{"title":"Direct-to-Consumer Telehealth and the Ambivalence of Self-Care","authors":"Mercer E. Gary","doi":"10.1111/japp.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>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 <i>and</i> 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.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Philosophy","volume":"42 4","pages":"1359-1377"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/japp.70028","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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.