![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Recent research has demonstrated the importance of family relationships in women's experience of premenstrual changes, their construction of these changes as “PMS.” However, the discursive process by which women take up the subject position of “PMS” sufferer through the explicit naming of “PMS” to an intimate partner has received little research attention. Drawing on 60 individual interviews with Australian women, conducted between 2004 and 2006, we examined accounts of naming “PMS” in intimate relationships, women's explanations for naming or not naming, their experiences of their partner naming them as premenstrual. The analysis process identified an overarching theme of naming “PMS,” which was made up of three themes: naming to explain; “PMS” becoming the only explanation for distress; “PMS” as not a legitimate explanation for distress. The findings suggest that clinicians need to be aware of women's complex, often ambivalent, experiences of naming “PMS” within their relationships, when working with women, couples, seeking treatment or support for premenstrual distress.