Direct-to-Consumer Telehealth and the Ambivalence of Self-Care

0Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) telehealth is presented by marketers as a mere conduit for self-care capable of circumventing the frustrations and injustices of existing healthcare systems. If self-care is both lauded as a key tool of resistance for the marginalized and rejected as a hollow marketing tactic, how should we respond to technologies seeking to promote self-care? What can they tell us about where self-care is a valuable pursuit and where it becomes a social threat? I pursue these questions by examining the tensions between ethically meaningful care for the self and pernicious self-responsibilization in two different uses of DTC telehealth: ‘men's health’ services for the treatment of erectile dysfunction and gender-affirming care services for queer and trans people. Drawing on opposing views of self-care, I argue that particular self-care projects like DTC telehealth are ethically viable where they resist, rather than bolster, projects of domination and where they support, rather than undermine, caring relationships.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gary, M. E. (2025). Direct-to-Consumer Telehealth and the Ambivalence of Self-Care. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 42(4), 1359–1377. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.70028

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free