The institution of health care is a broad field that has grown from humble backgrounds, in the medieval times, to a complex field coupled with technological advancements. The sociology of the health care environment with the modern societal inclinations, and the transcendence of healthy populations is majorly pegged on the ethical interactions and associations between the elements of the two worlds; healthcare and the society. Healthcare reception by the society relies on the healthy relations between the two elements. Therefore, positive interaction relations in the society are responsible for the realization of a healthy healthcare system in any society.
This case attempts to discuss the sociological attachment that is associated with the healthcare environment and society. In a research geared towards establishing the role of the society in determining the healthcare of a state, Shoemaker (1999) notes that the societal perceptions are vital in determining the extent to which the state realizes the question of proper healthcare. Cultural interactions and beliefs of the society are deemed as some of the key factors that influence the healthcare of the states. To some states, the cultural behavior may be delimiting in terms of access and acquisition of the medical practice, while it may have a greater penetration to some cultural contexts. Therefore, the sociology of the state and the cultural orientation is a factor that continues to affect the realization of proper healthcare in the medical practice.
Sociological perspective
Shoemaker (1999) defines a sociological perspective as one centeres on or focuses on statements of interrelated ideas that allow the systematization of knowledge of the social world. The knowledge is then used to explain the social world, make predictions and understanding of the social world as a whole (Watley & May, 2004). The health care environment is one of the areas where the sociological perspective has been considerably used to explain the relations and assumptions held in the medical fraternity. Rietti (2009) notes that the sociological theories like the ethics and interactions theory can be used to understand the medical practice and the prevalence of good healthcare in the society. Society is a large conglomeration of people of all backgrounds. The basic understanding g of the diversity of man and the peaceful co-existence is reached at by the recognition that human beings are social beings who must socialize. The interactions of human beings are thus guided by the ethical aspersions uniquely evaluated by individuals.
The basic understanding that human beings are social beings leads to the realization of the reasons why man adopts different cultural inclinations. To the symbolic social interactionists, the individual acts according to their unique interpretation of the meaning of the world (Watley & May, 2004). Therefore, the reception of proper healthcare in the medical practice by different communities is a result of the personal interpretation deciphered by the society. If the social hold by the community is that a practice in healthcare is unwarranted, then the community and society at large will unite against such disposition. This explains the reasons as to why certain medical practices in some societies are unacceptable. For instance, euthanasia (mercy killing) may be preferred in some instances but rejected in some regions (Rietti, 2009). In a case like this one, the social norms and functionality of the society is, therefore, prohibitive of such actions of the healthcare. This means that even if the action would appear appropriate for medical practice and health status of the country, the action cannot be undertaken due to the rebuttal by the social inclination adopted by the society.
Social Ethics in the healthcare
The healthcare environment is associated with the highest level of perfection, both in terms of practice and training. It is in this bid that the famed Hippocratic Oath was coined to safeguard the level of prudence among medical practitioners. Society sometimes may not understand the role of the Hippocratic Oath, especially in scenarios where the doctor or the medical practitioner is expected to act contrary to the medical profession in a bid to satisfy the patient’s or the society’s needs. In such a situation, the doctor is impelled to take a specific stand which is deemed right. This is irrespective of the consequences of the action. Watley and May (2004) contends in such a scenario the doctor would have acted according to Immanuel Kant’s deontological perspective. To deontologists, the action that is taken does not factor in consequence of the action. This is because the deontologists believe that what is right takes eminence before anything else. Kant argues that the human interactions and relations in the society should be guided by what is right. Undertaking an action just because its consequences are beneficial to one, therefore, does not guarantee the realization of respectful relations.
While that is the case, the utilitarianism or teleological theory hold that human beings should act according to their own perceptions provided their actions result to the greatest benefits that they could realize (MedIndia, 2012). This leads to the consequentialism view which significantly differs from the deontologists. To the consequentialist, the consequence of the actions undertaken forms the basic underlining on which the actions of people are based. Therefore, the healthcare institution is one that is guided by both the deontologists and the consequentialist approach. Whichever the approach taken, the individual is vested with, the power to decide. As Shoemaker (1999) argues, the individual reserves the greatest power in determining what is suitable for them. The situation of the healthcare practice is, therefore, still determined by the individual members in the society.
How does each theory affect the views of the individual who is part of the institution?
Achieving proper healthcare in the medical fraternity is a sole personal responsibility the individual in society. This means that members in the society determine their own capacity in determining and seeking proper medical attention. The theory holds that the individual should seek those actions that give them satisfaction. The actions taken should be able to result to proper satisfaction on the part of the individual. Therefore, the choice of pursuing proper medical attention by the individual falls squarely on the person’s decision. The views of the individual within the healthcare organization are, therefore, influenced by the view that is held. For instance, the member is held responsible for the action preferred. For instance, those who decide to follow medical attention or accord it rely on the assumption that is the action that will give them satisfaction. While that is the case, the ideological assertions of the ethical aspersions dictate that the health requirements of the individuals come before anything else. This means that the actions undertaken by the individuals are first of all based on the ethicality with which the actions come with.
Deontology and Utilitarianism influence on healthcare change
Social change in the institution of the healthcare fraternity is one that calls for greater observation. To the deontologists, the social change that is geared towards the betterment of the situation in the healthcare may be resolved on the assumptions that the change is based on what is right in the healthcare practice (MedIndia, 2012). Therefore, all efforts that that are deemed positive in the provision of good healthcare are embraced by the different faculties in the medical profession. On the other hand, the utilitarianism holds that if the consequence of the new reshuffles and changes in the healthcare will result to better effects or benefits, then the actions undertaken by the different entities are welcome. On the contrary if the actions undertaken have little benefits, then the actions undertaken are ignored hence constructing a platform on which decision making and proper policy formulation in the healthcare is based.
Conclusion
The proper and positive interactions in the society are responsible for the realization of proper healthcare in the society. This is due to the fact that the origin of thought and the consideration for better medical care stems from the individual decision. Therefore, if one feels that there is more benefits (consequences) in seeking alternative healthcare, they will seek it. On the other hand, if the action sought after is deemed right, it will be followed irrespective of the consequences (deontologists). This illuminates the need and basis upon which the society’s pursuit of better medical and healthcare is pegged.
References
MedIndia (2012). An Introduction to Biomedical Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.medindia.net/education/familymedicine/biomedical-ethics-theories.htm
Rietti, S. (2009). Utilitarianism and psychological realism. Utilitas, 21(3), 347-367. Doi: 10.1017/S0953820809990094
Shoemaker, D. W. (1999). Utilitarianism and personal identity. Journal of Value Inquiry, 33(2), 183-199. http://search.proquest.com/docview/203927544?accountid=45049
Watley, L. D., & May, D. R. (2004). Enhancing moral intensity: The roles of personal and consequential information in ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(2), 105-105. http://search.proquest.com/docview/198074625?accountid=45049
Webmaster (2012). Three Major Perspectives in Sociology
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/Three-Major-Perspectives-in-Sociology.topicArticleId-26957,articleId-26837.html
