Theoretical Perspectives on Health and Illness - Term Paper Example

Theoretical Perspectives on Health and Illness [Name] [Professor Name] [Course] [Date] Introduction Sociology refers to the study of the composition of the society, its organization, how individuals live and how global issues affect the state of their living (Barry and Yuill, 2002). Generally, it is essential for proper understanding of the dynamics and the structure of the society, as well as its link to human behavior or individual life changes. It examines the degree in which forms of social groups or structures and social interactions affect human actions, attitudes of opportunities. Sociological theoretical perspectives on the other hand, intend to explain social reality with reference to a number of identifiable linear causal factors (Barry and Yuill, 2002). With regard to health and illness, theoretical perspectives are also fundamental. This paper examines the concept of sociology within the area of the health. It examines why it is important that health practitioners be aware of the sociological theoretical perspectives on health and illness. It will focus on two perspectives, namely Marxism and symbolic interactionism The Marxist perspective of health and illness The perspective of Marxism is based on the interests and conflicts of the society (Coser, 1957). This sociological theoretical perspective underscores the significance of conflict in the society. Proponents of this perspective also believe that economics forms the basis of progress in the society, which can be attained through change in social stature that often results from the class of struggle -- or conflicts (Abend, 2008). This means that the principal emphasis of the Marxist perspective is on the role of material production in improving human welfare. The mass production in this case means production of basic human needs, including clothing, shelter and food, or mass production of goods in the contemporary capitalist society. Some theorists have observed that it is these forces and the factors of production that are combined to form the social structure, including health, educational, legal or political systems (Marx, 1843). Health Practitioner Awareness of Marxism The perspective of Marxism as applied within the medical sociology is orientated towards the social origins of an illness. In this regard, health outcomes are viewed as a result of influences of the capitalist economic system (Aguilar and Sen, 2009). Wealth and income are principle determinants of the standards of living, for instance they determine access to health care, recreational facilities or diet. Proponents of Marxism hold that doctors play a part as agents of social control. Basically, health practitioners should be aware of this perspective because of the following reasons (Goodman, n.d.).  First, health practitioners should understand that a holistic understanding of human health is possible with the analysis of material living conditions and its impact on human health and illness. Several theorists have posited the perception that; the most influential social groups shape material conditions. This may result to an alienating behavior that may further lead people to make unhealthy lifestyle choices (Hans-Hermann, 1990). Collectively, these are the major attributes of ill-health. Health practitioners therefore need to understand that the material conditions of life are causally connected to health and illness. This means that poverty and poor material conditions are linked to disease and illness. Health practitioners who concentrate on treating patients often have little time to use in countering the causal effects of disease and illness among the “have nots.” This is because humanity has almost naturally organized itself into different social structures, namely competition, capitalism, globalization and empire. This means that social disintegration will continue to set in as humans classify themselves. For instance, those who have limited material health may continue to accept their fate and isolate themselves in the society. Although health practitioners may be motivated by a number of variables, they should understand that it is not the caring ethic alone that propels their practice. While caring and treating is politically and socially arbitrated and shaped by forces that must often be accepted by professionals. Some experts have advised that health professionals should see health just as they are, based on material conditions of social life (Enzensberger, 2005). In addition, health professionals need to understand that the success in fixing human problems, such as health and illness, can only be realized at the individual level, rather than magnificent technologies and researches. Indeed, some Marxist theorists have postulated that if the focus is maintained at the individual, then it means that real health problems can be hidden (Fogler, 2009). For instance, historically, medicine was dominantly silent despite the prevalence inequity and poverty. This is because findings by health care practitioners along with the researches undertaken tend to concentrate on the needs of the rich while at the same time practice is based on profit-making and not satisfying the health needs of the individuals. For instance, pharmaceutical companies have resorted to quick fix expensive drugs, with the expectation of peaked shareholder profits. This has been the trend to the detriment of thorough analysis and costs of establishing the social causes of disease and illness. The social causes in this case represent the material conditions of life that cause the poor living standards (Goodman, n.d.).  Interactionist Interactionism focuses on how different players in the health care sector interact. Basically, it is concerned with how illness and the subjective experience of suffering an illness are established via doctor-patient exchange. In this case, this perspective develops from a concern with language and its significance in enabling individuals to be more self-conscious. The basis of the language accrues from the use of symbols that represent the meaning that we place on social or physical objects. There is always an exchange of these symbols in any social structure or strata that communication takes place. The general consensus is that identity is created via social interactions. Thus becoming a social being means achieving control over this process by learning to manage the impressions that other create about us (Fernback, 2007). Health Practitioners Awareness of Interactionism Health professionals should understand that in symbolic interactionism perspective, those who suffer from illnesses always construct an understanding of themselves as well as that of others out of their social experiences and the circumstances they find themselves in. In turn, this understanding has consequences in terms of the way in which they act and the manner of their reaction to them. In addition, since this perspective holds that the social identities that individuals possess are as a direct result of the way in which others react. It is important for health practitioners to understand that if they show some abnormal behavior during their practice, it is highly likely that the specific label that is attached within the society at a specific time that the behavior is demonstrated will then become attached to them as individuals. This can cause significant change in their self identity. Proponents of this perspective have argued that medicine should be perceived as a social practice that should be held into question. In the interaction between the doctor and the patient, satisfaction of the patient is likely to result if the doctor insists on a pre-existing framework upon the illness suffered by a patient. For instance, this happens in cases where the health practitioners assumes that they can understand what the patient suffers from just by interpreting the signs and symptoms exhibited by an illness, without reference to their health beliefs. The perspective is also concerned with the labeling process, such as in the diagnosis of an illness. Such labeling has the capacity to create a self-fulfilling forecast. For instance, once the patient is labeled as mentally ill, the individual may begin to behave as a mentally ill person. This means that the individual’s previous social identity is destroyed as he finds a new one, based on the new label as ascribed by the health professional (Scambler, 2013). In addition, studies have disclosed that causal relationship between the doctor and the patient is critical. Typically, the doctor-dominated interactions are the most prevalent. However, such health practitioners should understand that contrasting scenarios should also exist when the patient is allowed to dominate the interaction. Some researchers have attempted to explain that the relationship between the patient and the doctor may change between these two states of domination depending on various stages of an illness. For instance, during a severe stage of an illness, it is acceptable that the doctor dominates, while at the later stages when the patient has recuperated, it would be more beneficial of the patients is allowed to dominate the relationship by being actively involved in the conservations (Simon and Oakes, 2006). Conclusion Critical understanding of the sociological theoretical perspectives challenges the biomedical model of health and illnesses as they explain their social fundamentals. It is important that health practitioners understand them if they have to positively determine the outcome of the health care services they provide. While the Marxist theory is largely concerned with the manner in which the predominant economic structure of the society is a determinant of social strata or fragmentations in addition to impacting the relations upon which principle social institutions are established. The Interactionist approach on the other hand focuses on power centers and power relations in the constructing and managing health and illness. References Abend, S. M. (2008). Unconscious fantasy and modern conflict theory. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 28(2), 117-130. Aguilar, J. P., & Sen, S. (2009). Comparing conceptualizations of social capital. Journal of Community Practice, 17(4), 424-443. Barry, A. & Yuill, C.(2002) Understanding Health: A Sociological Introduction. London: Sage Publications Coser, L.A. (1957). “Social Conflict and the Theory of Social Change.” The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 8, No. 3. pp. 197-207. Enzensberger, H. (2005) The Radical Loser. Der Speigel 7th  November 2005 [http://www.signandsight.com/features/493.html] accessed 5th April 2013 Fernback, J. (2007). “Beyond the diluted community concept: a symbolic interactionist perspective on online social relations.” New Media & Society, vol. 9 no. 1 49-69 Fogler, S. (2009). “Using conflict theory to explore the role of nursing home social workers in home- and community-based service utilization.” Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 52(8), 859-869. Goodman, B. (n.d.) Marxism and Health care. Web. Retrieved from: [http://www.bennygoodman.co.uk/marxism-and-health-care/] Accessed 25 April 2013 Hans-Hermann, H. (1990). "Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis." The Journal of Libertan Studies, 10(12) Marx, K. (1843)  A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Introduction. Early Writings. Marx K. (1859) A contribution to the critique of political economy (Preface). Scambler, G. (2013) GBH: Greedy Bastards and health inequalities. 4th November [http://grahamscambler.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/gbh-greedy-bastards-and-health-inequalities/ ]accessed 25 April 2013 Simon, B., & Oakes, P. (2006). “Beyond dependence: An identity approach to social power and domination”. Human Relations, 59(1), 105-139. Read More