Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMcLaughlan, Rebecca
dc.contributor.authorGeorge, Beth
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-13T23:42:03Z
dc.date.available2024-05-13T23:42:03Z
dc.date.issued2022en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/32549
dc.description.abstractThe role of design and materials in the enactment and experience of healthcare has gained increasing attention across the fields of evidence-based design, architecture, anthropology, sociology, and cultural geography. Evidence-based design, specifically, seeks to understand the ways in which the built environment can support the healing process. In the context of palliative care, however, the very measure of healing differs vastly. Physicians Mount and Kearney suggest that “it is possible to die healed,” and that such healing can be facilitated through the provision of “a secure environment grounded in a sense of connectedness” (2003: 657). Acknowledging this critical difference raises important questions around the various ways through which the built environment might support healing, but also about the potential of architecture to impart care. This paper reports on fifteen interviews with architects, experienced in the design of palliative care settings, from the UK, US, and Australia, to provide a deeper understanding of the questions being asked within the briefing processes for these facilities, the intentions embedded in the ways that architects respond, and the kinds of compromises deemed allowable (by various stakeholders) within the procurement process. Our findings suggest that palliative care architects often respond to two briefs, one explicit and the other unspoken. Design responses in relation to the first include: formally expressing a differentiation in the philosophy of care (signalling difference), attention to quality, extending comfort and providing “moments.” The second relates to the unburdening of palliative care facilities from their associative baggage and responding to the tension between the physical and imaginative inhabitation of space. In revealing the presence of this hidden brief, and the relationship between the two, this paper invites a broader discussion regarding the capacity of architecture to support palliative care patients, their families, and staff.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherBMJen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofMedical Humanitiesen_AU
dc.rightsCopyright All Rights Reserveden_AU
dc.subjectarchitectureen_AU
dc.subjectcancer careen_AU
dc.subjectdesignen_AU
dc.subjectmedical humanitiesen_AU
dc.subjectpalliative careen_AU
dc.titleUnburdening expectation and operating between: Architecture in support of palliative careen_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.subject.asrcANZSRC FoR code::33 BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND DESIGN::3301 Architecture::330102 Architectural designen_AU
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/medhum-2021-012340
dc.type.pubtypeAuthor accepted manuscripten_AU
dc.relation.arcDE190100730
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::Sydney School of Architecture, Design and Planningen_AU
usyd.departmentArchitectureen_AU
usyd.citation.volume48en_AU
usyd.citation.issue4en_AU
usyd.citation.spage497en_AU
usyd.citation.epage504en_AU
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.