The objective of this essay is to explain the definitions of health and critically evaluate ways in which the medical profession exercise social control with reference to the ‘sick role’, the doctor / patient relationship and how the medical profession contribute to ill health.
For our society to have an understanding of health and illness and how to improve the development, we must first define health and what it means to be healthy. Health has been defined in different ways over the years. We have the negative definition, which is the ‘absence of disease’. The problem with the negative definition is that it does not include the mental, emotional and physical health of the person. It only focuses on one aspect which is the absence of the
…show more content…
It is a concept created by American sociologist Talcott Parsons in 1951. The obligations of those who are affected have to seek medical treatment/attention and to follow the doctors’ orders. They should also do everything they can to get better e.g. taking their medications, getting plenty of rest and taking care of themselves. So in return fulfilling these obligations they are discharged from social roles (daily responsibilities) which are shouldered by family or friends. The ill person is also not responsible for his or her illness. Parsons argued that being sick means that the victim enters a role of 'sanctioned deviation'. Since Parsons was a functionalist sociologist, so from a functionalist perspective, a patient is not a productive member of society.
Some of the criticism of the sick role is that it doesn’t always apply to everyone, e.g. single mothers or fathers will not be able to be discharged from social responsibilities as they have to keep taking care of their kids. Same thing applies to the sick person who does not have any friends’ or family members around to take over their social responsibilities and help them get better. The sick person is sometimes held responsible for their illness if it is associated with their social life, such as smoking and
…show more content…
Illich also argues that ‘although doctors claim to have vastly improved our health and longevity, virtually eradicating such disease as typhoid, tuberculosis and cholera, most contagious disease were in decline owing to improved sanitation before the development of vaccinations’. Illich identifies that doctors can do little about the main ‘modern epidemic’ killers such as cancer and heart disease. Rather than the medical profession working in our interest, most medical treatment are useless or dangerous, Illich argues. He meant that non-infectious illness are best treated by preventation and even early diagnosis rather than often disabling and expensive treatment. Illich also talks about medicine being poor for us whom he describes as either nemesis or iatrogenesis. Iatrogenesis means “brought forth by the healer” which Illich refers to the medical profession that makes us ill. The clinical Iatrogenisis covers the negative effects of medical treatments and the side effects of drugs, the addiction promoted by tranquillizers, as the patient comes sicker than when they went in. One example of this is the thalidomide scandal in the early 1960’s. Pregnant women were given tablets for their morning sickness, which lead to the women giving birth to
The improvement of medicine over the course of the human successes gave great convenience to the people of today. Science has cured and prevented many illnesses from occurring and is on its way to cure some of the most dreadful and harmful illnesses. As the world modernizes due to the industrialization, so does the ways of medicine. Some cures are approached by chance, some, through intense, scientific measures.
Overtime, sociology has played an essential role in the aid of healthcare policies and procedures, along with playing a fundamental role in one’s understanding of health inequalities. This paper explores how sociology has played such a role in healthcare, whilst including discussions regarding the influence of social structures and inequalities in the health of an individual, their family and community, with the topic of health variations between social classes being the main focus of the discussion. A structured overview, review and evaluation of a specific health policy in the UK will also be provided within this paper. Sociology in healthcare. Sociology can be defined in a number of ways, due to its almost limitless scope (Denny, Earle,
The sickness is not something that affects the human body but it is the poverty, violence, unaffordable healthcare, housing crises, food scarcity, and health stigma that has become normal in society. By placing a high value on health and healthcare, the patriarchal society we live in has been able to set a value on people. Thus those which are considered inferior to begin with, such as racial minorities, women or queer people, have a bigger disadvantage. The persons worth is then measured in the ability to sell labor, mediated by identity, and defines our access to the basic needs of life, those who are sick are seen as expendable in exchange of the interest of those who are "well". Hedva states, "To stay alive, capitalism cannot be responsible for our care… its logic of exploitation requires that some of us die” (2015).
The biomedical model of health has been criticised because it fails to include the psychological and social causes relating to an individual’s medical illness or health, looking only at the biological causes (Giddens and Sutton, 2013). Therefore, sociologists being aware of the impacts of social structure and lifestyle on health have put in various efforts to place the study of ‘the social’ at the core of health and healthcare examination.
Health as a Social Construction In my essay, I aim to find out why social construction affects the health of our society. Ill health may be defined as 'a bodily or mental state that is deemed undesirable'. This means that health is the condition of the body both physically and mentally. Social construction of health refers to the way health varies from one society to another.
In this essay I am going to investigate whether health is easily defined as the absence of disease or physical injury. According to Health psychology (2009) ‘World Health Organisation defined health as a complete state of physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’. In order to achieve good physical a nutrition diet is needed, healthy BMI, rest and adequate physical exercise is needed.
In some way, public health is seen as a modern philosophical and ideological perspective based on ‘equity’ and aimed to determine inequitable in society. It seen as a ‘science’ and ‘art’ in the sense that it deals with the cause of disease, treatment of illness as well as it involves laboratory experiments, intervention and promoting of health of the population. Winslow (1920, p. 23) defined public health as ‘the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting physical health and efficiency through organised community efforts for the sanitation of the environment, the control community infections, the education of the individual in principles of personal hygiene, the organisation of medical and nursing service for early diagnosis and preventive treatment of disease, and the development of social machinery which will ensure to every individual in the community a standard of living adequate for the maintenance of health. On the other hand, it is ‘the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting health through organised effort of society’ (Acheson, 1998; in Cowley S, 2002, p. 261).
Negative definition of health: negative health looks at illnesses and diseases that are not in the body and the body’s absence from them.
In society today, there is an extensive range of definitions of health and wellbeing which can be seen as both positive and negative. A Holistic view can also be identified and defined. These definitions of health have changed over time and will carry on changing within the future. According to where a family lives or their social class everyone will have different meanings and views of health and wellbeing. This may be due to what one person perceives as being healthy as another person may not. Channel 4 learning (no date) describes that a positive view of health can be seen as when a person is more likely to achieve and sustain physical fitness from exercising and are mentally stable. Therefor a negative view can be described when a person is free from illness, disease, mental distress or anything which may be a symptom of not having good health. The holistic view of health sees the person as a whole instead of just directing at one area and therefore combines physical, social, intellectual and emotional factors together. Consequently, if a person has emotional difficulties such as how they interact with other people or how they may feel but are physically fit and free from illness does not mean that they are healthy overall as one factor has difficulties. It is also vital to consider the two main theoretical concepts known as the medical and social model of health. Polity books (no date) describes that the medical model views health in terms of disease, diagnosis and then treatment and very much views a body to be separate from psychological processes. Causes of ill-health within the body are seen to require expert interference from a doctor to provide treatment to prevent or kill of an illness within the body. The Social model...
Introduction: For this essay I am going to critically discuss the biomedical model as well as the social model of health and how they both relate to the lay perspectives on health and illness.
Parson’s sick role generalizes today’s modern-day view of the sick role. It is the role given to those who experience illness beyond the physical condition of a sick state- it constitutes a social role because behaviors are shaped by institutional expectations and reinforced by the norms of society. It's based on the assumption that being sick is not deliberate or a choice of that person. According to Parsons, the sick role requires an ill person to fulfil a series of obligations to gain many rights. They are obliged to: Seek medical advice, cooperate with medical experts and therapists throughout their illness, want to get well as quickly as possible (Cockerham, 2016). In return for fulfilling these obligations they are exempt from social responsibilities and self-care, which are taken upon by family and friends. These rights, however, are granted only when a recognized medical authority, such as a doctor, acknowledges the person’s illness. Some illnesses do not justify people claiming all the rights of the sick role. For example, minor ailments may be self-treated and should not require time off work. In such circumstances, an inappropriate adoption of the sick role puts a strain on this social contract and may be met with a lack of sympathy from family and careers. This reaction can also occur when people who are genuinely sick fail to follow prescribed medical advice (Parsons,
According to World Health Organization health is defined as “‘state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease and infirmity’”. The terminology of “sick” and “well” is socially constructed from the community, family, friends, and work. Health is viewed differently on the demographic map, and communities. Gaining brighter insight into the use of health, we begin to understand the sociological perspectives. Functionalist believe that sick role is “societal expectations about the attitude and behavior of a person viewed being ill”. Early influential functionalist emphasis medicine’s role to maintain or even cure a ‘”normal”’ functioning individuals of society. In simple words, the patient or individual would be seeking to get well. It was also understood functionalist believe even disabled people were classified as sick. The downfall with functionalism is they confuse impairment and disability with the “sick role”. Talcott Parson, who is well known for his contribution to functionalism theory, outlined the behavior required of people who are considered sick. In summary he believed they are exempted from their normal, day-to-day activities. Yet they are
This also requires the person to be socially and economically productive in order to be seen as healthy. According to Mildred Blaxter (1990), there are different ways of defining health. Furthermore, disease can be seen as the presence of an abnormality in part of the body or where there is a harmful physical change in the body such as broken bones. So, illness is the physical state of disease, that is to say, the symptoms that a person feels because of the disease. However, there is some limitation of these definitions which is not merely an absence of disease but a state of physical, mental, spiritual and social wellbeing.
People in modern Britain acts in a certain way that is seen as appropriate for ill people. In the 1950s, Parsons (1951) outlined the norms that govern illness behaviour and professional responses to it, in modern society. He also saw the patient - doctor relationship as a social system, governed by norms about appropriate behaviour. Also, Parsons (1951) claimed illness as disruptive, a kind of deviance and is therefore potentially disruptive to the social order. Parsons saw society as a functioning whole, and was concerned with how the social order was maintained, and how various institutions in society in the case health care institution function... ...
In the 1960s, doctors in the United States predicted that infectious diseases were in decline. US surgeon Dr. William H. Stewart told the nation that it had already seen most of the frontiers in the field of contagious disease. Epidemiology seemed destined to become a scientific backwater (Karlen 1995, 3). Although people thought that this particular field was gradually dying, it wasn’t. A lot more of it was destined to come. By the late 1980s, it became clear that people’s initial belief of infectious diseases declining needed to be qualified, as a host of new diseases emerged to infect human beings (Smallman & Brown, 2011).With the current trends, the epidemics and pandemics we have faced have created a very chaotic and unreliable future for mankind. As of today, it has really been difficult to prevent global epidemics and pandemics. Although the cases may be different from one state to another, the challenges we all face are all interconnected in this globalized world.