Overview
With the emergence of new illnesses and epidemics and rising social and economic inequality that impedes access to healthcare, the globe continues to face obstacles in handling the healthcare crises. Malaria and HIV/AIDS in developing countries, the new COVID-19 pandemic, and the rapidly rising incidence of mental disorders offer serious hurdles to efforts to address the already-existing medical care upheaval. Thus, the purpose of the presentation is to analyze the medical care crisis from a conflict perspective. Specific challenges that require addressing include the global health care system’s incapacity to offer vaccines to everyone and limited access to professional medical treatment based on state rules and income levels.
Different diseases, including MERS and tuberculosis, as well as COVID-19, have a severe long-term impact on human physical health and are accompanied by major mental issues, such as depression, anxiety, and stress (Abbas, 2021) How healthcare systems across the board address these diseases, such as quarantine and social distancing measures, lead to patients’ mental health deterioration (Abbas, 2021). The imperfection of the healthcare system explains why this problem is so urgent.
Thesis Statement: Sociological Perspective
Dealing with global pandemics and their aftereffects within the context of people’s general physical and mental health should be prioritized in the examination of the healthcare crisis that the world is currently facing. Although the world has developed vaccinations and numerous pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical methods to battle mental health concerns, the overall effect of controlling the virus and assisting individuals in maintaining their psychological well-being remains uncertain. This is why it is critical to investigate this social issue via a multifaceted lens that allows for the elicitation of the deeper roots of the social processes under examination. These might include engagement or unnoticed links to other social sectors, such as government and the economy. The analysis can be implemented within the sociological framework of the conflict perspective.
Thesis Statement: Theoretical Framework
The fundamental research question addresses the causes of the medical care crisis from the conflict perspective. When looking at health difficulties as social problems, it is vital to consider not just illness and disease but also the healthcare system (Henslin, 2020). The study’s theoretical framework incorporates relevant data on the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on human health and the deficiencies of the healthcare system. A conflict perspective will be utilized to explain the processes that underpin the contradictions generated by the development of infectious illnesses and such sociological frameworks. This perspective seeks to uncover how the government and businesses influence healthcare policy and, as a result, define solution methods (Mooney et al., 2022). Consequently, it will be stated as what encompasses the healthcare industrial complex. It is critical to explore lobbying methods in the political system, which ultimately form and announce healthcare policy.
Definitions
Relevant sociological definitions are conflict theory and conflict perspective. Henslin (2020) emphasizes that conflict theory considers society a competitive and conflicting system. Each group in society tries to pursue its interests, even if it means harming others. Based on the conflict perspective, social issues are the natural and unavoidable result of conflict over limited resources. Whatever a societal problem appears to be on the surface, its core is the conflict between groups (Henslin, 2020). The more powerful individuals oppress the less privileged people as they utilize society’s resources. Karl Marx (1818-1883) is considered the founding father of conflict theory. After seeing the Industrial Revolution, he determined that a fight for power is the hallmark of history (Henslin, 2020). According to Henslin (2020), it is critical to recognize that there are two types of social problems from the viewpoint of conflict. One social issue is the distress felt by those who are exploited by the privileged. The other social problem is when the powerful face when the exploited resist, protest, or even appeal to higher principles. At the heart of every social conflict is a struggle to allocate power and privilege.
Relevant sociological definitions are conflict theory and conflict perspective. Henslin (2020) emphasizes that conflict theory considers society a competitive and conflicting system. Each group in society tries to pursue its interests, even if it means harming others. Based on the conflict perspective, social issues are the natural and unavoidable result of conflict over limited resources. Whatever a societal problem appears to be on the surface, its core is the conflict between groups (Henslin, 2020). The more powerful individuals oppress the less privileged people as they utilize society’s resources. Karl Marx (1818-1883) is considered the founding father of conflict theory. After seeing the Industrial Revolution, he determined that a fight for power is the hallmark of history (Henslin, 2020). According to Henslin (2020), it is critical to recognize that there are two types of social problems from the viewpoint of conflict. One social issue is the distress felt by those who are exploited by the privileged. The other social problem is when the powerful face when the exploited resist, protest, or even appeal to higher principles. At the heart of every social conflict is a struggle to allocate power and privilege.
Objective and Subjective Dimensions of Medical Care Crisis
Identify and discuss both dimensions of the social problem (review “objective and subjective dimension” concepts in Chapter 1).
Objective and subjective conditions are a social problem’s two essential characteristics. Henslin (2020) acknowledges that the term “objective condition” refers to a societal condition that may be measured or experienced. The subjective concern relates to people’s distress about a particular element of society. Hence, a social problem is some aspect of society (the objective condition) about which a large number of people are worried (the subjective concern) and would want to see change.
The objective dimensions are based on government attempts to control the crisis, including social distancing and quarantine, which are pushing the world into an economic downturn. Bohoslavsky (2020) states that some governments appear to be advocating the ‘saving the economy’ approach at any cost, even putting the citizens’ well-being in danger. Consequently, the subjective dimensions relate to people’s general physical and mental health concerns.
Theoretical Component
The theoretical component focuses on the investigation of the economy-centric approach of governments that causes social inequalities that consequently impact psychological well-being. The economy-centric approach is frequently coupled with a lack of excitement for reducing disparities; it does not ensure economic and social rights achievement. ‘Saving the economy’ implies putting the interests of a dominant elite first (Bohoslavsky, 2020). Hence, such a reductionist vision of the economy cannot serve as a trump card, mainly because the general economy must enable most people to achieve their social and economic rights. Knipe et al. (2020) claim that in the absence of viable vaccinations or treatments, governments throughout the world are attempting to restrict the disease through public health measures such as physical distancing and self-isolation. Thus, the pandemic and the public health response have a negative impact on the population’s mental health through job loss, debt, and social isolation. Additionally, the medical-industrial complex refers to medical firms prioritizing profit over patients and public health outcomes.
Content: The core causes
From the conflict perspective, the core causes of the medical care crisis are the medical-industrial complex, the economy-centric approach, and social inequalities.
The medical-industrial complex refers to a power system based on a convergence of economic interests, including the medical profession, governments, service providers, payers, and medical technology producers (Busfield, 2017). As a result, the complex is more concerned with profit than with the community’s health. When people’s lives and health are in danger, business, as usual, cannot continue operating. Governments must guarantee that public health systems do not collapse and that health policies and regulations do not deteriorate (Bohoslavsky, 2020). Nonetheless, they stay capable of managing disease transmission through an economy-centric approach focusing on profits instead of citizens’ physical and mental well-being. Economic circumstances may force people to choose between limiting food consumption, homeownership, and receiving medical treatment(Bohoslavsky, 2020). As a result of societal inequities, there is a healthcare crisis, which undermines citizens’ psychological well-being.
Content: Possible structural solutions
Governments may consider expanding social programs and assessing universal basic income levels. According to Bohoslavsky (2020), the solutions to removing social inequalities and the economy-centric approach include dismissing mortgage repayments and evictions; canceling private debt-servicing for people unable to deal with the public health crisis and without income; instituting a prohibition on existing sovereign debt for debt-distressed low- and middle-income countries; and constructing universal health coverage following international human rights standards. Public investments must also target small and medium-sized businesses to create long-term sustainable employment while emphasizing the fulfillment of social rights. Health care facilities should design multilayered, proactive strategies that employ the latest available clinical information and expand their existing surge capacity plans (Hick et al., 2020). Therefore, healthcare institutions and practitioners must be prepared to maximize the value of limited resources while minimizing damage to patients.
Content: Possible individual actions
The global medical-industrial complex’s policies waste money on disease management and harm patients. People worldwide should act against the medical-industrial complex’s policies and its corruption of physicians, governments, and healthcare institutions, which result in patient suffering and death. According to the American Academy of Ambulatory Care Nursing (n.d.), individuals are the most successful lobbyists. Lobbying is simply the timely and successful communication of citizens’ opinions on local, state, or national policy problems to the elected authorities. There are various ways of lobbying available to the average citizen. Face-to-face encounters, phone conversations, letters, and e-mails are examples (American Academy of Ambulatory Care Nursing, n.d.).
Citizens contribute a distinct viewpoint to health care concerns, and they frequently have extensive information that provides insight for the country’s politicians.
Conclusion: The causes
The uncontrolled development of COVID-19 pandemic waves has triggered a new chain of physical ailments, as well as significant mental health difficulties. As the global spread evolves, there is a severe threat to world peace and well-being. According to the conflict perspective, the medical care crisis’s fundamental reasons are the medical-industrial complex, the economy-centric approach, and social inequality. Governments should reduce disparities and poverty rather than just supporting wealthy firms and investors without imposing social constraints.
Conclusion: The solutions
Governments may consider extending social services and determining the level of universal basic income. It is critical to cancel private debt servicing for individuals who cannot deal with the public health crisis and are unable to work. People throughout the globe should use lobbying to oppose the medical-industrial complex’s agendas and corruption.
References
Abbas, J. (2021). Crisis management, transnational healthcare challenges and opportunities: The intersection of COVID-19 pandemic and global mental health. Research in Globalization, 3(1), 1-7. Web.
American Academy of Ambulatory Care Nursing (n.d.). The ABCs of lobbying. Web.
Bohoslavsky J. P. (2020). COVID-19 economy vs human rights: A misleading dichotomy. Health and human rights, 22(1), 383–385. Web.
Busfield, J. (2017). The concept of medicalisation reassessed. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(5), 759-774. Web.
Henslin, J. M. (2020). Revel for social problems: A down-to-earth approach (13th ed.). Pearson.
Hick, J. L., Hanfling, D., Wynia, M. K., & Pavia, A. T. (2020). Duty to plan: Health care, crisis standards of care, and novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. NAM Perspectives, 2020, Web.
Knipe, D., Evans, H., Marchant, A., Gunnell, D., & John, A. (2020). Mapping population mental health concerns related to COVID-19 and the consequences of physical distancing: a Google trends analysis. Wellcome Open Research, 5(82). Web.
Mooney, L., Clever, M., & Willigen, M. (2022). Understanding social problems (11th ed.). Cengage Learning.