In narrative approaches to health and illness, a distinction between narrative and story has been lost or occluded. This paper considers how the terms narrative and story are defined and how they are used in practice in order to focus on rehearsed or 'worked up' stories, including fiction, rather than minimally defined narrative fragments. Story-written, spoken and shared-is a powerful way of contextualising health and illness in a wider landscape of human values and interests and, as a form of enchantment in the face of scientific rationalization, a human necessity. Some reasons why sociology, and particularly medical sociology, has avoided defining fictional stories as part of its material and its method are explored. The reasons why a sociology of health, illness and medicine might want to include fictionalised story are sketched. Complex moments of human experience, including sick physicians' experience of alienation from both themselves and their medical treatment necessitate metaphor-laden and sometimes fictionalised writing to represent the subjective contradictions. Story, including fictionalised story, represents a means of including imaginative elements of human life in sociological view. 'People think that stories are shaped by people. In fact it's the other way round' (Pratchett, 2005). 'Sociologists tell stories as if they weren't storytellers, and as if storytelling were a less rigorous and honest pursuit than theirs' (Game & Metcalfe, 1996).