Guest Editorial: Perspectives on menstrual cycle

experiences

ROS BRAMWELL & LOUISE DYE

When we were asked to edit a special edition on the menstrual cycle, our aim was to

gather a range of papers which reflected the diversity of theoretical and research

perspectives in the area. The result is a collection of papers which approach a range of

aspects of menstrual experience from diverse and even competing perspectives. The

first four papers in the special issue consider experiences of the menstrual cycle across

the lifespan, while later papers consider the historical development of PMS and

evidence for self-help and alternative treatments.

The four papers which examine women’s experience of the menstrual cycle take very

different perspectives. The paper by Janette Perz and Jane Usher is based on feminist

psychology theory, whilst that by Tamara Newton, Rebecca Weigel and Cherie Watters

takes an evolutionary approach based on socio-ethological animal models, and Ros

Bramwell and Rabia Zeb adopt a cultural perspective. Jerilynn Prior views

menstruation in middle life from a viewpoint which, interestingly, combines personal

reflection with physiological research. These approaches seem to be completely

contrasting, but while they draw on a wide variety of methods, they all share the same

central conclusion: women’s experiences—physiological and psychological—are posi-

tioned within their social world and can change and deviate from the ‘norm’. In

contrast to medical models of the cycle, women’s experiences do not necessarily fit

either a ‘normal’ 28 day cycle or a definition of ‘illness’. Newton, Weigel and Watters

discuss the causes and consequences of different cycle lengths in younger women,

whilst Prior looks at our experiences as cycles change in the perimenopause. Menstrual

cycle research has tended to centre on younger women and standard 28 day cycles.

These papers provide thought-provoking analysis of periods when the cycles are not

standard—at the beginning and the end of menstruating.

The menstrual cycle, and especially the premenstrual phase, is experienced

negatively by many women, many of whom seek treatment for the condition. A great

deal of research has focussed on PMS and pharmacotherapy. In a historical review,

Uriel Halbreich, who has himself a long history in biomedical menstrual cycle research,

reflects on how different perspectives have driven different treatment approaches. If

Horney, rather than Dalton, had become the ‘mother’ of PMS treatment, would

pharmacological approaches have been less common and psychological ones more

supported by research and practice? Halbreich argues that the Anglo-centric research

base which favours research published in English has meant that important

JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE AND INFANT PSYCHOLOGY,VOL. 24, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2006, pp. 287–288

ISSN 0264-6838/print/ISSN 1469-672X/online/06/040287-02# 2006 Society for Reproductive and Infant PsychologyDOI: 10.1080/02646830600973842

contributions such as Horney’s have not received the attention they deserve.

Pharmacological treatments for PMS are not acceptable to many women, but cognitive

behaviour therapy, whilst shown to be equally efficacious (Hunter et al., 2002), is

available to only a few. Many women reach to herbal and homeopathic remedies rather

than pharmaceutical treatments and perceive these to be less invasive when in fact they

may be as potent as some pharmaceutical compounds. This special issue includes

papers looking at two potentially acceptable and available treatment approaches. Jane

Ussher and Janette Perz evaluate whether a self-help package alone can be as effective

as when combined with a minimal face-to-face intervention. Sarah Canning, Mitch

Waterman and Louise Dye review ‘alternative’ therapies, in the form of food

supplements and herbal preparations.

We feel proud to have brought together such a range of insightful and educational

papers on the menstrual cycle and even more proud to dedicate this special edition to

the memory of our friend and colleague, Precilla Choi, an energetic and committed

menstrual cycle researcher, whose views and work we miss from this collection.

Reference

HUNTER, M.S., USSHER, J.M., CARISS, M., BROWNE, S., JELLEY, R. & KATZ, M. (2002). Medical (fluoxetine)

and psychological (cognitive-behavioural therapy) treatment for premenstrual dysphoric disorder: a study

of treatment process. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 53, 811–817.

288 R. BRAMWELL & L. DYE