Rethinking medicalization: unequal relations, hegemonic medicalization, and the medicalizing dividend.

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Theory and Society Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1007/s11186-025-09611-9
Michael Halpin, Dagoberto Cortez
{"title":"Rethinking medicalization: unequal relations, hegemonic medicalization, and the medicalizing dividend.","authors":"Michael Halpin, Dagoberto Cortez","doi":"10.1007/s11186-025-09611-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Medicalization is an important theory that has been subject to numerous debates. Drawing on three varied datasets, we forward a relational approach to medicalization that responds to critiques while aiming to reinvigorate the theory with new concepts and questions. In contrast to prior process-based work, our relational approach argues that medicalization is best understood as an action or activity undertaken by specific groups or actors. We further suggest that unequal relations characterize medicalization. Specifically, we argue that 1) groups or actors receive a benefit from participating in medicalization, which we call the medicalizing dividend and, 2) an actor/group occupies a hegemonic position in medicalizing relations, reaping the largest dividend and constraining other actors. While we assert that pharmaceutical companies are currently hegemonic, we argue that their hegemony is not indefinite. We discuss how our approach facilitates links between medicalization and other theories, while outlining future steps for medicalization research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48137,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Society","volume":"54 2","pages":"243-276"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12062157/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-025-09611-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Medicalization is an important theory that has been subject to numerous debates. Drawing on three varied datasets, we forward a relational approach to medicalization that responds to critiques while aiming to reinvigorate the theory with new concepts and questions. In contrast to prior process-based work, our relational approach argues that medicalization is best understood as an action or activity undertaken by specific groups or actors. We further suggest that unequal relations characterize medicalization. Specifically, we argue that 1) groups or actors receive a benefit from participating in medicalization, which we call the medicalizing dividend and, 2) an actor/group occupies a hegemonic position in medicalizing relations, reaping the largest dividend and constraining other actors. While we assert that pharmaceutical companies are currently hegemonic, we argue that their hegemony is not indefinite. We discuss how our approach facilitates links between medicalization and other theories, while outlining future steps for medicalization research.

重新思考医疗化:不平等关系、霸权医疗化与医疗化红利。
医学化是一个重要的理论,一直受到许多争论。利用三个不同的数据集,我们提出了一种关联的方法来医学化,以回应批评,同时旨在用新的概念和问题重振理论。与之前基于过程的研究相反,我们的关系方法认为,医疗化最好被理解为由特定群体或行动者采取的行动或活动。我们进一步认为,不平等关系是医疗化的特征。具体而言,我们认为1)群体或行为体从参与医疗化中获得利益,我们称之为医疗化红利;2)行为体/群体在医疗化关系中占据霸权地位,收获最大的红利并约束其他行为体。虽然我们断言制药公司目前是霸权,但我们认为它们的霸权不是无限期的。我们讨论了我们的方法如何促进医疗化和其他理论之间的联系,同时概述了医疗化研究的未来步骤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theory and Society
Theory and Society SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.90%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Theory and Society is a forum for the international community of scholars that publishes theoretically-informed analyses of social processes. It opens its pages to authors working at the frontiers of social analysis, regardless of discipline. Its subject matter ranges from prehistory to contemporary affairs, from treatments of single individuals and national societies to world culture, from discussions of theory to methodological critique, from First World to Third World - but always in the effort to bring together theory, criticism and concrete observation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信