Spark [Robert_Klitzman]_When_Doctors_Become_Patients(Boo | Seite 309

298 Interacting with Their Patients
roles they put on, and other aspects of themselves. While sociologists
such as Talcott Parsons discussed the ‘‘sick role’’ and other social identi-
ties, the delineations between these roles and other aspects of oneself are
not always clear. The individuals here put these roles on and off, often
each day, in the service of personal needs, whether good or bad (e.g., ag-
gressive self-treatment or denial). In some ways, physicianhood appeared
as a role one put on daily at the office and did not always fully integrate
into how one behaved.
But doctoring emerged here, too, not merely as a matter of education
and academic degrees. Physicianhood did not constitute merely a socially
constructed role. Rather, these doctors internalized the white coats they
wore. Even when they were no longer practicing medicine, this career
permanently stamped them. This identity became profoundly embedded,
functioning at multiple levels and springing from deep-seated fears and
desires that at times operated despite these individuals, shaping their
views, experiences, and responses in the world. Not surprisingly, as a re-
sult, they generally at first resisted surrendering this position and adopt-
ing that of the patient. In diagnosing themselves, they frequently saw
themselves as if they were a doctor looking at someone else—until the
pain or symptoms overwhelmed them. Only then did some became pa-
tients. Over time, the precise boundaries between this role and identity
shifted. Frequently, these doctors acted the part, and in doing so, to
varying degrees, it became part of them.
Yet these physicians’ responses revealed not only similarities, but also
differences. We are each unique amalgams of social roles and individ-
ual psychological traits and quirks—products of our unique experiences.
These individuals had varied personal and family histories, experiences,
psyches, self-conceptions, and specializations (e.g., pediatrics versus psy-
chiatry). For instance, Harry, in part because of his experience as a war
refugee, believed there was a limit to how much doctors could alter ex-
ternal ‘‘other Forces.’’ Deborah, Juan, and Charles grew up in Hasidic,
Latino, and white Anglo-Saxon Protestant families, respectively. These
backgrounds shaped their responses, too. Variations in personal histories
and social and political commitments could influence individual ‘‘styles,’’
approaches, and preferences with patients.
Nonetheless, as I have tried to show, as they moved from doctor to
patient, clear underlying patterns cut across their experiences. These in-
dividuals often transcended, and at times rejected, neat categories. Deb-
orah had dismissed most of her family’s religious practices, though now