Advertisement

Gender, Sexuality and Prosthesis Use: Implications for Rehabilitation

  • Craig D. Murray
Chapter

Abstract

One particular, highly personal, form of social relationship following amputation relates to sexual behaviour and related concerns. Although the role of relationships, and particularly romantic and sexual relationships, are generally important in most persons’ lives, until relatively recently, the issue of sexuality following amputation has been a neglected area of research. This chapter summarizes the key literature on amputation and sexuality. This is mainly focused on males, who are lower-limb amputees, where data is collected via questionnaires or self-report surveys, with responses aggregated to ascertain the prevalence of certain pre-defined problems or issues. The sexual concerns of such persons can reasonably be expected to change over time and therefore to be different at various times following amputation and within the life course of individuals. Responses to limb losses are likely to be gendered experiences. Given the paucity of available literature on this topic and the importance of the issues surrounding it, this chapter reports the findings from a qualitative project of prosthesis use by both people with acquired amputations and those born with congenital limb deficiency on the complementary issues of gender, sexuality and romantic relationships. In this work, issues of sexuality emerged in relation to other salient meanings and experiences. In contrast to some prior research, which has had a tendency to explore sexual function and concerns in isolation, the qualitative analysis here highlights these as gendered concerns, and related to issues of forming romantic, and also sexual, relationships.

Keywords

Romantic Relationship Physical Disability Sexual Functioning Sexual Relationship Sexual Concern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Akesode FA, Iyang UE (1981) Some social and sexual problems experienced by Nigerians with limb amputation. Trop Geogr Med 33:71–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Badeau D (1995) Illness, disability, and aging. Sex Disabil 13:219–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bodenheimer C, Kerrigan AJ, Garber SL, Monga TN (2000) Sexuality in persons with lower extremity amputations. Disabil Rehabil 22:409–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradway JK, Malone JM, Racy J, Leal JM, Pool J (1984) Psychological adaptation to amputation: An overview. Orthot Prosthet 38(3):46–50Google Scholar
  5. Dunn DS (1996) Well-being following amputation: Salutary effects of positive meaning, optimism and control. Rehabil Psychol 41(4):285–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edmonson B (1988) Disability and sexual adjustment. In: Van Hasselt VB, Strain PS, Hersen M (eds) Handbook of development and physical disabilities. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 91–106Google Scholar
  7. Frank G (1984) Life history model of adaptation to disability: The case of a “congenital amputee”. Soc Sci Med 19(6):639–645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geertzen JHB, Van Es CG, Dijkstra PU (2009) Sexuality and amputation: A systematic literature review. Disabil Rehabil 31(7):522–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldberg RT (1984) New trends in the rehabilitation of lower extremity amputees. Rehabil Lit 45:2–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Ide M, Watanabe T, Toyonage T (2002) Sexuality in persons with limb amputation. Prosthet Orthot 26:189–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaiser SB, Freeman CM, Wingate SB (1985) Stigmata and negotiated outcomes: Management of appearance by persons with physical disabilities. Deviant Behav 6(2):205–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaiser SB, Wingate SB, Freeman CM, Chandler JL (1987) Acceptance of physical disability and attitudes toward personal appearance. Rehabil Psychol 32(1):51–58Google Scholar
  13. Kasharni JH, Frank RG, Kasharni SR, Wonderlich SA (1983) Depression among amputees. J Clin Psychiatry 44:256–258Google Scholar
  14. Kejlaa GH (1992) The social and economic outcome of upper limb amputation. Prosthet Orthot Int 16:25–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelly M (1992) Self, identity and radical surgery. Sociol Health Illn 14(3):390–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lewis CE (1990) Sexual practices: Are physicians addressing the issues? J Gen Intern Med 5:S78–S81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Medhat A, Huber PM, Medhat MA (1990) Factors that influence the level of activities in persons with lower limb amputation. Rehabil Nurs 15:13–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Murray CD (2004) An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the embodiment of artificial limbs. Disabil Rehabil 26(16):963–973PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Murray CD (2005) The social meanings of prosthesis use. J Health Psychol 10(3):425–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murray CD (2009) The personal meanings of prosthesis use. Disabil Rehabil 31(7):573–581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parkes CM (1975) Psychosocial transitions: Comparison between reaction to loss of a limb and loss of a spouse. Br J Psychiatry 127:204–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Postma A, Kingma A, DeRuiter JH, Koops HS, Veth RPH, Goeken LNH, Kamps WA (1992) Quality of life in bone tumor patients comparing limb salvage and amputation of the lower extremity. Journal of Surgical Oncology 51:47–51 Google Scholar
  23. Randall GC, Ewalt JR, Blair H (1945) Psychiatric reaction to amputation. J Am Med Assoc 128:645–652Google Scholar
  24. Reinstein L, Ashley J, Miller KH (1978) Sexual adjustment after lower extremity amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 59:501–504PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rintala DH, Howland DC, Nosek MA, Bennett JL, Young ME, Foley CC, Rossi CD, Chanpong G (1997) Dating issues for women with physical disabilities. Sex Disabil 15:219–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Romeo AJ, Wanlass R, Arenass S (1993) A profile of psychosexual functioning in men following spinal cord injury. Sex Disabil 11:269–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schover LR, Jensen SB (1988) Sexual problems in chronic illness: A comprehensive approach. Guilford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Shakespeare T (1996) Power and prejudice: Issues of gender, sexuality and disability. In: Barton L (ed) Disability and society: Emerging issues and insights. Longman, London, pp 191–214Google Scholar
  29. Shuttleworth R (2000) The search for sexual intimacy for men with cerebral palsy. Sex Disabil 18:263–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith JA (2004) Reflections on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 1(1):39–54Google Scholar
  31. Taleporos G (2001) Sexuality and physical disability. In: Wood C (ed) Sexual positions: An Australian view. Hill of Content Publishing, Melbourne, pp 155–166Google Scholar
  32. Taleporos G, McCabe MP (2001) Physical disability and sexual esteem. Sex Disabil 19:131–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Walters AS, Williamson GM (1998) Sexual satisfaction predicts quality of life: A study of adult amputees. Sexuality and Disability 16(2):103–115Google Scholar
  34. Whipple B, Richard E, Tepper M, Komisaruk B (1996) Sexual response in women with complete spinal cord injury. Sex Disabil 14:191–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williamson GM, Walters AS (1996) Perceived impact of limb amputation on sexual activity: A study of adult amputees. J Sex Res 33:221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Young I (1990) Throwing like a girl and other essays in feminist philosophy and social theory. Indiana University Press, IndianaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Health and MedicineLancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations