• Skip to main content

CentreForMedicalHumanities.org

  • Welcome to Centre For Medical Humanities
  • Telehealth Analysis
  • Research Translations
  • Evidence Reviews
  • Blog
  • About Centre For Medical Humanities

Published Today: ‘Critical Medical Humanities’, a special issue of BMJ’s Medical Humanities

posted on February 21, 2025

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making health decisions based on this content. Centre For Medical Humanities may contain affiliate links — purchases through these links support our editorial work at no extra cost to you.

By CentreForMedicalHumanities.org Research Team | Last verified: September 2026

Research Summary: Critical Medical Humanities Special Issue

Publication Type: Special issue of BMJ Medical Humanities journal
Editors: William Viney, Felicity Callard, and Angela Woods (Centre for Medical Humanities)
Core Framework: Five-point approach expanding medical humanities beyond clinical encounters to include critical theory, disability studies, queer studies, and activist politics
Featured Contributors: Andy Goffey, Jan Slaby, Mel Y. Chen, Bronwyn Parry, Lynne Friedli, Robert Stearn addressing immunology, neuroscience, race, disability, reproductive industries, and social policy
Respondents: Alex Nading, Stacey Smith, Clare Barker, Luna Dolezal, Sarah Atkinson providing critical responses
Primary Aim: Enliven debate about critical priorities and guiding assumptions in medical humanities research through interdisciplinary and cross-sector collaboration
Access: Free online access until 15 June 2015; supported by Editor-in-Chief Deborah Bowman

It is with great pleasure that we announce the publication of a special issue of Medical Humanities journal, edited by Centre for Medical Humanities researchers William Viney, Felicity Callard, and Angela Woods.

Exploring the many valences of the word ‘critical’ across and beyond the medical humanities, the special collection champions a ‘critical medical humanities’ characterised by: (i) a widening of the sites and scales of ‘the medical’ beyond the primal scene of the clinical encounter; (ii) greater attention not simply to the context and experience of health and illness, but to their constitution at multiple levels; (iii) closer engagement with critical theory, queer and disability studies, activist politics and other allied fields; (iv) recognition that the arts, humanities and social sciences are best viewed not as in service or in opposition to the clinical and life sciences, but as productively entangled with a ‘biomedical culture’; and, following on from this, (v) robust commitment to new forms of interdisciplinary and cross-sector collaboration. A more detailed account of these arguments can be found in the introductory paper.

The broadest ambition of this collection is to offer an invitation to think carefully about ‘critical’ priorities and to enliven debate about the guiding assumptions of medical humanities research. It does so by publishing work by those who may not ordinarily label themselves as medical humanities researchers. Andy Goffey, Jan Slaby, Mel Y. Chen, Bronwyn Parry, Lynne Friedli and Robert Stearn are leading social science and humanities scholars who reflect upon the work of criticism in fields as diverse as immunology, neuroscience, race and disability studies, reproductive and fertility industries, and social policy. We have also invited short responses from Alex Nading, Stacey Smith, Clare Barker, Luna Dolezal, and Sarah Atkinson to draw out the key ideas of each article. We are extremely grateful to all our contributors for their time, energy, and commitment to this publication.

With the support of the journal’s Editor-in-Chief, Deborah Bowman, this special issue of Medical Humanities is free to access online until 15th June 2015. We would like to extend our thanks to Deborah for enthusiastically supporting this project and to Emma Chan and her colleagues at the British Medical Journal for their professionalism and attention to detail.

Related Articles

  • ‘Recovery’ in mental health: who judges, on what grounds, wi…
  • Nootropic Supplement Safety Guide 2026: Who Should Be Cautio…
  • Nootropic Ingredients Research 2026: What Studies Actually S…
  • How Cognitive Function Changes With Age: 2026 Overview

FDA Disclaimer: These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Filed Under: CMH Publications

  • About
  • Editorial Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Affiliate Disclosure
  • Contact

CentreForMedicalHumanities.org is an independent health evidence publication. This site is not a medical practice, healthcare provider, academic institution, or research organization. Nothing on this site constitutes medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making decisions about supplements, medications, or health interventions. This website is not affiliated with Durham University, the Institute for Medical Humanities, or any academic or medical institution. The domain name reflects previous ownership history and does not indicate institutional affiliation, academic authority, or endorsement. The Durham Institute for Medical Humanities is an active research institute at Durham University — visit their official page for information about their programs and research. Some content on this site contains affiliate links. Purchases made through these links may generate a commission for this publication at no cost to the reader. See our Evidence Standards page for full disclosure details. Content produced by the CMH Evidence Review editorial team. © 2026 CentreForMedicalHumanities.org. All rights reserved. | About | Our Evidence Standards | Non-Affiliation Notice | Privacy Policy