Clicca qui per scaricare

Chronic illness and the ideology of the individual: towards a critique of the concept of agency
Titolo Rivista: SALUTE E SOCIETÀ 
Autori/Curatori: Nicoletta Diasio 
Anno di pubblicazione:  2019 Fascicolo: Lingua: Inglese 
Numero pagine:  14 P. 35-48 Dimensione file:  229 KB
DOI:  10.3280/SES2019-003004
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più:  clicca qui   qui 


The author analyses how the concept of agency may enhance some forms of social normativity and encourage a type of individual among children and adults. The article questions these characteristics, examines how far they are socially prescribed, and shows how they constitute a touchstone of the passage into adulthood. By the preliminary findings of a research on age transition of adolescents suffering Type 1 diabetes in France, the author questions the social ideal of managing and optimizing one’s capacities, projecting oneself over time, being flexible and breaking the ties of dependence, and underlines how these social exhortations can bring new forms of determinism and disempowerment.


Keywords: Body; Age transition; Youth; Diabetes; Empowerment-Disempowerment; Subject.

  1. Austin J.L. (1956). A Plea for Excuses. Proceedings for the Aristotelian Society, 57: 1-30.
  2. Bury M. (1982). Chronic Illness as Biographical Disruption. Sociology of Health and Illness, 4(2): 167-182.
  3. Cook D.T. (2005). The Dichotomous Child in and of Commercial Culture. Childhood, 12(2): 155-159., 10.1177/090756820505190DOI: 10.1177/090756820505190
  4. Diasio N. (2010). Children and food: ambivalent connections between risk, moral technologies, and fun. In: De Beaufort I., Vandamme S., Vande Vathorst S., editors, Who’s weight is it anyway: essays on ethics and eating. Ghent: Acco Publisher.
  5. Diasio N. (2011). ‘Liaisons dangereuses?’ Parents, enfants et redistribution des pouvoirs au seuil de la vie. In: Gross M., Mathieu S., Nizard S., editors, Sacrées familles! Changements familiaux, changements religieux. Paris: Erès.
  6. Diasio N. (2015). Le gouvernement des enfants: corps, âges et pouvoirs dans Les Anormaux. In: Hintermeyer P., editor, Foucault post mortem en Europe. Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg.
  7. Diasio N., Vinel V. (2017). Conclusion générale. In: Diasio N., Vinel V., editors, Corps et préadolescence. Intime, privé, public. Rennes: PUR.
  8. Fassin D. (2004). Le corps exposé. Essai d’économie morale de l’illégitimité. In: Fassin D., Memmi D., editors, Le gouvernement des corps. Paris: Ed. de l’EHESS.
  9. Favretto A., Fucci S., Zaltron F. (2018). Con gli occhi dei bambini. Come l’infanzia affronta la malattia. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  10. Fournier T., Delgarrondo S. (2019). L’optimisation de soi. Ethnologie française, 176(4).
  11. Garnier P. (2015). L«agency» des enfants. Projet scientifique et politique des «childhood studies». Education et sociétés. 2(3): 159-173.
  12. Giddens A. (1979). The Central Problem of Social Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  13. James A. (2010). Agency. In: Qvortrup J., Corsaro W.A., Honig M.S., editors, The Palgrave Handbook of Childhood Studies. Basingkstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  14. Lancy D.F. (2012). Unmasking Children’s Agency. AnthropoChildren, 1(2). -- Available at: https://popups.uliege.be/2034-8517/index.php?id=1253 (16/07/2019).
  15. Lee N. (2001). Childhood and Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  16. Martin C. (2014). Le soutien à la parentalité: une nouvelle politique en Europe?. Politiques sociales et familiales, 118: 9-22.
  17. Martin E. (1994). Flexible Bodies: Tracing Immunity in American Culture from the Days of Polio to the Age of AIDS. Boston: Beacon.
  18. Memmi D. (2004). Administrer une matière sensible. Conduites raisonnables et pédagogie par le corps autour de la naissance et de la mort. In: Fassin D., Memmi D., editors, Le gouvernement des corps. Paris: Ed. de l’EHESS.
  19. Neyrand G. (2011). Soutenir et controller les parents. Le dispositif de parentalité. Toulouse: Erès.
  20. Prout A. (2000). Childhood Bodies: Construction, Agency and Hybridity. In: Prout A., editor, The Body, Childhood and Society. London-New York: MacMillan St. Martin’s Press.
  21. Rabinow P., Rose N. (2006). Biopower Today. BioSocieties, 1(2): 195-217., 10.1017/S174585520604001DOI: 10.1017/S174585520604001
  22. Renaut A. (2002). La libération des enfants. Contribution philosophique à une histoire de l’enfance. Paris: Calmann-Lévy.
  23. Rose N. (2007). The Politics of Life Itself. Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
  24. Strandell H. (2010). From Structure-Action to Politics of Childhood: Sociological Childhood Research in Finland. Current Sociology, 58(2): 165-185., 10.1177/001139210935424DOI: 10.1177/001139210935424
  25. Valentine K. (2011). Accounting for Agency. Children and Society, 25(5): 347-358.
  26. Warnier J.-P. (2017). Par-delà les frontières du corps et de ses cultures matérielles: l’individu néolibéral manageur de lui-même, Journée d’étude Corps et culture matérielle, MSH Paris Nord, 10 novembre 2017.

Nicoletta Diasio, in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 3/2019, pp. 35-48, DOI:10.3280/SES2019-003004

   

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association associazione indipendente e no profit per facilitare l'accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche