Using an Ethnographic Approach to Study End-of-Life Care: Reflections from Research Encounters in England

  • Erica BorgstromEmail author


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. 


  1. Blumber, H. (1954). What is wrong with social theory. American Sociological Review, 18, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borgstrom, E. (2014). Planning for Death? An Ethnographic Study of English End-of-Life Care. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. Available at
  3. Borgstrom, E. (2015a). Advance care planning: Between tools and relational end-of-life care? BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, 5(3), 216–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borgstrom, E. (2015b). Planning for an (un)certain future: Choice within English end-of-life care. Current Sociology, 63(5), 700–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgstrom, E. (2015c). Social death in end-of-life care policy. Contemporary Social Science, 10(3), 272–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Borgstrom, E., & Ellis, J. (2017). Introduction: Researching death, dying and bereavement. Mortality, 22(2), 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cook, A. S., & Bosley, G. (2007). The experience of participating in bereavement research: Stressful or therapeutic? Death Studies, 19(2), 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Dey, J. (1993). Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fuller, S. (2002). Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1965). Awareness of Dying. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  13. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. Ingold, T. (2014). That’s enough about ethnography! HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 4(1), 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kendall, M., et al. (2007). Key challenges and ways forward in researching the “good death”: Qualitative in-depth interview and focus group study. British Medical Journal, 334, 521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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
  18. Koffman, J., et al. (2009). Vulnerability in palliative care research: Findings from a qualitative study of black Caribbean and white British patients with advanced cancer. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35(7), 40–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Lawton, J. (2000). The Dying Process: Patients’ Experiences of Palliative Care. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Rabinow, P., et al. (2008). Designs for an Anthropology of the Contemporary. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramcharan, P., & Cutcliffe, J. R. (2001). Judging the ethics of qualitative research: Considering the “ethics as process” model. Health & Social Care in the Community, 9(6), 358–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reeves, S., Kuper, A., & Hodges, B. D. (2008). Qualitative research methodologies: Ethnography. British Medical Journal, 337, 1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Savage, J. (2000). Ethnography and health care. British Medical Journal, 321(7273), 1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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
  26. Taussig, M. T. (2011). I Swear I Saw This: Drawings in Fieldwork Notebooks, Namely My Own. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Taylor, S. (Ed.). (2002). Ethnographic Research: A Reader. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Tolich, M., & Fitzgerald, M. H. (2006). If ethics committees were designed for ethnography. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 1(2), 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Witham, G., Beddow, A., & Haigh, C. (2013). Reflections on access: Too vulnerable to research? Journal of Research in Nursing, 20(1), 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wolcott, H. (1973). The Man in the Principal’s Office: An Ethnography. New York: Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  31. Wynn, L. (2011). Ethnographer’s experiences of institutional ethics oversight: Results from a quantitative and qualitative survey. Journal of Policy History, 23(1), 94–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations