Defining Health: Lay and Theoretical Perspectives - Essay Sample

Introduction

The World Health Organization defines health as a state of social, physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing. These four aspects overlap with one influencing the other, determining the state of wellbeing for an individual. People have different definitions for this term, depending on their culture and knowledge. This paper will define health using lay and theoretical perspectives and highlight similarities and differences between the two. It will also contain personal reflections about factors affecting the author's wellbeing since the beginning of the academic year.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Fugelli and Ingstad (2001, p.3602) described people's conceptualization of health using their nature, wellbeing, function, coping, sense of humour, and having energy. From their study, three qualities appeared to characterize the lay perspective on health: individualism, wholeness, and pragmatism. Wholeness describes health as a holistic phenomenal that relates to all aspects of society and life. It is interwoven in every feature of daily, family, working and community life. Further, health is a total, situation-specific, personal phenomenon and a resource. It is not enough to consider the absence of disease alone. The lay perspective includes life situations as a whole in this process. Svalastog et al. (2017, p. 431) report that it is paramount to take into account children's welfare and family functioning while determining wellbeing. The ability to live according to a person's value is also a significant element.

Pragmatism describes health as a reflective phenomenon. According to Fugelli & Ingstad (2001, p.3603), the experience and evaluation of health depend on the things people find reasonable to expect, given their social situation, medical condition, and their age. It is not necessarily dependent on the loss of functional abilities or freedom from disease. Instead, it includes other positive values in life, such as being realistic about one's life expectations.

The final feature of lay perspectives is individualism, which views health as a highly personal phenomenon. According to Svalastog et al. (2017, p. 431), an individual's perception of health depends on how they feel. Feelings close to other people, and being part of a society is critical. However, since every human being unique and values are individual, the strategies for improving wellbeing must be individualized.

There are three major sociological theoretical perspectives on health; functionalism, Marxist perspective, and sociological constructionism. According to functionalists, health is the backbone of the stability of society. It is a prerequisite for smooth functioning. Talcott Parsons, a leading scholar of this theory, defined health as sate where individuals have the optimum capacity to fulfil their roles in society effectively. A lack of health results in illness, which is a state of social 'deviance' that does not conform to societal norms and expectations. According to Lupton (1994, p. 4), sickness interferes with people's ability to execute usual roles in society, causing them to rely on others, thus weakens society. Functionalists view health as a natural state of the body that allows social and physical functionality.

Like the lay perspective of wholeness, functionalism considers a holistic approach to health. These two theories agree that the mere absence of physical illness is not enough to determine wellbeing. One should also take into account an individual's ability to fulfil the tasks delegated by society, such as taking care of children and family. However, functionalists may neglect some aspects of health, such as mental status. They view prolonged sickness as malingering, which can lead to stigmatization. It also differs from the lay perspective of individualism. Functionalism sees health as a community affair since it has social implications, thus designating healthcare workers as the default' gatekeepers.' On the other hand, individualism views health as a highly personal phenomenon, and society should not interfere.

Marxist perspective attributes health outcomes to capitalism. It is not only a state of being physically fit but also having the resources to maintain it. According to theorists, diseases have a social origin. Industrial production can affect health by causing injuries, diseases, or stress-related illnesses (Lupton, 1994, p.7). Also, the process can pollute the environment, and the products can cause long-term harm to the body after consumption. Wealth and income play a significant role in determining health by influencing the standards of living.

Sociological constructionism views health as a socially constructed sense of body and bodily disturbances. Social theorists describe wellbeing as being able to experience one's body as a 'field of discourse.' This should happen in a 'symbolically mediated fashion' rather than a naturalistic way. According to this perspective, health should be about what people feel, not what science and medicine tell them (Lupton 1994, p. 11). The theory embraces a social rule that requires people to have emotional and intellectual meaning within their lives. It establishes a link between self-identity, beliefs, and health. As an example, WHO's 'Health for All' promotes leading economically and socially productive lives. This perspective is similar to the lay pragmatic approach of having positive values in life.

From the above discussion, health is a combination of all these perspectives. It is a state of holistic wellbeing, including social, physical, spiritual, and mental aspects. As with individualism, individuals should have the liberty to feel the way they do and make decisions about their health. Society should not pressure or stigmatize sick people. Although recovery from illnesses should be a personal affair, it requires society input to provide favourable environments and eliminate risk factors.

Last year, I lost my younger sister in a car accident, which affected my overall health significantly. My parents moved houses in a different neighbourhood to escape the memories of my sister in our old house following this incident. It has also been hectic and exhausting to juggle between my job, family, and schoolwork as I have little time to relax. At the same time, I got a new boss and a new computer system that I had a hard time understanding how to use caused a lot of stress and pressure. I also found out one of my friends was gay and was having a rough time at school due to bullying. The ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic dealt a blow to my health. Although the virus has not affected me directly, it has dramatically disrupted my life. I started working out at home and practising healthy eating habits, which I believe has improved my immunity. Also, I started going to church and attending Bible service fellowships.

Losing my sister was the most significant blow to my health. The two of us were very close, and she was my best friend. Naturally, her death devastated me, making it almost impossible to get back to my normal routine. I chose this factor because it triggered terrible panic attacks that I am still learning to handle. At fourteen years old, I was diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorders (GAD). My sister would hold my hand and keep reassuring me that everything would be fine when they occurred. Together, we had learned how to manage the condition, and I would rarely get attacks until last year when they returned. They were terrible when they started, but the severity and frequency have been reducing over time.

On the morning of the burial, I could not stand up on my own, and my legs felt weak. This occurrence is consistent with what Knowles et al. (2019, p.420) described. All the systems of the body overwrap. Therefore, the effects of grief on the nervous system can extend to the muscles, making someone immobile. That morning, I suffered the worst panic attack I have ever had in my life. The chest pain was unbearable, my heart racing, and I could not breathe until my mother showed up and calmed me down. The attacks have been occurring since then, but the severity and frequency have been reducing over time. Being older and understanding the pathophysiology of panic attacks has made it easier for me to manage them. These occurrences are consistent with the findings of various studies.

In most cases, grief is associated with a new onset of mental health disorders. Anxiety is a natural effect of bereavement that usually wears off over time. However, the symptoms tend to be severe and persist for longer in people with a history of anxiety disorders. The reactions are especially critical if the cause of death was unexpected and the believed had a strong emotional attachment with the deceased (Keyes et al. 2014, p.869).

There is a significant association between grief and a relapse into episodes of GAD. Significant life events such as death are risk factors for this condition. According to a survey by Francis et al. (p. 389), losing a loved one reinforces the use of worry as a strategy to cope, which increases overall symptomatology of GAD, leading to relapse. My family has a strong history of heart diseases, including heart attack and hypertension. Therefore, I worry that the panic attack will damage my cardiovascular muscles, increasing my risk of early onset of these conditions.

According to Knowles et al. (2019, p.420), grief does cause not only mental but also physical effects on the body. It interferes with the ability to fight infections, exposing the person to a wide range of diseases. The authors reported that a significant number of grieving people express lower antibody response to vaccinations and a higher level of systemic infection. In my case, I came down with the flu for about three times last year despite my annual flu shot. I also suffered constant extreme fatigue, and I had little energy or interest to do anything.

The most pronounced effect of grief was in my gastrointestinal tract. Usually, my GI is very sensitive to stressors; it got worse after the loss of my sister. Knowles et al. (2019, p.431) describe GI disturbances such as diarrhoea, constipation, nausea, bloating, acid reflux, heartburn and flatulence as the most common symptoms physical effects of grief. I experienced all these symptoms within the first month after the burial. During the first month, I had a whole range of GI medications that I took depending on the symptoms. My appetite reduced drastically, and my stomach could barely hold any food. As a result, I survived mainly on fruits, smoothies and nuts for a couple of months. Most bereaved people end up having peptic ulcers and lose a substantial amount of weight, but I was lucky to escape with only the latter.

Grief relates to the definition of health described above. The loss of a loved one affects almost all aspects of wellbeing, including physical, social, and mental. From my experience, health is not the mere absence of physical illness. It is a combination of intricate factors that define a person. It is, therefore, not enough to declare someone healthy based on the presence or absence of disease only. According to numerous studies, bereavement is one of the most traumatic experiences in life (Clark and Georgellis 2013, p.501). Losing a loved one results in grief that disorients the entire health system resulting in physical and mental illnesses in some cases.

All aspects of health are intertwined; one influences the other. From my experience, losing my sister caused immense grief that made me emotionally distressed. It led to a relapse of my anxiety disorder, and other physical conditions followed. Mental status is a significant determinant of health. It affected the other systems in my body, causing me to fall sick and fail to fulfil my usual societal ro...