-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Misery White on Real Life Superheroes
- ylukovsky on Crying Wolf – False Rape Accusations
- ylukovsky on Crying Wolf – False Rape Accusations
- proffessor on Crying Wolf – False Rape Accusations
- Rob McGoldrick on SEC reviewing S&P handling on downgrade
Frequent Topics
- ADHD
- Becker
- Britain
- Broken Windows Theory
- Conrad and Schneider
- control
- crime
- criminals
- criminal surveillance
- criminal youth
- delinquency
- Depression
- Deviance
- deviant behavior
- Deviants
- DNA profiling
- escape
- FBI
- female murderer
- film
- flash mobs
- Graffiti
- justice
- Lombroso
- medicalization of deviance
- Moral Panic
- Outsiders
- Philadelphis
- police
- Poweres that be
- prison
- privacy
- profiling
- racism
- riots
- serial killer
- social construction of illness
- social network
- society
- Stereotyping
- Stigma
- tattoos
- traceable
- Typecasting
- Women
Archives
Categories
Meta
Category Archives: Assignment 4
Protected: Medicalization of Deviance Gone Wrong!
Posted in Assignment 4
Tagged Conrad and Schneider, illness, medicalization of deviance, Poweres that be
Enter your password to view comments.
medicalization over crime?
I really enjoyed reading this article! The way society is becoming, it seems as though, you have to have all this medication, to be normal. I think that doctors try to prescribe pills, and different medicines, for things that cannot be helped by medicines. Criminals however, are exempted from the legal justice system by being conducted via several tests on becoming “fit for trial” in order to decide a lighter faith due to the lack on mental healthiness. Doctors that give all these medications to kids, or individuals and whoever, doesn’t always help these individuals to cope with their disorders, resulting in worse side effects or actions that are immoral for the norms of society. Although not treating these disorders with proper medication, ca result in worse future for patients, having too many can end up on the same path as the untreated. The right amount and somehow, coming to a balance between medication and reality of the disease, with close supervision and right treatment, a sick mind can walk among healthy ones with no visual discrepancy.
laurentio
Posted in Assignment 4
Tagged crime, justice, medicalization
Comments Off on medicalization over crime?
Medicating Kids for the Wrong Reasons and Selfish Mothers
In this article from Today, researchers send out questionnaires to 26,000 mothers in an attempt to better understand parenting behavior. They found the following answers:
– 45% of moms would rather weigh 15 pounds less than add 15 points to their child’s IQ.
– 42% of moms would prefer a 50% raise at work than spend 50% more time with their kids.
– 23% of moms would choose a different spouse to raise a family with.
– 1 in 5 moms medicate their child with Benadryl or Tylenol before a long car or flight.
I think these statistics show us that children really are not always the problem. Parents just often want to think of themselves before their children, and often will not admit that. The need to medicate children just to cope really shows that there are very deep underlying issues involved in the practice of medicating children for the right reasons. The topic of losing weight instead of raising your child’s IQ is really a sad reality, since working out can easily cause any mother lose weight. These mothers just seem lazy, self centered and have their priorities mixed up. In regards to these statistics and the documentary about medicating children, I think there needs to be less of a focus on the problems caused by children, and more of a focus on dealing with parenting. Medication should never be the quick fix that it’s being used as. Tylenol and Benadryl might not cause that much harm, as opposed to anti-depressants, but they are being used as sedatives instead of their intended purpose. If a parent does not want to spend time with their children, and deal with the hardships of raising an active kid, they should seek therapy or an alternative to these medications.
Hegemony & How We Define Deviants
In the following Monty Python clip from the “Holy Grail” movie, a wandering King Arthur encounters two peasants and discusses the nature of their political system. The peasant intellectually outmuscles and corrects the King over and over until the King exhibits “violence that is inherent in the system”.
The joke is clear here: no one would expect the peasant to be so knowledgable on political science, philosophy and political systems. But he is, which is what catches the king off guard.
In a broader sense, this peasant is a deviant. He is unlike his fellow peasants in that he is well read, articulate, politically aware and has the will power to stand up for his own unorthodox views. This reminds of me Conrads article “From Badness to Sickness”, where he argues that some definitions of criminals and deviants enjoy a hegemony over others. By this, Conrad meant that some definitions are more favorable than others in a given context, and this hierarchy of ways to explain deviance leads to a certain criteria being established to categorize criminals, which may not necessarily be the best or most accurate.
So going back to the video, the the peasant would be defined as a deviant (and I mean deviant in the most literal sense as someone/something that is “going against the grain”). The hegemonic definition that leads one to this label is one that is based upon the idea that most peasants in that era never question authority, are not well read or well educated, and are therefore never individually a threat to supreme power. This peasant was different, and is thus a deviant (which is the basis for the joke!)
Clearly, our view of deviants in different social classes has changed. It is not as uncommon now that a peasant (or to be more PC, someone from the lower strata of our economy) would be well read and well educated. In fact, America prides itself on the image of a working, raise-yourself-by-the-bootstraps citizen (even though this may not be an accurate reflection of reality). The deviant definition that was shown in the video was one of class-stagnation: if you were born a peasant, you would remain a peasant. Now our definitions for deviants are much more complex and fluid, so its not like we would expect the richest people to be the smartest and the poorest to be the most intellectually inept.
Conrad discusses how our definitions of criminals are evolving and are relying more on medical definitions. I agree that this shift is occurring. The only thing I can hope for is that in this shift of definition, we never stop scrutinizing our approach and our criteria for what a deviant is. In the same way the peasant in the video was challenging the hegemonic assumption of the King, we should go about doing the same. We can not accept any practice, system or ideology as a superior fact just because it exists.
Additionally, it helps to understand why someone acts in the way they do from many perspectives. The King approaches this problem by only analyzing the peasant based on his social class. This one tracked approach was clearly faulty. Instead, we much analyze deviants psychologically, politically, sociologically, philosophically, scientifically and medically if we are to get the best possible explanation and understanding of their behavior and nature. We can not accept hegemonic definitions as an end all be all.
As the peasant tells the king: “Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. ”
-Nikhil
Posted in Assignment 4
Tagged Conrad Deviants Deviance Crime Labels Badness to Sickness Medicine Medical Social Construction Monty Python
Comments Off on Hegemony & How We Define Deviants
From Unhappiness to Depression
In this talk of the nation on NPR, there is a discussion between Gary Greenberg, author of “Manufacturing Depression: The Secret History of a Modern Disease” and Peter Kramer, MD, author of “Against Depression” about the increase in diagnosis of depression. Mr. Greenberg believes the disease is overdiagnosed. He says the move from unhappiness to depression was a long and gradual process. He said it all started in the 1960’s when Merck created an antidepressant drug called elavil and needed to sell it. Merck’s marketing campaign said in order to sell the drug you must associate it with a disease. At this time, Frank Ayd wrote a book for doctors called, “Recognizing the depressed patient” to provide doctors with a script to look for patients who fit into that diagnosis of depression.
Mr. Greenberg also states that Merck was not only advertising the drug but they were also advertising the idea of depression, they were advertising the “disease”. He also points out that doctors still don’t know much about the biochemistry of depression but that one wouldn’t know that when they go to see their doctor. In the discussion they also mention the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) which is a questionnaire that rates the severity of symptoms observed in depression such as low mood, insomnia, agitation, anxiety and weight loss and the fact that this scale is the most commonly used for rating depression and it doesn’t always give a depressed person the correct diagnosis and/or treatment.
Peter Kramer states that “it is hard to measure depression with the Hamilton scale and it cannot assign the right medication”. Both Kramer and Greenberg agree that those depressed don’t always get the correct treatment. Mr. Greenberg says, antidepressants don’t do much better than a placebo if one isn’t majorly depressed. He also believes that there are social issues of depression like one losing their job, working too much and not having enough time for family, etc. but says that the country doesn’t care much about that, they would rather treat it with medication.
I thought this discussion was very interesting because it shows what Conrad and Schneider wrote about in the article “From Badness to Sickness” about the power of the medical profession and how drug companies with a profit motive can create diseases such as depression to make money and get away with it. In the article by Conrad and Schneider, they state, “The medical profession dominates the organization of health and has a virtual monopoly over anything that is defined as an illness a “medical” treatment. All the medical profession has to do is make a claim and turn something like unhappiness into depression, so that they can medically treat it with a pill.
Posted in Assignment 4
Tagged Conrad and Schneider, Depression, medicalization of deviance, overdiagnosis
15 Comments
Photo Evidence in Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal
In the beginning of 2004 instances of prisoners abuse in Abu Ghraib prison came to the public attention. Many of 30.000 Iraqi prisoners were tortured by US military officials, CIA interrogators and independent contractors during interrogations or “for fun”.
United States Army Criminal Investigation Command started criminal investigation and some evidences were revealed to media. In April 2004 television news-magazine 60 minutes II aired a story on the abuse, including picture evidences. Harsh’s article in The New Yorker followed with detailed report on this case. (wikipedia )
Some picture you can find easily online, the link I post here is to the “wired” magazine’s webpage that came not from government officials, but from psychologist who had access to them.
Only fraction of photo evidences were released to public, the rest were presented in court behind the shut doors. Even though the case took place in 2008, there are still debates about whether or not the rest of pictures should be published.
I found it interesting to bring up this case for our class for a few reasons. First, as we see from the fact that picture evidences for this case are still a hotly debated topic, they played a major role in the case itself and in attracting public attention to it. It serves as a proof of how powerful photo evidence can be in law. Secondly, even though in some court cases picture evidences may be arguable evidence as picture only depicts a moment in time and can give a false presentation of what was happening at that time, in this case pictures were backed up by testimonies and video tapes. It also serves as an example of how much easier it is to get public attention and sentiment when case is supplied with vivid images.
Finally, Abu Ghraib prison scandal connects us with last weeks discussion of Foucault reading. Foucault argues that prisons are products of the switch from punishment to discipline, whether in Abu Ghraib prison detainees were clearly punished, not disciplined, often without a cause or reason.
Medication overload!!!
I have come across this very interesting article and it spoke about our generation being overpopulated with people taking medication for literally everything. I have to agree that we are a generation that can not deal with the simplest of things and situations. We tend to always want to find the easy way out. Looking for a bandaid or a quick fix to make everything okay. This is very scary to me because it has started with the adults and is progressing to children as young as a couple of months old.
People take medicine for depression, sleep disorders, and attention deficit disorder. Although there are people who truly do suffer immensely from these disorders and cant help it but take medication for it, but when the majority of the population thinks they have these disorders; thats where the problem starts. The article said that drug companies have pushed the selling of drugs through ads and commercials and have influenced people to believe they have some sort of disorder and thats how they sell their drugs.
My opinion on this topic is that we live in a country where we want to do everything and accomplish so much at one time that we will medicate ourselves just to get through the day. It has gotten so bad that we give medication to our hyper-active children to calm them down so that we dont have to deal with them while trying to accomplish our own personal tasks either at home or at work. Whatever happened to kids just being kids? Maybe these kids are over active because they seek attention from their parents. Instead of medicating these children and putting a medical label on them, why not try talking and spending time with them and find out the true problem. It might not be a disorder afterall.
My point in all of this is that we need to take time for ourselves and relax because Rome wasnt built in a day and we need to face that. For ourselves, our children, and future generations, we need to stop this over medication of society now because if we dont, we will become a country full of robots. We will keep taking medicine for every little thing we dont like about ourselves or cant deal with and we will be controlled by these pills and drugs. We will become a generation full of drug addicts.
Sidewalk Rage is real!
Hey guys. After we left class on monday I was thinking deeper into the social construction of illnesses and the first connection I made was to something I remembered seeing on the news a couple weeks ago. Well with alittle online-searching I found an article (actually a few!) reporting it.
I chose this article out of all the others mainly because it appeared on The Wall Street Journal, a pretty reputable, popular and wide spread publication that reaches millions of people. To summarize, the important parts of the article pretty much say that we now have developed the concept of “sidewalk rage” and defined it as something that, in extreme cases, can signal a psychiatric condition known as “intermittent explosive disorder”. Sidewalk rage is “real” and one scientist has even gone to the extent to develop a “Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome Scale” to help classify the levels of rage people experience. The article mentions how scientists are trying to figure out what it is that really makes people angry so that when it becomes a personal problem it can be helped. “When your emotionally upset, your impared,” says Dr. Leon James from the article (which is perhaps why scientists and doctors are exploring this concept more). The article then goes on to give symptoms, scenarios, and suggestive tips for you to keep your cool on the sidewalk and help prevent sidewalk rage.
OK, to me, this is ridiculous. This is New York City, the streets are crowded, its summertime and hot out, if your in a rush and getting slowed down by a mob of tourists I’m sure EVERYONE has felt frustrated! I believe these are normal, natural feelings given our location and lifestyle! For society to minimize something all the way down to “sidewalk rage” and even associate it at all with a medical condition really seems stupid. Millions of men and women are getting brainwashed with this and can then perhaps use it as an excuse to justify their behavior they do something rash; especially if their reasoning has medical associations! Dont get me wrong if someone is getting mad at people on the sidewalk non stop/everyday I definitely think it could be abnormal (because honestly, its not THAT big of a deal!) but to me, “sidewalk rage” is fake and if its that much of an issue its just plain old rage and will most likely be exhibited in other scenarios throughout life and should be treated for those reasons of its own.
