This project examined the use of 'normal' by doctors and patients in 61 oncology interviews via the methodology of conversation analysis (CA). 'Normal' was examined as an access to particular social actions. Special attention was given to how 'normal' functioned as a membership category invoked by both doctors and patients in their negotiation of the patients' identity as 'sick' or 'well.' Identity was understood as collaboratively constructed within interaction. Given the relative nature of 'normal,' attention was given to what referent of 'normal' was cited within the interaction. Three referents of 'normal' were examined: 'normal' in reference to a generic healthy person, 'normal' in reference to the patient when healthy, and 'normal' in reference to a diseased person. What referent 'normal' invoked greatly altered what 'normal' meant for both doctors and patients. The particular actions accomplished by the utterance of 'normal' by doctors and patients were also described and analyzed. Differing doctor and patient uses were compared and contrasted.