Safety as ‘Boundary Object’: The Case of Acupuncture and Chinese Medicine Regulation in Ontario, Canada

  • Nadine Ijaz
  • Heather Boon
Chapter
Part of the Health, Technology and Society book series (HTE)

Abstract

This chapter applies a theoretical concept from science and technology studies, that of the boundary object, to the field of professional regulation as it pertains to traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM). By examining state risk discourses and the construction of regulatory parameters for acupuncture, the issue of English-language fluency for immigrant practitioners and the negotiation of standard-setting across professions, our analysis points to ways in which safety-related discourse may play a disproportionate role in TCAM regulatory processes. This discursive emphasis on safety, aligned with biomedicine’s ‘evidence-based’ conceptual underpinnings, deflects attention from other important regulatory considerations. It also serves to reinforce the subordination of non-biomedical epistemologies and practitioners even while these become newly integrated into mainstream healthcare. Regulators of TCAM professionals and practices should bring careful awareness to the difference between safety as discourse and safety as policy consideration.

References

  1. Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Abbott, A. (2005). Linked ecologies: States and universities as environments for professions. Sociological Theory, 23(3), 245–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, D., Braithwaite, J., Sandall, J., & Waring, J. (Eds.). (2016). The sociology of healthcare safety and quality. London: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Birch, S. (2007). Reflections on the German acupuncture studies. Journal of Chinese Medicine, 83, 12–17.Google Scholar
  5. Clarke, A., & Star, S. (2008). The social worlds framework: A theory/methods package. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed., pp. 113–137). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, R. (1979). The credential society. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, R. (1990). Changing conceptions in the sociology of the professions. In M. Burrage & R. Torstendahl (Eds.), The formation of professions: Knowledge, state and strategy (pp. 11–23). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Derkatch, C. (2008). Method as argument: Boundary work in evidence-based medicine. Social Epistemology, 22(4), 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flesh, H. (2013). A foot in both worlds: Education and transformation of Chinese medicine in the United states. Medical Anthropology, 32(1), 8–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms and epistemologies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. HPRAC. (1996). Advice to the minister of health: Acupuncture referral. Ontario: Government of Ontario.Google Scholar
  12. HPRAC. (2001). Traditional Chinese medicine and acupuncture: Advice to the minister of health and long-term care. Ontario: Government of Ontario.Google Scholar
  13. Hsu, E. (1999). The transmission of Chinese medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ijaz, N. (2017). Regulating traditional medicine professionals in the public interest: A case study of Chinese medicine and acupuncture regulation in Ontario, Canada. PhD Thesis, University of Toronto, TSpace, 2017.Google Scholar
  15. Ijaz, N., Boon, H., Muzzin, L., & Welsh, S. (2016). State risk discourse and the regulatory preservation of traditional medicine knowledge: The case of acupuncture in Ontario, Canada. Social Science and Medicine, 170, 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ijaz, N., Boon, H., Welsh, S., & Meads, A. (2015). Supportive but ‘worried’: Perceptions of naturopaths, homeopaths and Chinese medicine practitioners through a regulatory transition in Ontario, Canada. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 15, 312–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keshet, Y., Ben-Arye, E., & Schiff, E. (2013). The use of boundary objects to enhance interprofessional collaboration: Integrating complementary medicine in a hospital setting. Sociology of Health and Illness, 35(5), 666–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Murphy, R. (1988). Social closure: The theory of monopolization and exclusion. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  19. O’Reilly, P. (1999). Health care practitioners: An Ontario case study in policy making. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  20. Owens, K. (2015). Boundary objects in complementary and alternative medicine: Acupuncture vs. Christian science. Social Science and Medicine, 128, 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parkin, F. (1974). Strategies of social closure in class formation. In F. Parkin (Ed.), The social analysis of class structure (pp. 1–18). London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  22. Parkin, F. (1979). Marxism and class theory: A bourgeois critique. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Phipps, D. L., Noyce, P. R., Walshe, K., Parker, D., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2011). Risk-based regulation of healthcare professionals: What are the implications for pharmacists? Health, Risk and Society, 13(3), 277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Polich, G., Dole, C., & Kaptchuk, T. (2010). The need to act a little more ‘scientific’: Biomedical researchers investigating complementary and alternative medicine. Sociology of Health and Illness, 32(1), 106–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shiva, V. (1997). Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. Toronto: Between the lines.Google Scholar
  26. Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–1939. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. World Health Organization. (1999). Guidelines on basic training and safety in acupuncture. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  28. World Health Organization, World Intellectual Property Organization and World Trade Organization. (2013). Promoting access to medical technologies and innovation: Intersections between public health, intellectual property and trade. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadine Ijaz
    • 1
  • Heather Boon
    • 1
  1. 1.Leslie Dan Faculty of PharmacyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations