Health1
refers to the extent of a person’s physical, mental, and social well-being.
This definition, taken from the World Health Organization’s treatment of health,
emphasizes that health is a complex concept that involves not just the soundness of
a person’s body but also the state of a person’s mind and the quality of the social
environment in which she or he lives. The quality of the social environment in turn
can affect a person’s physical and mental health, underscoring the importance of
social factors for these twin aspects of our overall well-being.
Medicine2
is the social institution that seeks both to prevent, diagnose, and treat
illness and to promote health as just defined. Dissatisfaction with the medical
establishment has been growing. Part of this dissatisfaction stems from soaring
health-care costs and what many perceive as insensitive stinginess by the health
insurance industry, as the 2009 battle over health-care reform illustrated. Some of
the dissatisfaction also reflects a growing view that the social and even spiritual
realms of human existence play a key role in health and illness. This view has fueled
renewed interest in alternative medicine. We return later to these many issues for
the social institution of medicine.
The Sociological Approach to Health and Medicine
We usually think of health, illness, and medicine in individual terms. When a person
becomes ill, we view the illness as a medical problem with biological causes, and a
physician treats the individual accordingly. A sociological approach takes a
different view. Unlike physicians, sociologists and other public health scholars do
not try to understand why any one person becomes ill. Instead, they typically
examine rates of illness to explain why people from certain social backgrounds are
more likely than those from others to become sick. Here, as we will see, our social
location in society—our social class, race and ethnicity, and gender—makes a
critical difference.
The fact that our social backgrounds affect our health
may be difficult for many of us to accept. We all know
someone, and often someone we love, who has died
from a serious illness or currently suffers from one.
There is always a “medical” cause of this person’s
illness, and physicians do their best to try to cure it and
prevent it from recurring. Sometimes they succeed;
sometimes they fail. Whether someone suffers a serious
illness is often simply a matter of bad luck or bad genes:
we can do everything right and still become ill. In
saying that our social backgrounds affect our health,
sociologists do not deny any of these possibilities. They
simply remind us that our social backgrounds also play
an important role (Cockerham, 2009).Cockerham, W. C.
(2009). Medical sociology (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
A sociological approach also emphasizes that a society’s
culture shapes its understanding of health and illness
and practice of medicine. In particular, culture shapes a
society’s perceptions of what it means to be healthy or
ill, the reasons to which it attributes illness, and the
ways in which it tries to keep its members healthy and
to cure those who are sick (Hahn & Inborn, 2009).Hahn, R. A., & Inborn, M. (Eds.).
(2009). Anthropology and public health: Bridging differences in culture and society (2nd
ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Knowing about a society’s culture,
then, helps us to understand how it perceives health and healing. By the same
token, knowing about a society’s health and medicine helps us to understand
important aspects of its culture.
An interesting example of culture in this regard is seen in Japan’s aversion to organ
transplants, which are much less common in that nation than in other wealthy
nations. Japanese families dislike disfiguring the bodies of the dead, even for
autopsies, which are also much less common in Japan than other nations. This
cultural view often prompts them to refuse permission for organ transplants when
a family member dies, and it leads many Japanese to refuse to designate themselves
as potential organ donors (Sehata & Kimura, 2009; Shinzo, 2004).Sehata, G., &
Kimura, T. (2009, February 28). A decade on, organ transplant law falls short. The
Daily Yomiuri [Tokyo], p. 3; Shinzo, K. (2004). Organ transplants and brain-dead
donors: A Japanese doctor’s perspective. Mortality, 9(1), 13–26.

0 Comments