Abstract
Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) is the removal of both breasts when one is affected by cancer. Researchers and journalists typically attribute increased use of this controversial procedure to patient misunderstanding of breast cancer risk. Thus, efforts to curb CPM use focus on better patient education. I argue that such efforts are potentially ineffective insofar as they fail to recognize that risk isn’t just something that patients know but also something that they do, and that how they do it affects their healthcare decisions. I further argue that this failure can lead to impaired communication about CPM by perpetuating sexist stereotypes of women as too emotional to make good decisions. To improve communication, then, I draw on screening guidelines and public discourse about CPM to show how patients do breast cancer risk, arguing that they often experience a kind of overtreatment that makes CPM an effective, if unconventional, treatment choice.
- Journal
- Rhetoric of Health and Medicine
- Published
- 2022-03-03
- DOI
- 10.5744/rhm.3008
- CompPile
- Search in CompPile ↗
- Topics
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
Cites in this index (0)
No references match articles in this index.
Related Articles
-
Computers and Composition Dec 2024Unveiling the affective digital counterpublic: A rhetorical ecological analysis of the #JusticeForNaqib movement in Pakistan ↗Salma Kalim
-
Rhetoric of Health and Medicine Jul 2019Vaccine Barriers, Vaccine Refusals: Situated Vaccine Decision-Making in the Wake of the 2017 Minnesota Measles Outbreak ↗Kari Lynn Campeau
-
Pedagogy Apr 2017Melissa Ames
-
College English Jan 2013Joyce Inman
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Jun 2010Joshua Gunn