ArticleMonash bioethics review2026
Joseph K. visits the sick house: how the medical humanities require the medical posthumanities.
Article in Monash bioethics review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper challenges the typical function of narrative in the medical humanities to advocate for a medical posthumanities: an approach that destabilizes the centrality of "the human" and instead embraces patient narratives that are embodied, fragmented, and provisional. To make this claim, we first challenge the stability of the "humanity" described in the "medical humanities" and reiterated in the genre that we call "the medical romance." In this genre, illness and suffering destabilize a sense of identity and coherence, which is then restored through introspection and interpretation of the patient narrative. To challenge this genre, we turn to surface reading, a literary studies technique that sees traditional interpretation as too hurriedly foreclosing on meaning. Through a close reading of Franz Kafka's The Trial and Henrik Ibsen's Hedda Gabler, we demonstrate both what surface reading looks like and also how it embraces generic and interpretive instability. Finally, we focus this approach to narrative on physician-assisted suicide (PAS), particularly attending to PAS and disability, to argue that both medical romance and its entailed traditional narrative interpretation overvalue "the human" as an agential individual seeking a "good death." This at once affirms the tendency to encourage the allegedly meaningful death of disabled people by PAS, and also excludes from narrative focus the structural and environmental sources of suffering. The medical posthumanities, in its attention to embodiment, networks, environment, and the decentralizing of individual agents, would better make room for patient narratives that value the messiness and interconnectedness of lived experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.