'You're not a good vet if things go wrong': The dark side of veterinary identities.

Abstract

Background: Vets, like other professionals, strive for somewhat fantasised desired occupational identities, but the dichotomic dark side of feared identities-that is, negative constructions of oneself as flawed, failed or failing-remains underexplored. This paper reviews the identity processes associated with feared identities.

Methods: This qualitative study was conducted within a UK-based, multisite small animal veterinary organisation. Data were collected via 51 semi-structured interviews with 39 participants. Vets were asked to talk about difficult cases and perceived mistakes. Data were interpreted using a thematic discursive analysis.

Results: Vets drew on social discourses to construct feared identities and engage in negative self-assessment. Most vets spoke of externalising culpability for apparent misdeeds, but some described unrelenting self-blame.

Limitations: The results were context-specific and collected within one case study organisation. Further work is required to investigate feared identities in other veterinary organisations and professions.

Conclusion: This research demonstrates how vets form feared identities and engage in self-denigration. It shows how some vets use defensive identity work strategies to restore desired identities while others maintain feared identities. These findings suggest that critically reviewing inherent professional and organisational norms may help create work environments within which vets can better learn and recover from difficult experiences.