Essay on Medicine and Society

Most American citizens would agree that modern medicine has drastically changed American Society. The progression of medicine has impacted American lives in multiple ways. It has changed how the United States military uses medicine, how American scientists research medicine, and how everyday American citizens use medicine. Just 100 years ago, the people of the time period would not have been able to comprehend the medical advances that today’s society experiences, and what postmodern societies will continue to experience. Over time, the progression of medicine affected American soldiers during times of war, changed how diseases were discovered and treated, and impacted the way 21st century Americans view medicine and medical professionals.

Oral contraceptives have provided the world with great outcomes. Planned parenthood stated that birth control has “advanced women’s educational opportunities, led to more college-educated women pursuing advanced professional degrees, enhanced children’s well being in the long run, saved women money, reduced teen pregnancy, and reduced unwanted pregnancy” (“Birth Control” 1-3). The argument that birth control has done great things for society is obvious.

Overtime the understanding of human society has been seen and described in many different perspectives. With new concepts and point of views backed by research and study, sociology continues to be changed and adjusted as we learn more about humanity every day. But the interesting thing is, that the way sociology changes, is similar to the way many things in life change over time as well. For example, in this paper we will look at the medicalization of society through its three main perspectives, and see that they work hand in hand. The medicalization of society is constantly changing due to ever-growing technology and discoveries. We continue to learn more and more each day about both sociology and medicalization which is why it is easy for us to put them both into the same perspective together. The medicalization of society can be explained through the three main sociological perspectives allowing us to better understand and analysis each concept for its own different meaning.

One of the most significant happenings that the Birth Control Movement was responsible for was the creation of the birth control pill. In 1948, Margaret Sanger, biologist Gregory Pincus and physician John Rock began to research and develop the birth control pill. It got approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1960 (Kaufman). This oral contraception is a type of medication that women take daily to prevent pregnancy because these pills contain hormone that prevent a woman’s eggs from leaving the ovaries and making cervical mucus thicker which keeps the sperm from getting to the eggs (Planned Parenthood). Plannedparenthood.org stated that within five years of its approval, the birth control pill was used by one out of every married women

"In the past two decades or so, health care has been commercialized as never before, and professionalism in medicine seems to be giving way to entrepreneurialism," commented Arnold S. Relman, professor of medicine and social medicine at Harvard Medical School (Wekesser 66). This statement may have a great deal of bearing on reality. The tangled knot of insurers, physicians, drug companies, and hospitals that we call our health system are not as unselfish and focused on the patients' needs as people would like to think. Pharmaceutical companies are particularly ruthless, many of them spending millions of dollars per year to convince doctors to prescribe their drugs and to convince consumers that their specific brand of drug is needed in

While the fight to legalize abortion, for reasons other than a mothers health concerns, was won, states such as Texas are now reconsidering the regulations, which go along with such right. In 2004 the State of Texas introduced the Woman’s Right to Know Act, which “requires that all abortions at or after 16 weeks’ gestation be performed in an ambulatory surgical center (ASC)” (Colman, S., & Joyce, T. (2010), p. 775). Roe V Wade’s Supreme Court decision makes it federal law that abortion be legal, therefore the state of Texas cannot make a law specifically prohibiting abortions around this time. However, they can implement acts such as the one discussed above to hinder a women’s access to such rights. By implementing the Woman’s Right to Know Act, the state of Texas is allowing abortion, however it makes access to it within the state of Texas out of reach for the majority of women. In the time following the effect of this law “not one of Texas’s 54 nonhospital abortion providers met the requirements of a surgical center” (Colman, S., & Joyce, T. (2010), p. 775. Following that, a

Abortions will always happen and keeping it legal would make it safer. It is a simple question between medical attention or terrifying home methods. “women who do not want to be pregnant will try to end their pregnancies… Rat poison,

It hasn’t changed that the average person doesn’t like to feel pain or be ill. The evolution of medicine from 1776 to 1938 in the United States depended on the knowledge of current diseases and treatment at that time. The major diseases during this time were pneumonia, influenza, tuberculosis, gastrointestinal infections, heart disease and cerebrovascular disease.1 Ironically, much of those diseases still exist today. Over time, the world’s demand for drugs for any type of illness or disease drastically skyrocketed. Was the medicine really working or were people psyched into believing they had an illness? The diagnosis and treatment was incorrect many times, resulting in “shoulda, coulda, and wouldas” when dealing with diagnosis and medicine. Without a scientific basis, medical doctors, such as Benjamin Rush were ineffective with proper treatment, and quacks promoted strange treatments as to say: Yackedy Quack, Don’t Talk Back. By the end of the 20th Century, one could say American medicine was on the rise and researchers and physician were much more respected.

The idea of birth control has been around since before the eighteenth century. However, those in control of it have changed over time leading to several positive and negative effects including seeking underground abortions and disguised labeling of products for contraception.

But we need to treat that as it is: people taking something optional and forcing it upon others. This happens with many cases but we don’t hold the action at fault. Those inhumane people are the big problem. Abortions have a practical use for those who want them. Some women chose to take that route because it is what they think is best. It is a personal choice and, since it is not outlawed, it is an option open to a woman to use. If abortion centers become illegal some women will still get abortions. But they will be forced to get potentially unsafe and unprofessional operations that could seriously take a detrimental effect on their health. Getting an abortion is taking your own risk with the procedure, but getting one isn’t significantly more potentially dangerous as any other similar operation. But also a point to consider is that giving birth also has risks to the mother and baby. Maternal death is a problem that does happen and the mother has to consider. If the mother is informed that her mortality rates would be too low when giving birth, she might decide not to take the risk and get an abortion. Whatever the reason a woman has to get an abortion; her decision is made and she should be able to get the care she needs. Because if it is not your body, then should you really have an opinion on what happens to

Birth control has been studied for many years. Over the year’s people have discovered so many new things and applications. The history of birth control and the society around us has been affected by the impact of laws and the people.

The practice of medicine has been shaped through the years by advances in the area of diagnostic procedures. Many of these advances were made possible by scientific breakthroughs made before the 20th century. Modern medicine arguably emerged. Both normal and abnormal functions (physiology and pathology) were increasingly understood within smaller units, first the tissues and then the cells. Microscopy also played a key role in the development of bacteriology. Physicians started to use stethoscope as an aid in diagnosing certain diseases and conditions. New ways of diagnosing disease were developed, and surgery emerged as an important branch of medicine. Above all, a combination of science and technology underpinned medical knowledge and

In the spring of 1918, the first wave of one of the deadliest influenza pandemics began plaguing its victims (Peters, ix). Over the span of three lethal waves, the pandemic claimed approximately forty million victims, eradicating nearly twenty percent of the entire world’s population, or about one out of five individuals (Peters, ix). To make matters more dire, the ill-suited medical community was exceptionally unprepared for such a wide-scale pandemic: Doctors had very basic tools, knew little about diseases, and had no experience with vaccinations or prevention (Peters, 1-5; “The 1920s: Medicine and Health: Overview”, n.p.). People blindly faced the epidemic, relying on folk remedies such as consuming wine, drinking antiseptic, and

Written about the structure and culture of biomedical heath care and a society that is attempting to prolong aging, Medicare funding, funding and development of research, and today’s definition of standard care, Sharon Kaufman brings to light the many dilemmas posed to the American health care system. Her ethnographic story, Ordinary Medicine: Extraordinary Treatments, Longer Lives and Where to Draw the Line reveals the booming biomedical research and clinical trials industry, the power held by Medicare and private insurance, and a rapidly changing standard of care once a medical treatment is considered reimbursable. This leads to systematic changes in the standard of care result in a massive amount of pressure being placed upon doctors, patients and families to make an ethically and medically sound decision in refusing or accepting therapy. Kaufman exposes the driving forces behind the expansion of biomedicine, society’s response to the growing industry on a personal and bureaucratic level.

Mukherjee (2015) talks about the three laws of medicine however these are his personal laws that may or may not be followed by other health professionals. He explains each law that he had learned through personal experiences with patients. The first law is ‘A strong intuition is much more powerful than a weak test,’ explains that there may be some hidden variable when diagnosing a patient that could be crucial in life or death situations. A variable could be the environment that a person lives in or their lifestyle and this chapter notes to know when to look for small clues that could possibly help. The second law is ‘”Normals” teach us rules; “outliers” teach us laws, ' talks about how normal cases teach and build the rules of what should be done on a regular basis of patients, what is normal. Outliers are the cases where it may untreatable but has the chance to reshape and even advance medicine. The third law is 'For every perfect medical experiment, there is a perfect human bias, ' talks about how we hope for a medical treatment that can help treat a disease but it is biased because it either works or doesn’t work despite a few anomalies. These are laws Mukherjee has learned from experience and applies throughout his career, they may not be followed by all health practitioners.