Abstract
PurposeThe major thesis of this article is how social contract theory sheds light on the interaction of structure and agency. A minor thesis is to rebut the conclusions drawn from Stanley Milgram's famous obedience experiments.Design/methodology/approachThe argument rests in large part on an extensive review of authentic, empirical evidence found in studies of medical compliance.FindingsPatient agency is choosing not to comply with medical orders has over the years forced structural changes in the doctor–patient relations. These changes can be understand through the evolution of three kinds of social contract.Practical implicationsOne important implication is that non‐compliance can be a relational choice in one's lifeworld.Originality/valueNo other study has brought together Milgram's evidence with the medical compliance literature to demonstrate the integration of agency and structure.
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,Sociology and Political Science
Reference79 articles.
1. Adorno, T.W., Frenkel‐Brunswik, E., Levinson, D., Sanford, N. et al. (1950), The Authoritarian Personality, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
2. Altman, L. (2002), “Many workers ignored Anthrax pill regimen”, New York Times, Vol. 30, October, p. 14.
3. Archer, M. (2000), Being Human: the Problem of Agency, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
4. Aronson, J.K. and Hardman, M. (1992), “Patient compliance: ABC of monitoring drug therapy”, British Medical Journal, Vol. 305, pp. 1009‐11.
5. Bander, S.J. and Walters, B.A. (1998), “Hemodialysis morbidity and mortality: links to patient non‐compliance”, Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 649‐53.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献