Social Inequality : Patterns And Processes By Martin Marger

Janny Scott’s article, “Life at the Top in America Isn’t Just Better, It’s Longer,” follows three different people as they recover from a heart attack; Jean Miele, Will Wilson, and Ewa Rynczak Gora. Though each person in the article suffered a heart attack around the same time, their treatment and recovery processes were vastly different. Economic inequality had a huge influence on how each person was treated during and after their heart attacks. When Mr. Miele suffered his heart attack, he understandably chose the nicest hospital to receive his treatment. However, when Ms. Gora was suffering from her heart attack, she wasn’t given a choice of hospitals, she was simply taken to the closest city hospital. Unlike Ms. Gora, Mr. Miele had the means to afford the best care possible; he could afford the best hospital, he could afford the best surgery, and he could afford to follow the best recovery plan. Ms. Gora’s lack of wealth an integral reason why she did not recover from her heart attack in the way the Mr. Miele, and even Mr. Wilson, did.

In the movie Unnatural Causes: In Sickness and in Wealth, it compared the lives of four individuals, Taylor, Young, Anderson, and Turner, in different locations, race, and socioeconomic background. The scale of difference between this group of people is that it goes from financially stable and healthy individuals to individuals with lower income and poorer health. This wealth-health gradient reflects that those who have easier access to healthier lifestyles (i.e. running outside without the concern of safety) are more likely to have a higher life expectancy than those who are in living environments that are not as developed and lack healthier options of nutrition. The difference of the average life expectancy scaled down from Jim Taylor whose neighborhood had an average life expectancy of 80 years, Young’s 75.3 years,

Socio-economic class or socio-economic status (SES) may refer to mixture of various factors such as poverty, occupation and environment. It is a way of measuring the standard and quality of life of individuals and families in society using social and economic factors that affect health and wellbeing ( Giddens and Sutton, 2013). Cockerham (2007 p75) argues: ‘Social class or socioeconomic status (SES) is the strongest predictor of health, disease causation and longevity in medical sociology.’ Research in the 1990s, (Drever and Whitehead, 1997) found out that people in higher SES are generally healthier, and live longer than those in lower SES.

The Health and Wealth connection distilled is our health will most commonly reflect from our amount of wealth. The wealthy can afford the cost of quality care and the time to take care of themselves. Within the textbook, Dimensions of Human Behavior Hutchison writes. Public health experts have long noted the association of poor clinical outcomes, in all body systems, with low income, low education, unsanitary housing, poor healthcare, on stable employment, and uncertain physical environment (Hutchison, 2015). Easily demonstrated throughout American society the rather dubious and is a somewhat perplexing phenomenon of the Health-and-Wealth connection theory. The gap between the haves and have-nots are ever expanding. Those who have the funding to pay for resources will pay to get those resources. And those who do not have sufficient funds to pay for said resources will, unfortunately, have to stand in the long lines to receive seemingly, deceptively, scarce resources.

There has always been a link between social class and health, even with the welfare state and the improvements made to health in all sections of societies over the years, a difference still remains in this area. This difference is applied to all aspects of health, which include life expectancy, general levels of health and infant mortality. Many people argue that as long as the quality of life is

In addition, to the first book review our second review analyzed the lives of people class distinctions. In Class Matters as stated in my initial review the book focuses on the negative and positive factors of people’s lives. During a section of the book just to recap the experiences of three people of different social classes experiencing heart attacks. The first guy that had a heart attack was of the upper middle class. This man had the luxury of giving multiple options of attending the best hospital and care for his health. In chapter five heading the Hierarchy: Upper Class or Superclass? The conclusion states, “Best positioned within the class structure to obtain high-quality financial capital and also social capital…” (Doob, 142). The first guy with the heart attack has a better advantage because of all of the necessities and benefits he has to offer. The second person with the heart attack was of the middle class. This man was issued with fewer options, but still a good hospital he had the same surgery, but with no additional information as the first person. In chapter six it discusses how some middle class people have difficulty financially. The expenses of health insurance have become much greater for middle class American’s. Doob states, “The harsh reality involving healthcare is that left on their own, many middle-class people can afford only very limited or no

Most of the social class groups in America are treated differently in of services at Hospitals and Clinics. The term “social class” is a group of individuals that shares common features from an economic, behavioral view and ideological representation of the world around them. In the New York Times article, Life at the Top in America Isn 't Just Better, It 's Longer, Janny Scott highlights patients who experienced heart attacks and how they were treated at different medical clinics. Scott evaluates the upper class, middle class and working class and how it impact in people’s health and emergency care. Scott specifically points out the types of treatments and medications were given by doctors to patients. In the book, Framing Class: Media Representations of Wealth and Poverty in America, Diana Kendall describe about how the upper class portrays middle class people based attitudes and judgments between ideological characteristics. The term “admiration framing” are the interests that upper and wealth class help raise good cause on medical treatments towards other social class. Kendall quotes “journalists and television writers hold elites and their material possessions in greater awe…” (3-4). Kendall explains that the upper class people can be generous and help the working and middle class by helping towards their conditions of life. The working and middle class people don’t have the type of health opportunities as the upper class people do which impacts their lives. Diana

According Social Inequality: Patterns and Processes by Martin Marger, life chances includes “education, physical and mental health, residence and justice;” which are opportunities that we must procure through social resources (18). Our position within society determines our life chances; for children their parent’s positions within society determines the child’s social status within society. “Life chances are acquired, then, as a result of factors that are only partially in the control of individuals…people’s initial class position and, therefore, the dimensions of their opportunities and future prospects are essentially an “accident of birth.” Certainly, people may subsequently enhance their life chances through individual effort, but those of lower social origins will need to overcome many socially imposed handicaps to do so” (Marger, 19-20). It is completely possible for someone to shape their life chances through their own efforts however; this occurrence is rare which is the reason sociologists tend to focus on the typical pattern society follow. Looking at life chance opportunities such as health, justice, and education; people’s social resources are not only shaped through individual choices but mainly by group membership.

First, there is Jim Taylor, Hospital CEO, District 16; second, Tondra Young, Clinical Lab Supervisor, District 24; lastly, Corey Anderson, Floor Technician, District 21. The population of each district decreases in average income, education level and life expectancy than its preceding district, beginning with district 16, Jim Taylor’s district. District 16 has an average combined household income of approximately $120,000/ annually. In this district, 65% of the population has a college degree and the life expectancy in this district is 82 years. Whereas, Tondra Young’s district, district 24, has an average combined household income of $70,000/annually and 15% of the population has a college degree. The life expectancy of district 24 is 75 years, that’s 7 years less than district 16. In district 21, Corey Anderson’s district, the average combined household income is less than $50,000/ annually and only 5% of the districts population have college degrees. Consequently, the life expectancy of district 21 is 70 years, 5 years less than district 24 and 12 years less than district 16 (Adelman 2008). The results of this study are indisputable: there is an obvious correlation between social/economic status and health status. As each districts average income and education level decrease, average life expectancy coincides. This leads to the next question: why does social and economic status so greatly influence health status?

The Health and wealth connection distilled is our health will most commonly reflect from our amount of wealth. The wealthy can afford the cost of quality care and the time to take care of them selves. Within the textbook, Dimensions of Human Behavior Hutchison writes. Public health experts have long noted the association of poor health outcomes, in all body systems, with low income, low education, unsanitary housing, in adequate healthcare, on stable employment, and unsafe physical environment (Hutchison, 2015). Easily demonstrated throughout American society the rather dubious and is somewhat perplexing phenomenon of the Health-and-Wealth connection theory. The gap between the haves and have-nots are ever expanding. Those who have the funding to pay for resources will pay to get those resources. And those who do not have adequate funding to pay for said resources will unfortunately have to stand in the long lines to receive seemingly, deceptively, scarce resources.

This essay will discuss ways in which a person’s socioeconomic class and his/her social situation can have an impact on his/her health, using examples. We believe that there is a direct link between socioeconomic/social class and health (Adler et al. 1994). I will be defining the key terms: socioeconomic and health, social class then proceed to discuss about how poverty, income, employability, environment and housing can impact on a person’s social situation and their health.

The aim of this essay is to examine the influence that socio-economic status has on an individual’s health.

Life chances can have a positive or negative effect on individual’s lifetime in terms of their education, health, employment, income and housing. They are influenced by different social factors such as social class, gender and ethnicity. As a result, life chances are different for individuals and groups (Anon, 2016).

Throughout the history of the United States, two things have always afflicted this great nation: inequality and disease. They have always had an effect on each other, as diseases have affected those from lower classes differently from those from upper classes. In our modern U.S. society, we face a specific disease, heart disease, which is now the leading cause of death in the United States and is part of a complex system of social problems (Center for Disease Control).

In briefly evaluating the classical and modern explanations of social inequality, it is essential that we step outside the realm of our own lives, class position, and discard any assumptions we might have about the nature of inequality. This process of critical pedagogy allows us to view our world, not from our perspective, but from a wider, more critical analysis of inequality's nature. Also, it should be considered within this wider perspective that all theories of inequality have a class perspective, where the theorist, based on the position their theory takes, is making claims from (or for) a particular class (whether they want to or not). With this in mind, it seems that most of these theories come