Health and Illness are Social Phenomena - Essay Example

Health and illness are social phenomena s Submitted by s: Social construction of health and illness is a critical research dimension as far as medical sociology is concerned (Hardey, 1998, p. 28). To start with, various illnesses are entrenched with cultural meanings that are not direct derivatives of the nature of the condition, which determine the manner in which the society reacts to those affected while influencing the experiences associated with the specific illness (Harris, 2010, p. 41). Secondly, all the illnesses are constructed socially depending on the experiences that people have based on how people are able to understand and live with the illnesses they have. Thirdly, medical knowledge concerning illnesses and diseases does not come from nature; instead, it is created people who come up with claims as well as interested parties. Therefore, social constructionism provides a significant counterpoint to the mainly deterministic methodologies associated with medicine in relation to illnesses and diseases while assisting in the widening of policy considerations and choices. Introduction The social construction of illness and disease has developed to become the main focus of numerous researches in the last half a century especially in the sub-discipline of medical sociology. It has contributed considerably to the better appreciation of the social viewpoints of illness (Giarelli and Vignera, 2012, p. 67). Social constructionism can be considered as a conceptual framework that stresses the cultural as well as historical features of occurrences which are broadly perceived to be entirely natural. The stress is on the manner in which the definitions of phenomena do not essentially inhere in the phenomena themselves; instead it develops through relations in a social setting. Considered in a different manner, social constructionism evaluates how people and groups contribute to the production of apparent social reality along with knowledge. When illness is considered from a social constructionist point of view, it is entrenched in the broadly theoretical difference between disease which is a biological condition and illness which is a social condition. Even though there is disparagement of this distinction, it still remains useful as a conceptual instrument. The medical model that makes the assumption that diseases are general and that they do not vary depending on time and place, social constructionists’ stress that the meaning and experience associated with illness is determined by both cultural and social structures (Good, 1994, p. 8). Therefore, illness does not merely exist in nature waiting for discovery by scientific researchers and physicians; instead, illness is a social designation that has not been defined by medical facts yet (Rainwater, 2011, p. 177). Nonetheless, there are bio-physiological conditions of the body or events that occur naturally but these cannot be considered as consequential illnesses or diseases. In the conceptual distinction of diseases and illnesses, the disease section is suitable for an analysis using social constructionism, as long as what is considered a disease is negotiated socially. Cultural meaning of illness Numerous medical sociologists argue that illnesses have biological and experiential mechanisms and that these mechanisms do not necessarily depend on each other (Nigg, 2006, p. 208). Culture as well as biology dictates the kinds of illnesses that face stigmatization and those that do not, those that denote a disability and those that do not as well as those that can be contested as opposed to those that can be defined unquestionably. For example social stigmas hamper people from being fully integrated into the society. When a patient is stigmatized, he or she feels the greatest effect and the form of care he or she receives is also affected (Baum, 1997, p. 214). It has been argued from many quarters that the societies as well as institutions that are meant to provide health care discriminate against particular diseases such as mental disorders, STDs as well as ski disorders. Facilities that treat these conditions may be below per and may be isolated from the other areas in the health facility placed in a setting that is poorer than that of the rest of the facility. This stigma may discourage people from seeking assistance for their illnesses therefore worsening their conditions. The contested illnesses such as chronic fatigue which are questioned by the physicians may be either true or perceived by the patients. This factor may have an effect on the patient as well as the kind of treatment the patient decides to seek. The functionalist view of health and illness This conceptual view emphasizes the fundamental stability and cooperation that exists within contemporary societies. The explanation of social occurrences is done through referring to the functions they are supposed to perform in allowing continuity in the society. Society itself is equated to a biological organism since the entirety is considered to be constituted by both interrelated and combined components and this incorporation is based on the general consensus of key values and norms. Through socialization, the rules of the society can be learnt and consequently decoded into roles. Therefore, unanimity is seemingly achieved through creating a structure that guides the behaviour of humans. In regard to medical sociology, this methodology focuses on the theme associated with the sick role as well as the related phenomenon of illness behaviour. Therefore, is denoted as a social phenomenon instead of an entirely physical condition, while health being the opposite of illness is described as: “The state of optimum capacity of an individual for the effective performance of the roles and tasks for which he or she has been socialized.” (Rothstein, 1985, p. 139). In the Functionalist view, health is considered a requirement for a society that functions efficiently and therefore being sick means that one is failing in the regard of fulfilment of roles in the society making illness appear as an unmotivated aberration. Regulating the sickness is consequently achieved through the instrument of the “sick-role” concept as well as the related “social control” role that is played by physicians that allows people to acquire a sick status. The Marxist view of illness and health A significant affirmation of the Marxist view is that production in a material manner is the most essential of all the activities associated with humans from producing the simplest human necessities like food and housing in a sustenance economy to the mass production of goods in the contemporary consumerist society. When this production occurs in the contemporary or sustenance economy, it entails a form of organization and the utilization of suitable tools and all these elements are considered as being the forces of production. Marx considered production of any form as encompassing social connections. In the contemporary consumerist society, the relations of production result in the creation of division of labour thereby demonstrating the presence of varying social classes. In Marx’s argument, the forces and relations associated with production when blended together create the economic foundation of the society. The framework of the society in regard to politics, education and health systems among others, are influenced and controlled by this economic foundation. The manner in which this approach is oriented as applied in medical sociology is in the direction of social origins of particular diseases. The health effects of the society are considered as being subjective to the way the consumerist economy structure operates at two echelons. The first level entails the production itself where health is affected in a direct manner through industrial diseases and injuries as well as ill health associated to stress, or indirectly from the broader effects of the process involved in producing goods in the contemporary society. The outcome of the production process is pollution of the environment, and the consumption of the produced goods has long term health concerns that are associated with car accidents and eating processed foods among others. Secondly, health is impacted at the distribution level where income and wealth are the main factors that determine the standards of living of different people in regard to where they reside, access to basic needs and the recreational activities they engage in. All these elements are critical to creating a social pattern as far as health is concerned. The symbolic interactionist view of illness and health This view arose from a concern with language and the manner in which it allows human beings to become unsure. The foundation of any language is the utilization of symbols that demonstrate the meanings that have been endowed to physical and social objects. In the social environments where communication occurs, there is always an interchange of these symbols in that, individual seek clues that will assist in the interpretation of the behaviour and intent of other individuals. Since communication is a two-way occurrence, it can be described as an informative process that entails a concession between the parties that are taking part in the process. The interactionist dimension affirms that an individual’s social identity is influenced by the response to other people. Therefore, if a person demonstrates behaviour that is deviant or out of the ordinary, there are high chances that that specific label attached in the society at a certain time to the said conduct will then develop an attachment to the individual (Brent, 2014, p. 357). This may develop significant changes to people’s self-identities. The diagnosis of a disease such as depressions and creating assumptions about the individual is an example of this kind of label. From this view, medicine may also be considered as a social discipline, and its assertions as an independent science may then be in doubt. When doctors and patients are interacting, the patient may become dissatisfied when the doctor rigidly overlays a pre-existing structure on the subjective illness experience that is associated with the patient. For instance, by arrogantly assuming that they understand a person’s misery based on an elucidation of their signs and symptoms without referring to what they believe in terms of health. Social constructionist view of illness and health This particular view based on sociology originates from the phenomenological methodology associated with Berger and Luckmann (Cooke and Philpin, 2008, p. 162). They develop the argument that day to day knowledge is created by individuals and is designed to deal with real-world issues. Therefore, the creation of facts takes place through social communications and how people interpret the facts that arise. This fundamentally subjectivist methodology embraces various differing sociological archetypes. However, the common attributes that exist between these archetypes in regard to health and illness is an emphasis on the manner in which human beings make sense of their bodies and disturbances that take place in them. Social constructionism does not dwell on creating a distinction between scientific and social knowledge. It also does not disregard diseases so that it can assess the illness experience as compared to the interactionist view. Nevertheless, it stresses that all the knowledge is constructed socially as human beings are considered to get knowledge of the world through the notion they have concerning it as well as what they believe. In regard to the construction of the illness experience, personality of an individual as well as their culture is critical. In some cases, prolonged illness makes the world seem smaller and more defined about the illness than any other phenomenon. In other cases, illnesses may provide an opportunity for discovery, and reinventing a new self. Culture is significant in determining the manner in which people go through illnesses. Prevalent diseases such as AIDS have particular cultural indicators that have evolved with time and control how the communities as well as individuals perceive them. Presently, numerous institutions that are concerned with wellness recognize the level of personal views that determine the nature of health as well as illness. In relation to physical activities, the CDC suggests that people use a regular degree of exertion to evaluate their physical activities (Healey and Zimmerman, 2010, p. 124). This rating develops a more comprehensive view of a person’s true exertion level as medication and other issues may affect heart rates and pulses. In the same manner, numerous medical professionals employ a compatible scale in the assessment of professed pain to assist in the determination of strategies that will deal with the pain. Conclusion There is a possibility of stating that human beings have nature, but greater significance lies in stating that human beings create their own nature or human beings produce themselves. It is critical to stress that the connection between human beings and the social world is dialectic, meaning that human beings interact with their social world. According to a social constructivist, health, illnesses and well as medical care all constitute social facts, in that, they are constructed socially to describe and provide meanings to particular classes of occurrences. Behaviours or experiences associated with a society’s members are considered as signs or symptoms depending on cultural values, societal norms as well as rules of interpretation that are shared throughout culture (Mishler, 1981, p, 141). This methodology contradicts the biomedical model of diseases as denoted through referring to general standards that are not dependent on culture. The social construction of illness as well as health creates a critical antagonistic standpoint to the essentially deterministic attitude of medicine in regard to illnesses and health. As a result of this, the planning of policies along with decision-making has a wider area to operate in. it is clear that social institutions and structures have far-reaching and persistent influences, and individuals get a lot of influence from ideas that have been socially constructed in relation to norms associated with health dynamics. Through a social constructionist view, the medical sociologists possess the ability to connect and appreciate health and illnesses in various different ways. Sociologists should endeavour to stress the significance of social movements in relation to the health care system (Brown, 1995, p. 49). Movements and activists in such areas as occupational health and the health of women have been critical in numerous ways including demonstrating how more resources can be acquired to prevent and treat the diseases that have already been identified. Bibliography Baum, A. 1997, Cambridge handbook of psychology, health, and medicine, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Brent, E. 2014, Learn sociology, Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington, MA. Brown, P. 1995, Naming and framing: The social construction of diagnosis and illness. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, pp.34--52. Cooke, H. and Philpin, S. 2008, Sociology in nursing and healthcare, Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier. Edinburgh. Giarelli, G. and Vignera, R. 2012, Sociology and sociology of health, F. Angeli, Milano. Good, B. 1994, Medicine, rationality, and experience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hardey, M. 1998, The social context of health. Open University Press, Buckingham [England]. Harris, A. 2010, AIDS, sexuality, and the Black church, Peter Lang, New York. Healey, B. and Zimmerman, R. 2010, The new world of health promotion, Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, Mass. Mishler, E. 1981, Social contexts of health, illness, and patient care, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge [Cambridgeshire]. Nigg, J. 2006, What causes ADHD?, Guilford Press, New York. Rainwater, L. 2011, Deviance & liberty, AldineTransaction, New Brunswick. Rothstein, J. 1985, Measurement in physical therapy, Churchill Livingstone, New York. Read More