Using an Ethnographic Approach to Study End-of-Life Care: Reflections from Research Encounters in England
This chapter is based on reflections about the various kinds of explanatory work that I had to do with various stakeholders to legitimise and negotiate studying end-of-life care in England ethnographically. By examining the responses I received, I comment on how this explanatory work and framing shaped what I could ultimately study, the knowledge that could be produced, and my relationship to the project. Ultimately, this chapter invites ethnographers to be reflexive about the ways we position our methodological stances and ourselves as researchers within health-related fields and how this constructs our subjects of study.
The project that this chapter is based on was funded by the NIHR CLAHRC for Peterborough and Cambridgeshire. I’d like to thank all the various project stakeholders who have made this ethnographic project possible. Time to participate in the workshop that led to this chapter and to write this chapter was funded by the Foundation for the Sociology of Health and Illness. I’d like to thank the other workshop participants for their insightful comments and the editors for their useful feedback on earlier drafts. I would also like to thank all the research participants who made this project possible.
- Borgstrom, E. (2014). Planning for Death? An Ethnographic Study of English End-of-Life Care. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Available at https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/245560.
- Borgstrom, E. (2016). End of life care strategy and the Coalition Government. In L. Foster & K. Woodthrope (Eds.), Death and Social Policy in Challenging Times (pp. 35–52). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Cooley, T. J. (1997). Casting shadows in the field: An introduction. In G. F. Barz & T. J. Cooley (Eds.), Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives for Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology (pp. 3–19). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Fuller, S. (2002). Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1965). Awareness of Dying. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
- Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
- Hockey, J., & Forsey, M. (2012). Ethnography is not participant observation: Reflections on the interview as participatory qualitative research. In J. Skinner (Ed.), The Interview: An Ethnographic Approach (pp. 69–87). London: Berg.Google Scholar
- Kisliuk, M. (1997). (Un)doing fieldwork: Sharing songs, sharing lives. In G. F. Barz & T. J. Cooley (Eds.), Shadows in the Field: New Perspectives for Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology (pp. 23–44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Lawton, J. (2000). The Dying Process: Patients’ Experiences of Palliative Care. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Shaffir, W. (1998). Doing ethnographic research in Jewish Orthodox communities: The neglected role of sociability. In S. Grills (Ed.), Doing Ethnographic Research: Fieldwork Settings (pp. 48–64). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Taylor, S. (Ed.). (2002). Ethnographic Research: A Reader. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Wolcott, H. (1973). The Man in the Principal’s Office: An Ethnography. New York: Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar