In this article, we define the concept of "risk work," which aims to make visible working practices to assess or manage risk, in order to subject these practices to sociological critique. This article reviews and synthesizes existing published literature to identify components of risk work: (a) translating risk into different contexts, (b) minimizing risks in practice, and (c) caring in the context of risk. We argue that these three components of risk work raise important tensions for workers that have been inadequately explored in the literature to date. We propose that future research should additionally focus on practitioner subjectivity and identity in risk work. In addition, we argue that comparative research-across type of risk and different contexts-and methodological and theoretical diversity would enhance this emerging field of research.

Choice feminism is a popular form of contemporary feminism, encouraging women to embrace the opportunities they have in life and to see the choices they make as justified and always politically acceptable. Though this kind of feminism appears at first glance to be tolerant and inspiring, its narratives also bring about a political stagnation as discussion, debate, and critical judgment of the actions of others are discouraged in the face of being deemed unsupportive and a 'bad' feminist. Choice feminism also encourages neoliberal values of individualism and consumerism, while downplaying the need for political and collective action against systematic inequalities. Yet to succeed in creating change for women debate needs to occur, and all decisions cannot be supported if they act to further inequality and a patriarchal status quo. In this article I would like to argue for the continued need to engage politically with other feminists and the status of the movement as a whole by critiquing choice feminism and looking empirically at how discussion and dissent can be silenced by the choice narrative. The empirical data in this article will focus on online discussions of naming on marriage to illustrate the wider theoretical argument.

Whenever there are well-publicised pressures on acute care, there is a tendency for policy makers and the media to imply that a significant number of older people may be taking up hospital beds when they do not really need the services provided there. However, evidence to back up such claims is often lacking, and existing research tends to fail to engage meaningfully with older people themselves. In contrast, this research explores the emergency hospital admissions of older people in three English case study sites, drawing on the lived experience of older people and the practice wisdom of front-line staff to explore the appropriateness of each admission and scope for alternatives to hospital. Contrary to popular opinion, the study did not find evidence of large numbers of older people being admitted to hospital inappropriately. Indeed, some of the older people concerned delayed seeking help and only ended up at hospital as a very last resort, possibly due to concerns about being seen as a burden on scarce public resources. While older people and front-line staff identified a number of suggestions to improve services in future, there seemed few clear cut, easy answers to the longstanding dilemma of how best to reduce emergency admissions. Seeking to understand and potentially reduce emergency hospital admissions is complex, and it is important to consider the experiences and expertise of older people and front-line staff.

What is known about this topic• Inappropriate emergency admissions to hospital are the subject of significant policy and media debate.• While a range of possible explanations are put forward, many of the accounts appear overly-simplistic and/or underevidenced.• Given current demographic and financial pressures, the desire to prevent unnecessary emergency admissions will only increase. What this paper adds• There is relatively limited research on this topic, and it is difficult to compare results in a meaningful way (due to local contextual and methodological details).• Different methods of identifying 'inappropriate' admissions each have their limitations, and potential solutions do not appear well thought through.• Research which includes the perspective of patients, families and front-line staff may provide a more nuanced, helpful approach. AbstractThis paper reports the findings of a review of the literature on emergency admissions to hospital for older people in the UK, undertaken between May and June 2014 at the Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham. This review sought to explore: the rate of in/ appropriate emergency admissions of older people in the UK; the way this is defined in the literature; solutions proposed to reduce the rate of inappropriate admissions; and the methodological issues which particular definitions of 'inappropriateness' raise. The extent to which a patient perspective is included in these definitions of inappropriateness was also noted, given patient involvement is such a key policy priority in other areas of health policy. Despite long-standing policy debates, relatively little research has been published on formal rates of 'inappropriate' emergency hospital admissions for older people in the UK NHS in recent years. What has been produced indicates varying rates of in/ appropriateness, inconsistent ways of defining appropriateness and a lack of focus on the possible solutions to address the problem. Significantly, patient perspectives are lacking, and we would suggest that this is a key factor in fully understanding how to prevent avoidable admissions. With an ageing population, significant financial challenges and a potentially fragmented health and social care system, the issue of the appropriateness of emergency admission is a pressing one which requires further research, greater focus on the experiences of older people and their families, and more nuanced contextual and evidence-based responses.

This article outlines the ways in which British women make sense of and reconcile facets of their identities at the point of marriage through the naming decisions they make. Both name changing and name retaining are considered. The dialectic between self and others is considered, using Mead’s theories, as well the creation of gendered identity, using empirical evidence from a survey of 102 British women and 16 in-depth interviews with a smaller sample of this group.