{"title":"重新思考医疗化:不平等关系、霸权医疗化与医疗化红利。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Rethinking medicalization: unequal relations, hegemonic medicalization, and the medicalizing dividend.
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.
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.