis. In Media studies key issues and debates, ed. E. Deveorux. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Kleinman, A. 1988. The illness narratives. Suffering, healing & the human condition. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Kristvik, E. 2012. The significance of presence. Personal experience and research among incurable cancer patients. Medische Antropologie 24(1): 149.Google Scholar
- Lagnado, L. 2015. The double mastectomy rebellion—Defying doctors, more women with breast cancer choose double mastectomies. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/defying-doctors-more-women-with-breast-cancer-choose-double-mastectomies-1436545322.
- Lindelöf, K.S. 2015. Lady Långdistans, Ladylufsen and Kvinnor Kan: Ethnological perspectives on the rise of women-only sports races in Sweden. Ethnologia Scandinavica 45: 140–157.Google Scholar
- Missinne, S., K. Neels, and P. Bracke. 2014. Reconsidering inequalities in preventive health care: An application of cultural health capital theory and the life-course perspective to the take-up of mammography screening. Sociology of Health & Illness 36(8): 1259–1275. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mukherjee, S. 2010. The emperor of all maladies: A biography of cancer. New York, NY: Scribner.Google Scholar
- Møller, P., A.I. Hagen, J. Apold, L. Maehle, N. Clark, B. Fiane, K. Lovslett, E. Hovig, and A. Vabo. 2007. Genetic epidemiology of BRCA mutations—family history detects less than 50 % of the mutation carriers. European Journal of Cancer 43(11): 1713–1717. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.04.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Møller, P., A. Stormorken, C. Jonsrud, M.M. Holmen, A.I. Hagen, N. Clark, A. Vabo, P. Sun, S.A. Narod, and L. Maehle. 2013. Survival of patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancer diagnosed in an MRI-based surveillance program. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 139(1): 155–161. doi: 10.1007/s10549-013-2540-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- National Breast Cancer Group. 2016. Nasjonalt handlingsprogram med retningslinjer for diagnostikk, behandling og oppfølging av pasienter med brystkreft. Oslo: Helsedirektoratet.Google Scholar
- National Cancer Institute. 2015. BRCA1 and BRCA2: cancer risks and genetic testing. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics/brca-fact-sheet.
- Normannsvik, E. 2016. Brystkreft: Cancer mammae. Retrieved from https://kreftforeningen.no/om-kreft/kreftformer/brystkreft/. Assessed 20 June.
- Norwegian Directorate of Health. 2008. Gentesting ved påvist bryst-eller eggstokkreft og ved vurdering av forebyggende fjerning av eggstokene. Oslo: Rapport fra en arbeidsgruppe nedsatt av Helsedirektoratet.Google Scholar
- Slagstad, R. 1998. De nasjonale strateger. [National strategists]. Oslo: Pax Forlag AS.Google Scholar
- Solheim, J. 1998. Den åpne kroppen; om kjønnssymbolikk i moderne kultur. [The open body: On gender symbolisation in modern culture]. Oslo: Pax Forlag.Google Scholar
- Sontag, S. 1977. Illness as metaphor. New York: Review of Books.Google Scholar
- Svenaeus, F. 2013. Homo patologicus: Medicinska diagnoser i vår tid. Stockholm: Tankekraft.Google Scholar
- Theissen, S. 2015. The Angelina Jolie effect. On medicine. Retrieved from http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/on-medicine/2015/11/25/angelina-jolie-effect/. Assessed 25 Nov.
- Thue, K. 2015. Angelina Jolie-effekten påvirker norske kvinner. [The Angelina Jolie-effect influences Norwegian women]. Retrieved from http://www.hegnar.no/Nyheter/Livsstil/2015/08/Angelina-Jolie-effekten-paavirker-norske-kvinner. Assessed 26 Aug.
- Woodward, K. 2015. Psychosocial studies: An introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Yalom, M. 1998. A history of the breast. London: Pandura.Google Scholar