toptermpaper.com

The Tamil people have been fighting for independence from Sri Lanka since 1973 when an island-wide pogrom (the most violent of several that had regularly occurred since 1956) convinced Tamils that they would not attain equality or security under the Sinhala-chauvinist state that has ruled Sri Lanka since independence in 1948, Before the British entranced to the Sri Lanka, there was two independent states, one is Tamil and another one is Sinhala but after the ruled of British those states combine together and when they left from Sri Lanka they handed all the power to the Sinhala state.

If we see the violence in Sri Lanka against the Tamils, in the lead-up to the 1956 elections, the Buddhist clergy launched a racist anti-Tamil movement that culminated in the first pogrom against Tamils. It also proved that the clergy could swing elections and secured their position in the political elite. Following the 1956 elections, laws were enacted making Sinhala the only official language. This excluded most Tamils from public sector employment and torture, rape and random killings have been perpetrated by the military and pro-government paramilitaries.

This violence continued year by year and so many innocent Tamil people were affected horribly and so many Tamil people left their own places and they went to other countries as refugees.

In this stage, “Mr.Prabhakaran, who has born in 1954 and got great angry against the violence on Tamils, founded the first Tamil protest movement in 1973. The grievances of this Tamils minority went back to 1956 when a new law imposed Sinhala as the country’s official language. He came from well educated family, he dropped his studies in his age 16 and created a rebel group with his friends which fight against for the discrimination of Tamils because he found one true from his own experience, that if we get afraid and never show ours against in their way to their violence, they never stop that until the last Tamil death.

Another historical sad example for the genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka is “Black July” in 1983,

“Smoke from hundreds of shops, offices, warehouses and homes blew idly over Colombo yesterday. Any business, any house belonging to or occupied by a Tamil has been attacked by gangs of goondas and the resulting destruction looks like London after a heavy night’s attention from the Luftwaffe. The sharp smell of destruction fills the nostrils and the roads beneath the feet crunch with broken glass. Cars and Lorries lie at ungainly angles across the footways. In Pettah, the old commercial heart of the city, row after row of sari boutiques, electronic dealers, rice sellers, car parts stores, lie shattered and scarredaˆ¦ government officials yesterday estimated that 20,000 businesses had been attacked in the city.”

-The Guardian 28 July 1983-

“The riots began in retaliation for an ambush of an army patrol in Jaffna that left thirteen Sinhalese soldiers dead. The army immediately retaliated by randomly killing a number of innocent civilians in the Jaffna peninsula. This followed by an extensively organised anti-Tamil riot which initially started in Colombo and soon spread to southern part of Sri Lanka where ever the Tamils lived. Sinhalese rioters in Colombo were provided with voter’s lists containing details of names and addresses to enable them to specifically target the Tamil Community. The police, security forces, Buddhist monks and the State Officials turned a blind eye but encouraged the mobs and in some cases they themselves actively took part in the carnage.

Mobs of angry Sinhalese roamed the streets targeting properties and businesses owned by the Tamils. They chased down and beat any vulnerable people they could find. This lasted for several days and claimed the lives of over 3,000 Tamils. Over 50 Tamils political prisoners were butchered by the fellow Sinhalese inmates and the prison guards”.

-Genocide Org July 2008-

And following are some evidence about Sinhala majority people’s opinion about Tamil’s rights in country, some of the most famous racist quotes by the Sinhalese politicians:

“If we are governing, we must govern. If we are ruling, we must rule. Do not give into the minorities. ” – Mrs. Wimala Kananga M.P. Sri Lankan Parliament, July 1981

“I am not worried about the opinion of the Tamil peopleaˆ¦ now we cannot think of them, not about their lives or their opinion.. The more you put pressure in the north, the happier the Sinhala people will be hereaˆ¦ Really if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala people will be happy.” – President J.R. Jayewardene, Daily Telegraph 11th July 1983

“They want a separate state – a minority community which is not the original people of the country, etc.” (Saying that Tamils do not belong in Sri Lanka) – President Chandrika Kumaratunga in an interview on South African TV, September 1998

Not only in those ways, but also in other ways “like denied prospects of Tamil student’s higher education by standardisation, even though they obtained higher marks than Sinhala students they were not able to entered university and Sinhala students entered university easily even they obtained lower marks than Tamils according to that system” Tamils affected and they lost their independence and culture.

After these problems raised against to Tamils and the failure of peacefully protest by Tamils politicians and the death of Mr.Thileeban by hunger strike for the Tamils rights and safety, Tamils understood that there was no option except Independent Tamil Nation to Tamils. After that they accept the way of Mr.Prabhakaran, and started to give their hand to his activities and 90% of Tamils think him as their godfather who comes to save and bring freedom to them.

After the death of Mr. Thileeban arm struggle start severely with the Tamils support. Most rebel armies rely on a state sponsor. Mr.Prabhakaran’s, however, had no such ally. Instead, his guerrillas obtained money and guns from a global support network run by the Tamil Diasporas.

So many younger Tamils joined in the LTTE with their own wish of bringing freedom to their people in their own place. And some people were joined in a compulsory after 2006 because of the fear on LTTE. There was chid soldier also, but they gave education to their child soldiers and made them as doctors and lawyer, etc for their own medical needs in war periods and political activities. All those happened under the words of Mr.Prabhakaran, even he didn’t study he had vast knowledge in all fields through his reading habits and eager to know new things, that is really miracle to the world today also. He was famous by his discipline behaviour. Still no one complained about his fighter in discipline matters, because his punishments were severe to people who failed to keep discipline in their life even they were fighter. He gave equality to the female fighters in all decision makings like males.

If we see the violence activities of LTTE under the control of Mr.Prabhakaran against to the government from starting, uniquely in the annals of guerrilla campaigns, his bloodstained efforts embraced every form of warfare, ranging from large scale battles to the ambushes of classic insurgency tactics, to urban terrorism, complete with suicide bombings.

Since 1977s LTTE start violence against Sri Lankan forces. In July 1983 first big attack against Sri Lankan army that is known as Thirunelveli attack. Mid of 80’s the LTTE controlled most part of the North and east of Sri Lanka. At that period the Sri Lankan forces faced high trouble when they try to enter to the LTTE controls area.

1987 July Sri Lankan army forces started a military operation has known as “operation liberation”, at that time LTTE introduced suicide attack. By this suicide attack defeat Sri Lankan army with small lost.

From that time LTTE used suicide attackers known as “Karumpulikal” (Black Tigers) when they got trouble. They used black tigers for destroy military, political and economic targets, the LTTE had land, sea and air black tigers.

In 1987 Indian army entered to Sri Lanka as peace keeping force. But the Indian army wasn’t being honest. By this LTTE moved to another way of freedom fighting by hunger strike. One of LTTE member name Mr.Thileeban died for that after 12days hunger strike. This is not workout for Indian army so LTTE started violence against Indian army. Because of this cheatings, the former Indian Prime Minister Mr. Rajeevkandi killed by LTTE suicide bomber.

Mr.Prabhakaran’s fighters were ruthless practitioners of suicide attacks. In 1996, they drove a lorry packed with explosives into Sri Lanka’s central bank, killing at least 90 people. That target was for the Sri Lankan economy.

In 1997 they fighting against the longest military operation in south Asia known as “Operation Jaisikkuru” it’s taken more than one and half years. Then they capture areas again within few days. In 2001 July black tigers attacked Sri Lankan international airport and Sri Lankan air force camp within few hours. By this attacked international consider about Sri Lankan Tamils problem.

Analysis about the Leadership of Mr.Prabhakaran According to the Problem:

Under the Mr.Prabhakaran control there were nearly 60000 to 70000 soldiers, but nearly 35000 soldiers died in war activities and nearly 10000 soldiers were injured during the war period. He divided all fighters by group by group for different purposes. For example one groups for political movements, one for intelligence activities another group for fighting. His LTTE is the first rebel group who have air, sea and land forces without any country support and with only over sea’s Tamils support.

If leaders failed to fulfil the needs of their people or failed to give security to their life and culture, they won’t support to them in a long period in reality. If we see the Mr.Prabhakaran life, he started violence for his people from 1976, from that period his supporters’ rate not decreased, only increased by his group’s discipline activities and the secure to their culture by him. That’s why in Tamils 90% people support him and accept him as a one and only leader to them.

He never thought about his personal life he thought only about his people future, to that purpose he founded so many good steps, he started Tamil School Culture in all country all over the world, and in Sri Lanka also he proved that we can ruled ourselves to us in the period of some place were in under his control. He founded orphanages to the children who lost their parents in war in the name of “Sencholai”. We cannot deny the fact that the Sri Lankan government destroy that place and killed those children by air force. That time most of the countries said against to Sri Lankan government.

LTTE went so many ceasefires with the Sri Lankan government, but Sri Lankan government was not ready to give rights to Tamils correctly in their places, their target was only bring Mr.Prabhakaran to their side by give some personal advances to him. But Mr.Prabhakaran was not ready to accept that, he was ready to sacrifice his life for Tamils and he was not ready to sacrifice Tamils life for his personal welfare. That’s why all ceasefires broke down in half way.

Although so many countries barred the LTTE as terrorist group, no one talked about Mr.Prabhakaran and LTTE discipline and sacrifices.

“If JR is a great Buddhist, we do not want get arms”, this is one of the statements of Mr.Prabhakaran, that means even Buddhist torture Tamils, Mr.Prabhakaran kept good thinking about Buddhist and he was not taken arm with wish.

Judgements about Mr.Prabhakaran According to the Moral Theories:
Utilitarianism (Consequence based) Theory:

This theory is come to judgement right or wrong according to the balance of their good or bad consequences.

According to that theory Mr.Prabhakaran way was right even he did some mistakes in his decision making like accept the child soldiers and attacked Sinhala people by bomb in several times as revenge.

In Sri Lanka that attacks were necessary to save Tamil people, because the government was minimise their attacks on innocent Tamils only after their revenge activities on Sinhala areas.

In Sri Lanka, before starting violence type fight, Tamil politicians and even LTTE also were protest peacefully in so many periods and gave their life to that peace protest by hunger strike but no one ready to accept their even basic request and they continue their torture and rape on Tamils with the help of Indian forces in 1987.

According to the statement that “Our fighting way will be decided by our enemy” they took arms to fight against the Sri Lankan government to safe guard their people.

So in my point of view, Mr.Prabhakaran way was correct in that time as a leader to that community. If he failed to take that way, today may be no Tamils in Sri Lanka, because after LTTE defeated, within few months most of time Sinhala shown their own face.

Even famous Tamil politicians said only the god can safe Tamils, Mr.Prabhakaran only the man who start the fights with brave without any major supports in beginning to safe guard their people.

Kantianism (Obligation based) Theory:

This theory is telling that “the moral worth of an individual’s action depends exclusively on the rule of obligation on which the person acts”. According to that theory there were some wrong side also in Mr.Prabhakaran leadership like killing Sinhala people as revenge and to stop violence against Tamils.

According to that theory he was not have rights to kill others. In other side there were no rights to Sri Lankan government to discriminate Tamils and their basic rights.

Another wrong thing about Mr.Prabhakaran is according to rules of this theory, compulsory soldier taking, and child soldier and displaced the Muslims and Sinhalese from North, East in Sri Lanka.

Liberal Individualism (Rights based) Theory:

This theory about the rights that have individual to receive a one’s choice and to be free from some action by others, that means “individual and group have rights -justified claims that individual can make upon other individuals or upon society”.

According to this theory Mr.Prabhakaran way is right, because he fight for his community rights. And he chose the way because of no option without that, he justified claims the violence against the Tamils on behalf of Tamil community.

Communitarianism (Community based) Theory:

This theory is telling that “Everything fundamental in ethics derives from communal values, the common good, social goals, traditional practices and cooperative virtues”. According to this theory “An action’s moral value can be judged based on its positive or negative effects on society’s well-being as a whole”.

This is the most suitable theory in Sri Lankan problem, because in most of cases Mr.Prabhakaran followed this theory and claimed the judgment to his community according to that moral theory and he lives as moral leader according to that theory.

If we see the problem deeply, one thing will be noticed easily that the problem a rise because of discrimination on particular community, that is why one member (Mr.Prabhakaran) of the community who got anger and who have brave to give sound against to the discrimination started fight against to the Sri Lankan government. Because of that fight so many lose took part in both side but that loses helped to save the certain community for long term with miner loses.

That means there were some negative effects but that effects also the steps to Tamil society long term freedom and save the life and culture.

He is seen as the honest and brave leader to whole Tamils community by Tamils and all world even they describe the LTTE as terrorist group.

So finally my opinion according to above theories except Kantianism, he is a moral leader in all ways to Tamil community, no one can deny the fact that he scarifies his whole life without any corruption for Tamils Freedom in their mother land.

An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts. A preconceived preference or idea. A prejudiced perspective or point of view; a skeptical, critical attitude; distorted vision that perceives everything as faulty, inferior, or undesirable.

I am an Indian and I eat rice. This phrase is based on the assumption that every Indian eats rice.

Examples of PREJUDICE

The organization fights against racial prejudice.

religious, racial, and sexual prejudices

We tend to make these kinds of decisions according to our own prejudices.

He has a prejudice against fast-food restaurants.

But today most black Americans not hampered by poverty or prejudice take for granted their right to study Italian, listen to Britney Spears or opera, play in the NHL, eat Thai food, live anywhere, work anywhere, play anywhere, read and think and say anything.

History

The first psychological research conducted on prejudice occurred in the 1920s. This research was done to attempt to prove white supremacy. One article from 1925 reviewing 73 studies on race concluded that the “studies take all together seem to indicate the mental superiority of the white race”.[3] This research among others led many psychologists to view prejudice as a natural response to inferior races.

In the 1930s and 1940s, this perspective began to change due to the increasing concern about anti-Semitism. Theorists of this time viewed prejudice as pathological and looked for personality syndromes linked with racism. Theorist Theodor Adorno believed prejudice stemmed from an authoritarian personality. Adorno described authoritarians as “rigid thinkers who obeyed authority, saw the world as black and white, and enforced strict adherence to social rules and hierarchies”.[4] Adorno believed people with authoritarian personalities were the most likely to be prejudiced against groups of lower status.

Types of Prejudice

Prejudice can be based upon a number of factors including sex, race, age, sexual orientations, nationality, socioeconomic status and religion. Some of the most well-known types of prejudice include:

Racism

Sexism

Classicism

Homophobia

Nationalism

Religious prejudice

Agism

Prejudice and Stereotyping

When prejudice occurs, stereotyping and discrimination may also result. In many cases, prejudices are based upon stereotypes. A stereotype is a simplified assumption about a group based on prior assumptions. Stereotypes can be both positive (“women are warm and nurturing”) or negative (“teenagers are lazy”). Stereotypes can lead to faulty beliefs, but they can also result in both prejudice and discrimination.

According to psychologist Gordon Allport, prejudice and stereo types emerge in part as a result of normal human thinking. In order to make sense of the world around us, it is important to sort information into mental categories. “The human mind must think with the aid of categories,” Allport explained. “Once formed, categories are the basis for normal prejudgment. We cannot possibly avoid this process. Orderly living depends upon it. ” This process of categorization applies to the social world as well, as we sort people into mental groups based on factors such as age, sex and race.

However, researchers have found that while when it comes to categorizing information about people, we tend to minimize the differences between people within groups and exaggerate the differences between groups. In one classic experiment, participants were asked to judge the height of people shown in photographs. People in the experiment were also told that:

“In this booklet, the men and women are actually of equal height. We have taken care to match the heights of the men and women pictured. That is, for every woman of a particular height, somewhere in the booklet there is also a man of that same height. Therefore, in order to make as accurate a height judgment as possible, try to judge each photograph as an individual case; do not rely on the person’s sex.”

In addition to these instructions, a $50 cash prize was offered to whoever made the most accurate judgments of height. Despite this, participants consistently rated the men as being a few inches taller than the women. Because of their prejudgment that men are taller than women, the participants were unable to dismiss their existing categorical beliefs about men and women in order to judge the heights accurately.

Researchers have also found that people tend to view members of outside groups as being more homogenous than members of their own group, a phenomenon referred to as the out-group homogeneity bias. This perception that all member of an out-group are alike holds true of all groups, whether based on race, nationality, religion, age or other naturally occurring group affiliation.

Ways to Reduce Prejudice

In addition to looking at the reasons why prejudice occurs, researchers have also explored different ways that prejudice can be reduced or even eliminated. Training people to become more empathetic to members of other groups is one method that has shown considerable success. By imaging themselves in the same situation, people are able to think about how they would react and gain a greater understanding of other people’s actions.

Other techniques that are used to reduce prejudice include:

Passing laws and regulations that require fair and equal treatment for all groups of people.

Gaining public support and awareness for anti-prejudice social norms.

Making people aware of the inconsistencies in their own beliefs.

Increased contact with members of other social groups.

Examples of Discrimination

World War II – In Germany and German-controlled lands, Jewish people had to wear yellow stars to identify themselves as Jews. Later, the Jews were placed in concentration camps by the Nazis.

Racial discrimination in South Africa. Apartheid (literally “separateness”) was a system of racial segregation that was enforced in South Africa from 1948 to 1994. Non-white people where prevented from voting and lived in separate communities.

Age discrimination is discrimination against a person or group on the grounds of age.

Gender Discrimination: In Western societies while women are often discriminated against in the workplace, men are often discriminated against in the home and family environments. For instance after a divorce women receive primary custody of the children far more often than men. Women on average earn less pay than men for doing the same job

The Difference Between Prejudice and Discrimination

A prejudiced person may not act on their attitude. Therefore, someone can be prejudiced towards a certain group but not discriminate against them. Also, prejudice includes all three components of an attitude (affective, behavioral and affective), whereas discrimination just involves behavior.

An extreme example of prejudice and discrimination would be the Nazi’s mass murder of Jews in the Second World War, or the killings of Catholics by Protestants and Protestants by Catholics.

There are four main explanations of prejudice and discrimination:

1. Authoritarian Personality

2. Realistic Conflict Theory – Robbers Cave

3. Stereotyping

4. Social identity Theory

My prejudice

I was born and raised in India. In India people are discriminated and showed prejudice based on their color.

Skin Color Paradox

The Skin Color Paradox refers to the fact that no matter how differently African Americans are treated based on their skin color, their political and cultural attitudes about “blackness” as a form of identity and their feelings of relatedness and solidarity with other blacks tend to remain consistent. Although light-skinned blacks receive many socioeconomic advantages over dark-skinned blacks, who have much more punitive relationships with the criminal justice system and greatly diminished prestige, and although blacks are aware of this disparity in treatment and status, both light-skinned and dark-skinned blacks have similar political attitudes towards discrimination and race solidarity.[18]

Political scientists would suggest that skin color is a characteristic perhaps as equally important as religion, income, and education, which is why this paradox is so surprising, but studies show that skin color has no real bearing on actual political preference. Affirmative action is another example of the paradox between colorism on the one hand and political preference on the other. Studies show that most African Americans that benefit from Affirmative action come from families that are better educated and more well off, and historically this means that the lighter-skinned portion of the black race is receiving the majority of the aid, making it appear as if the race as a whole is being benefited. Yet beneficiaries of this special treatment tend to hold on to their political identification with “blackness.” [18]

When I was in school, I had the nick name ‘blackly’. That was the common name by every one use to call me. when ever it comes to sports or group activities, I was picked last. Its like blacks don’t hang out with whites. They have to only make friends with there own kind of people, the other black kids.

Conformity as an Explanation of Prejudice and Discrimination

Influences that cause individuals to be racist or sexist, for example, may come from peers parents and group membership. Conforming to social norms means people adopt the “normal” set of behavior(s) associated with a particular group or society.

The interpersonal approach to prejudice Ideas about prejudice which look at processes within groups of people focus on stereotyping, discussed earlier, and conformity tosocial and cultural norms.

Social norms – behavior considered appropriate within a social group – are one possible influence on prejudice and discrimination. People may have prejudiced beliefs and feelings and act in a prejudiced way because they are conforming to what is regarded as normal in the social groups to which they belong:

The effect of Social Norms on Prejudice

Minard (1952) investigated how social norms influence prejudice and discrimination. The behavior of black and white miners in a town in the southern United States was observed, both above and below ground.

Results: Below ground, where the social norm was friendly behavior towards work colleagues, 80 of the white miners were friendly towards the black miners. Above ground, where the social norm was prejudiced behavior by whites to blacks, this dropped to 20.

Conclusion: The white miners were conforming to different norms above and below ground. Whether or not prejudice is shown depends on the social context within which behavior takes place.

Pettigrew (1959) also investigated the role of conformity in prejudice. He investigated the idea that people who tended to be more conformist would also be more prejudiced, and found this to be true of white South African students. Similarly, he accounted for the higher levels of prejudice against black people in the southern United States than in the north in terms of the greater social acceptability of this kind of prejudice in the south.

A study by Rogers and Frantz (1962) found that immigrants to Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) became more prejudiced the longer they had been in the country. They gradually conformed more to the prevailing cultural norm of prejudice against the black population.

Evaluation: Conformity to social norms, then, may offer an explanation for prejudice in some cases. At the same time, norms change over time, so this can only go some way towards explaining prejudice.

Introduction

Hispanics are considered a single minority group arising in the United States which certainly as the name suggests being a product of the Spanish. It is evident that Spanish environment is dominated in such territories hence the high level of discrimination against them the American people are afraid of such small tribes to being very strong communities not only in politics but also power and economic development which directly poses a threat towards their growth as a nation. There are those intense factors that have facilitated discrimination of this community in the US, for instance Media presentations, Linguistic point of view and residence legality. As a result of this, the type of discrimination being embraced by this small community includes lack of proper health care, victims of hatred and oppression, lack of proper rental-housing and lack of health insurance.

Catalyzing factors in racial discrimination
Media and Hispanic oppression

In every issue arising facing the human kind, the media is always there as a facility of creating awareness to the general public. Media can therefore be a very sensitive channel of communication and public awareness. With media broadcasting all the live events occurring in the general public, politicians and prominent people, there are very high chances of transmitting cases of hater speeches from different speakers which can bring forth tension among different people as a reaction, either positively or negatively(Cummins and Gordon, 2006). News broadcasting is considered to be a rapid-fire technique of delivering the real world in terms of cultural, economical and political issues. Some media stations tend to employ animation technology to portray sarcasm regarding a certain community hence creating the same expression in many of the viewers who later practice such actions but now in the real world and ends up hurting one another socially. With the media being interested mostly in transmitting the bad news for instance cases of illegal immigration being emphasized more upon as compared to the legal migration of the small communities particularly the Hispanic community as asserted by Lee (1998). This therefore reveals the role of media and the kind of information the media people transmitting the general public, which counts for negativity in most of the cases. News paper articles with very eye catching headlines such as illegal migrants, foreign drug dealers and such information is usually taken seriously and the initial blame befalls the small communities, with Hispanic being among the suspected group due to lack of proper understanding and like of love for one another. According to Lester(1996), the media is always very effective in framing issues since the initial intent is to give the public what they would like to hear, all about hate for the one not related with, for example the small community being blamed for each and every form of negative issues arising.

Residency Illegality assumption

In the United States, approximately more than 42 million legally migrated residents are believed to have Latin origin as noted in a statistical abstract (2007). About 16 million of these residents, an approximate of 39 percent, are born as foreigners. According to US immigration statistics, certain fraction, about 11 million people, of this population are estimated to have illegally migrated with 8.7 million migrants being believed to be of Hispanic origin as supported by Therrien and Ramirez (2001). This therefore asserts that more than 85 percent of Hispanic migrants have legally obtained their US residency with majority of them having been born in the United States. This therefore justifies the Hispanic community living in the United States from being discriminated against and they should hold their grounds while fighting for their residency rights, since by balancing the legal versus illegal migrants it clearly points the great difference favoring the legal migrants and the mere fraction that represents the illegal migrants should not earn such level of discrimination against the whole community. According to Jorgensen (1996), the US politicians are the leading people passing such complaints against what they term to be “illegal aliens”. Reports have proven that Hispanic employees have really experienced very unfair job mistreatment from their employers both in public and private sectors. Despite their hard work in jobs, no credit or appreciation is accorded to them for instance wages raise, no chances for ideas sharing since their ideas are considered unworthy towards bringing forth development. (Jennifer, 2007)

Language barrier

In the United States, there is a very strong bond connecting language and racism. The main group tends to discriminate the minority groups which certainly reflect on the hatred towards the Hispanics by the United States majority group (or rather the whites) residents. For instance the use of mal mot “wetback” is a clear example of sarcasm characterization used to classify the Hispanics who cross the Rio Grande boundary to the United States illegally. Now, the problem comes in where all the Hispanics suffer this oppression having legally or illegally migrated to the United States, hence being considered a high level of misunderstanding where even the innocent have to suffer on the account of the illegal migrants. The minority groups that cannot speak the dominant language are restricted from participating in the dominant culture and this has brought forth a two-side culture of living with those speaking native language (English) oppressing the alien language speakers for instance the Hispanic community. The English language community has realized the linguistic threat posed by the Spanish language speakers in the United States since they seem to multiply as time passes on. As a reaction to this linguistic threat, native language heritage has started a campaign towards supporting English as the immediate language that should be embraced by each and every resident in the united states, being an American, Asian, Spanish or black American. With respect to this, a form of US bilingual education has been highly documented and debated about as asserted by Rothstein (1998). To many people, this form of education was more of a confusion situation than a solution, since each and every ethnic group concentrated in learning in their own language, but the English language conquering the rest, hence the alien natives being forced to embrace the English learning since they could not meet the standards to bring forth the level of education needed to code with the American way of learning.

Effect of this discrimination
Victims of hatred

In the united states, majority of federal hate crimes target crime victims with respect to ethnicity or basic race initiated programs, according to the UCR (Uniform Crime Reporting)program, there is a huge number of hate speech white victims as compared to the other groups. According to research carried by New Century Foundation organization, it is worthy to claim that hate crimes towards the minority groups are committed mostly by the black Americans as compared to the white Americans. Among the minority groups, the Hispanics are more prone to being victims of hate speech. Referring to practical examples, quoting a previous case of racial hatred that took place back in the year 1992 whereby an Asian American and being of Chinese descent was beaten to death by an angry mob believed to be white assailants as a result of unemployment level hence blaming Japanese and Chinese US invasion.

Women discrimination

Hispanic Women in the United States are more exposed to discriminations compared to their male counterparts particularly when it comes to the job and labor sector. Female Hispanics’ wages do lag behind as compared to their fellow men colleagues it is evident that in the united states of America, the wages to Hispanic women are much less as compared to the white men, women and Hispanic men of the same level. According to a research carried out on the month of March back in the year 1998, it was known that males embracing Hispanic ethnicity earned an average of $ 11.75 in an hour whereas women earned an average of $ 9.40 for the same work type. White Non- Hispanic males and females earned on average $ 15.75 and $ 11.29 respectively. This difference in wages was claimed to have been as a result of education level, work experience, occupation type, language and lastly discrimination against women. According to Oaxaca (1973), Hispanic women wages discrimination is as a result of differences from each individual’s characteristics subtracted from the total wage required to be paid hence coming up with a new calculation factor which is more of corruption and somehow reflects to discrimination also.

Health care inequality

The government had failed to provide better health facilities plus other requirements towards one’s good health for instance poor services, in adequate insurance, complete lack of health insurance and reluctance towards health seek and care (Woolf, 2004). Systematic bias is also reflected much in the way inequality is handled in health care while delivering health services to the Americans where personally I feel that these people are yet to be treated like rest of the Americans else such discrimination will bring a bad reputation towards the Americans in the near future. Though there are developments of anti-racism organizations for instance the National Association of the Advancement of Colored People, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, American-Arab anti-Discrimination committee, the National Italian American Foundation and the National congress of American Indians among others.

Sabotaged health conditions and deaths rate

In the US, there is a wide range of racial differences in delivering health services appropriately. The migrants are treated in a negative way as compared to the US white residents. With reference to an article published by the public health sector in the US, it is worthy to assert that more than 880,000 deaths could have been avoided back in the year 1991 to 2000, if proper health care had been given to the foreign residents, inclusive of Hispanics. These deaths occurred as a result of much sabotaged health facilities given to the non-natives, if these people had received the same level of health services as the white Americans, such loss could not have occurred. It is worthy to claim that currently in the United States of America, racial bias has also infected the health sector with the minority communities facing very harsh condition due to low level of response from the health officers, particularly the public health sector. Referring to a previous study carried by Hope and Elizabeth (1996) it is evident that lifetime effects of fascinating conditions like being psych comes as a result of lack of attendance from the medic al officers to the patients who end up suffering some brain and mental conditions that could have been prevented in one way or the other given the issue of community discrimination support was avoided at all cost. It is believed that the minority communities cannot receive some donations for instance blood, and other body organs transplant from the American people which shows the level of discrimination being faced by these people and the importance of immediate reforms being embraced pertaining the same. Majority of Americans from these minority communities face inadequate insurance, poor medical services, and very low level of medical centers. Patients are forced to queue in some specific medical institutions that they can afford to pay rather than trying to scramble in a health facility where they are not welcome.

Housing discrimination

Despite of earning low income, the living standards of the Hispanics cannot be justified by such income. The poor housing conditions have left this community to face housing discrimination where high charges are given but with very minimal maintenances being employed whereby tenants suffer roofs leakages and rats become part and parcel of the house living. Some landlords go to the level of refusing to refund security deposit in the case where a Hispanic tenant wants to move in into another house. Such landlords also violate the US landlord-tenant laws that protects both the tenant and the landlord, for instance the 1998 Congress- passed Fair Housing Act which was meant to eradicate housing discrimination, but the landlords seem to be very mean with the lust for money but less worried with the housing conditions and its influence on the tenants. Most of the landlords practiced the following unlawful housing discrimination:

Employing other forms of lease or contract provisions when dealing with Hispanics as compared to non-Hispanics.

Having minimum maintenance and repair practices to the houses rented by the Hispanics which was not the case for the natives.

Having minimal laundry and exercise facilities to the Hispanics which was not the case for the rest of tenants.

Forcing Hispanics to provide very high security deposits as compared to non-Hispanics.

Having the Hispanics evicted from the houses due to late payment of rent.

Religion discrimination

Today in the United States, when interviewed on how they feel about the status of their religious belief, 19 percent of Americans claim to consider being minority whereas 78 percent do not consider themselves being minority. This explains that 19 percent of the Americans are being discriminated against with respect to their religious beliefs. This has enhanced the prejudice by the Native Americans against other races as supported by Lincoln (2006). With US having the white evangelicals representing the highest percentage in terms of religion, about 24% of them refer themselves as constituent of the minority religious group whereas an equivalent of 11% of protestants and 13 % of Catholics claiming the same.

Conclusion

From this research, it is evident that Hispanics are being ill treated by the white in United States of America, courtesy of various published reports and scenes as discussed in the body of this research paper. The level of discrimination against Hispanic community living in the US is very serious with immediate measures worthy to be employed to counter it. From job discrimination, housing, freedom of expression, educational rights, and other rights have been denied to the Spanish residents living in the United States. “Studies have found that nearly three in every ten Hispanic workers feel they have been discriminated against in their employment. Some reports being referred to with racial slurs at work while one in four feel they are paid less and have reduced career advancement prospects than their Caucasian counterparts”( Sebastian, 1995).

It is therefore the high time that Civil right Act, under the federal law that covers discrimination towards a particular race, color or sex comes into real action and performance. It is worthy to claim that the Hispanics have been deprived from their human rights to enjoying their freedom of expression, speech and movement. The non-governmental organizations enhancing campaigns against racial discrimination should also continue without fear or threat from authority or other people whatsoever. The Hispanic community should recognize their rights and carry a strict campaign against being discriminated. The local government should protect these minority communities from racial discrimination as a posed method towards enhancing well-being of each and every citizen.

Hispanics are the largest minority population in the United States. Projections suggest that the estimated 46.9 million Hispanics who currently reside in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau 2009) will grow to over 62 million by 2020 and to more than 133 million by the year 2050 (Bean, 2001). Research is crucial in learning how this population functions, assimilates and understanding the societal trends that have the strongest impact on Hispanics. Hispanics display an exceptional resilience to assimilating into mainstream American cultural patterns while maintaining their traditional cultural norms, beliefs and customs (Acevedo, 2009). Research that examines the underlying factors which facilitate Hispanic assimilation gives insight into understanding Hispanic culture. It can serve as the foundation for developing a guideline in studying cultural assimilation and aiding other cultures in achieving it. An individual’s beliefs, motivation, and actions are defined and influenced by connections and investments with groups they consider themselves to be a part of. In the realm of behaviors and attitudes, groups are exceedingly significant (Acevedo, 2009). Therefore, studying Hispanics as a group supplies researchers a unique advantage in gaining relevant insight.

One of the most prominent values of Hispanic culture is familismo, the emphasis on family relationships, which includes gender roles, childbearing, familial hierarchy, etc (Raffaeilli & Ontai, 2004). It is a cultural value that highlights the priority of family connections, participation in larger family networks and harmony within relationships. In traditional Latino families, it is generally believed cultural values reflect traditional hierarchical gender roles. Women are supposed to be “virginal” until marriage. In essence this means they are expected to remain virgins until they marry and be ignorant in sexual manners because the husband is responsible for educating his wife in this arena (Quadagno, Sly, Harrison, Eberstein & Soler, 1998). The woman’s most important roles are as wife and mother – being the caretaker for the children, her husband, and home life in general. Traditional male roles are defined as machismo, in which males maintain dominant and aggressive attitudes and are responsible for working to support the family (Saez, Casado & Wade, 2009). Men are considered to be the head of the household and possess the most power in making decisions. The traditional definition of these gender roles also implies that women are the more subservient sex and men being not only more powerful but also domineering, macho, and potentially excessively controlling and abusive. The relationship between gender-role socialization and hypermasculinity suggests that the home environment is a powerful source of messages regarding male gender role norms (Saez, Casado & Wade, 2009) as well as female gender role norms. Scholarly research has criticized this depiction of traditional gender roles as stereotypical and invalid (Amaro, 1988). In the Latino world, machismo is defined as the expectation that a man will be honorable, responsible and loving towards his family (Parra-Cardona & Busby 2006). Hispanic partners are also very likely to be influenced by cultural values that emphasize personalismo, which refers to a high level of emotional resonance in interpersonal encounters (Parra-Cardona & Busby, 2006). Therefore, communication and connection between partners and within the family carry significant weight, promoting familial harmony, strength and growth.

Clinicians are responsible for understanding the familial gender roles as defined by different ethnicities in order to maintain cultural competence to work with those populations. Multicultural competence is generally characterized as involving three main areas: clinician’s awareness of the culture they identify with, clinician’s knowledge of the client’s perception of society, and clinician’s knowledge and implementation of culturally appropriate treatment strategies and interventions (Bean, 2001). Since the Hispanic population continues to grow, the demand for therapists who are trained to work with Hispanics will also rise. Therefore, research will supply information that can be applied toward developing and implementing treatment plans that will best serve Hispanics.

There exists an overwhelming amount of research concerning gender roles amongst the Hispanic population. However, research concerning roles as defined by the elderly Hispanic population is quite scarce, creating a significant gap in understanding the populace. The population of U.S. Hispanics older than 64 years is one of the fastest growing segments of elderly Americans (Beyene, Becker & Mayen, 2002). Respeto, or respect, is a traditional value in the Hispanic culture. All members of the family are expected to be respected and give it in return. Traditionally, Hispanic elderly were highly valued for their role and function as well as their ability to contribute their knowledge and experience to their family. They have served as repositories of history, tradition and values (Beyene, Becker & Mayen, 2002). They are addressed as “Don” or “Dona,” titles of reverence and respect. Children are socially and morally obligated to support their elderly parents, which typically translates to parents moving in with their children’s family once their condition limits their independence and inhibits their ability to care for themselves. However, the Hispanic elderly that have emigrated from their native country live in a different society that possesses values that differ greatly from the society they were raised in. In the modern Hispanic culture it remains common practice to seek out the elderly for advice concerning childrearing and family relations, but young Hispanics who were raised in the United States are more likely to align their values with those based on the U.S. culture, which emphasizes youthfulness and personal independence (Beyene, Becker & Mayen, 2002).

Research shows a significant connection between emotional well being and family support for the elderly Hispanic population. Elderly Hispanics deem emotional support, understanding, compassion and love from their adult children as the most important form of assistance. Thus emphasis is given to social relationships and emotional connection. An exchange of attention and affection with grandchildren also has a significant influence on the sense of well-being for Hispanic elderly (Beyene, Becker & Mayen, 2002).

The elderly Hispanic population tends to have a strong connection to religion and religious tradition. This is believed to aid in helping with the stresses of old age. Religious beliefs help people make life bearable, and determine their relationship to the supernatural, to the environment, to time, to activity, and enhance their self-worth (Beyene, Becker & Mayen, 2002). Religious beliefs are aligned closely with the conservative sphere, which indicates the possibility that elderly Hispanic whom are less assimilated into American culture and feel a more powerful connection to their culture are more likely to possess conservative views and ideals than young Hispanics or Hispanics who are more assimilated into U.S. culture. Most Hispanics in the United States identify with Catholicism or evangelical Protestantism which are traditions that have a tendency to embrace conservative theological and social values, such as opposing abortion and contraception (Ellison, Echevarria & Smith, 2005). Ultimately, conservative views call for more traditional gender roles in the family, embracing old-fashioned practices which become scarcer as the United States continues to embrace and incorporate a more modern way of life

Methods

The literature suggests that within Hispanic cultures, there are strong traditional moral ties connecting younger and older generations, including traditions like adult children caring for elderly parents and women remaining celibate until marriage. However, these relationships may be different from generation to generation, particularly as some generations become more acculturated to American life. The question we will attempt to answer is exploratory in nature and serves to ask whether or not there is a relationship between age and traditional beliefs within the Hispanic population in the United States. In order to test this question, we will utilize data taken from the Pew Hispanic Center in 2002.

The Pew Hispanic Center conducted the National Survey of Latinos in 2002 among 2929 Latinos and 1284 non-Latinos. This was a broad survey that asked a number of socially relevant questions related to culture, experience and relationship to the United States. These were telephone surveys conducted in both English and Spanish among a randomly selected sample of adults. The respondents were selected using a four-stage stratification system to identify areas more densely populated with Hispanic people and computer assisted calls were made to random phone numbers within these areas. The data received was proportioned to match expected area population values based on country of origin.

We will use the data collected from only the Hispanic population in the sample, as this is the target population relevant to our research question. In order to test our question, we will look at two variables: age and level of agreement with the statement, “It is better for children to live in their parents’ home until they get married” (Pew Hispanic Center, 2002). This question is valid for our study due to its relationship to traditional Hispanic family values regarding child and parent roles. The answers were coded in the survey using possible responses of four levels of agreement, from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree” and additionally allowed respondents to state “don’t know.” For our purposes, we will recode the data received from this question to include just the four levels of response and encode the “don’t know” responses as missing data, because these responses give us little insight within our exploratory analysis. We will begin our analysis by conducting descriptive frequencies analysis of our two variables, utilizing the dataset’s included recoded age data, which grouped age responses into five age groups, and the responses to the survey question. We will then run a crosstabulation of the two variables and conduct a Pearson chi-square test using SPSS software.

The chi-square test will allow us to see if there is a significant relationship between the two variables. It will measure the significance of the difference between the expected and observed frequencies when comparing categories of the two responses within a crosstabulation. The crosstabulation will allow us to identify specific frequencies of each response divided by age group. The null hypothesis is that there is no significant relationship between the two variables and that the frequencies of responses will be distributed equally. We will use a two-tailed test in order to be fully able to observe if a relationship exists, either positively or negatively. Based on the literature, our hypothesis is that there is a positive relationship between age and the belief among Hispanics in the U.S. that children should remain at home until marriage.

The usefulness of this exploratory analysis is that a relationship between these variables may be indicators of greater trends or differences in beliefs among generations and may serve as a basis for additional exploration. The limitation of this study occurs due to its exploratory nature in that we are looking at only one variable as an indicator for the relationship of tradition and age. Although limited in terms of general relationship, discovering a relationship with these variables specifically may help clinicians to better picture and predict generational belief differences within families regarding child and parent roles.

Results

By running descriptive frequencies on the recoded age variable, we were able to visualize an unequal distribution among our five age groups. The data (see Table 1) shows that of the 2929 respondents, the largest group were 18-29 years old, representing 32.0% of the total sample. The next two age groups, 30-39 and 40-54, reported in similar numbers, with 748 (26.0%) and 721 (25.1%) respectively. The largest drop then occurred, with only 8.5% reporting each for the next two groups, 55-64 and 65 or older.

Descriptive frequencies run on our question variable (see Table 2 and Chart 1) shows heavily skewed responses, with 1779 (61.5%) of the 2929 respondents answering that they “agree strongly” that children should live in their parents’ home until they get married. 512 (17.7%) responded “agree somewhat.” Disagreement comprised of only 20.4% of the respondents, with 11.9% disagreeing “somewhat” and 8.9% disagreeing “strongly.” Of the total sample, 38 responses equally 1.3% of the total were counted as missing data.

Running a crosstabulation on these two variables found 85 (2.9%) missing cases (see Table 3), which leaves 2844 (97.1%) cases that are valid for comparison. Within the frequency table generated by the crosstabulation (see Table 4,) we can see the degree to which each age group agrees or disagrees with the survey question. Although 61.4% of the total population strongly agrees with the question, the 65+ age group gave this response most frequently, with 78.0% of that age group strongly agreeing and 14.5% agreeing somewhat. The three middle age groups responded similarly in nearly equal numbers when proportioned for their age groups, representing 64.8% to 65.8% of each age group strongly agreeing and 16.7% to 17.8% of each age group agreeing somewhat. Although a lower proportion of the youngest age group responded with “strongly agree,” it is important to note that 49.4% of this age group still gave this response and 19.8% agreed somewhat.

Disagreement with the question displayed fewer responses among the sample population, but skewed toward the younger age group, with 18.0% of that age group disagreeing somewhat and 12.8% disagreeing strongly. The numbers decrease with each age group, with 4.1% of the oldest age group disagreeing somewhat and 3.3% disagreeing strongly. From the crosstabulation results, there appears to be a relationship wherein older respondents respond more frequently in agreement with this question. Although younger respondents strongly agree in large numbers with the question, they also report disagreement more frequently.

The results of the Pearson chi-square test (see Table 5) indicate that the relationship between these two variables is significant, with a p-value below the .0005 level, based on a chi-square value of 117.985 with 12 degrees of freedom. The results of our analysis thus reject the null hypothesis that there is an equal distribution of frequencies and no relationship. The results show a higher frequency of general agreement with our study question among the oldest group of respondents and a higher rate of general disagreement among the youngest respondents. The middle three age groups responded slightly more conservatively than the oldest group, however, they still responded more frequently with agreement to the survey question. The results of our analysis show a somewhat positive relationship between age and level of agreement with the survey question, thus confirming our initial hypothesis.

Discussion and Conclusion

The data collected shows that there is a relationship between age and traditional beliefs of people of Hispanic origin in the United States. The findings, as explained in the results section, indicate that there is a positive correlation between age and the belief that children should remain home until marriage. The older the individual surveyed is, the more likely he/she is to strongly agree with this belief. This finding assists social workers in understanding the importance of familial relationships as well as the effects of assimilation across generations within the Hispanic culture. Understanding the impact of these two factors helps to inform therapeutic work with members of this population by assisting clinicians in becoming culturally competent. Cultural competence is an important quality that all social workers ought to possess when working with individuals from a culture different from one’s own. “Cultural competence is then aspirational at best and requires the continuous development of practitioners’ cultural sensitivity, awareness, knowledge, and skills” (Furman et al, 2009) learning is an ongoing process and it is imperative that social workers keep this in mind in order to be able to serve clients from different backgrounds. By engaging in cultural competent practices clinicians will be able to better understand and empathize with his/her clients. Through the clinician’s personal awareness and cultural sensitivity, client and clinician can build a trusting relationship. Without cultural awareness, social workers contribute to oppression when working with clients from other cultures. This is unethical practice and can cause clients great harm (Sue et al., 1992). This understanding amongst the clinician and client will serve to build a therapeutic rapport between the two, which is the foundation for successful work with a client.

The effect of assimilation and acculturation across generations is another important factor that clinicians should be aware of. Though attitudes don’t dramatically differ across age groups, it is important to recognize that traditional beliefs within the Hispanic population are slowly changing as many Hispanics assimilate into the American culture. “Generally, acculturation has been measured in terms of behavior, cultural identity, knowledge, language, and values. These aspects, then, are critical components in understanding and addressing factors that cause intercultural conflict and distress related to adapting to a new culture” (Furman et al, 2009). As social workers, it is important for us to realize the potential effects that this assimilation may have. For example, one noticeable difference between the American culture and the Hispanic culture is our value system. The American culture values independence and individualism while the Hispanic culture values interdependence and collectivism. Anderson & Sabatelli point out this fact; they explain that, “Workers need to recognize that a behavior or coping mechanism is not dysfunctional simply because it does not match dominant culture patterns” (1999). This is very important for practitioners to realize when working with cultures that are different from their own. By becoming aware of potential differences in interpretations and problems practitioners will be able to better understand and relate to his/her clinics. Even problem identification itself is a part of this awareness process. What may be interpreted as a problem to the client may not be a viewed as a problem to the clinician and the same is true the other way around. For example, in terms of the survey that was conducted, it was found that older Hispanic people strongly believed that children should remain home until married. If a client came to seek counseling because his/her son/daughter moved out of the home to pursue a single lifestyle, a clinician without cultural competency may shrug this problem off. He/she may attempt to convince the individual that this is not a pressing problem because every day, people move out of their parent’s homes in order to live on their own. This is an example of the practitioner not placing the client’s values high in regard. This blatant disregard may make the client not want to participate in services.

Researcher Tina Hancock further describes the interdependence of the Hispanic culture as it relates to family, “the family generally is regarded as the survival net for its members, who internalize a strong sense of duty to one another and across generations. The foundation of this cultural orientation is the value of la familia and the principle of familismo” (2005). We must look at the effects that such a change in traditionally held beliefs may have on the family unit and culture as a whole. Using a systems perspective to analyze the interactions between an individual and his/her family, social workers can better understand conflict and potential interventions, by acknowledging that the individual, family, and cultural systems all interrelated.

Conclusion

The Hispanic population in United States is growing faster than all other minority populations combined, “The Hispanic, population is projected to swell from 28 million from 1990s to about 100 million in 2050?( pewhispanic.org). With this increase in diversity in the population it is necessary for social workers to be able to work with a variety of cultures in their work with the American population. By using the information gathered on the issues of assimilation and familial relationships clinicians can develop better and more effective interventions in their work with this particular population. Developing cultural competency is one way of achieving this task. In this study we were limited by the variety of responses that we were able to obtain, as the questions that were asked were very broad in nature. For future research it would be beneficial for researchers to delve deeper into the topic of assimilation upon cultural attitudes. Additionally, further study the effects of cultural competency as it relates to client-clinician relationships would also be effective in shaping social work practice. By becoming more aware of the different values and traditions, practitioner’s work with varied populations will become more informed and effective.

The subject of this research developed from a personal interest in the dichotomy between quality and the provision of housing in the U.K. In an interview with BBC Two news night the Planning Minister, Nick Boles, criticised the recent provision of housing. He states “People look at the new housing estates that have been bolted on to their towns and villages in recent decades and observe that few of them are beautiful. Indeed, not to put too fine a point on it, many of them are pig-ugly (the Guardian, 2012). This is a valid point and is at the core over the provision of housing as literature provides sufficient evidence based on negative feedback on housing especially with houses built in the post war periods of the 1960’s. However using the term ‘pig ugly’ to describe the effort of others is perhaps too much of an exaggeration. Nevertheless, this develops interest in exploring further what the Minister considers to be ‘pig ugly’ and what can be done to make these buildings better.

With regards to providing housing for the community, Boles was pin pointing with particular criticism to the recent Harrison Wharf development in Purfleet, Essex, which he describes as an ‘insult to the community’. The Planning Minister states that whilst more land is needed for development, the right to houses is ‘a basic moral right, like health-care and education, there’s a right to a home with a bit ground around it to bring your family up in’ (the Guardian, 2012). With this criticism on a high density type of development consisting of 103 flats, not buildings of the 1960’s either but a more recent development, raises curiosity as to what new developments offer in terms of quality in housing despite all the new policies and regulations in place. Exploring further research into the rights to houses will develop further evidence as to what extent a right to ‘a home with a bit of ground’ is a necessity.

Other evidence pointing towards the ideology of an ideal home being that with a garden includes that of the town planner Professor William Holford, whom on a report of symposium posits the view that in British housing, a tacit assumption is that the ideal house for young family with children is a cottage, a villa, or a semi-detached house with a garden. From this, it can be argued that high rise and high density flats in particular have come to be regarded as what Sir William Holford describes as ‘ a regrettable necessity, forced upon us by the shortage of land’ to accommodate the unfortunate who have to live in them Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). Taking this into account, with consideration of the growing increase in high-rise and high density housing in the UK builds up controversy and develops the keenness to investigate further whether high-rise and high density housing really is a regrettable necessity or more satisfying projects can be achieved.

The ideology of an ideal home being that with a garden described above may just be one characteristic of what the consequences of high-rise and high density housing seem to have. Literature provides other numerous consequences associated with high-rise and high density housing whereas at the same time, other literature reviews suggests that high density housing is increasingly being seen as a solution for the high demand for housing. The Planning Policy Guidance note 3 (PPG3), which sets out the government’s policy on different aspects of planning requires local authorities to avoid inefficient use of land, hereby referring to developments that provide less dwellings per given area (PPG3). It is therefore evident that the government does encourage accommodating more using less space, whether it is encouraging developments which are considered as ‘failures’ according to some literature sources, is a question that prompts further investigation.

There is much debate about what the future housing is offering as a solution with consideration to the government’s restrictions on land use. With the main drivers to high density housing being high house price inflation, a cultural shift bringing about the desire to live alone and several other drivers discussed further in a later chapter of this study, there has been an increased rate of household establishment (Bretherton & Pleace, 2008). The effect of these price inflation in houses has led to what Hills (2007) terms as ‘residualisation’, where it is mainly the poor people adapting in the social rented tenure of housing. With this occurring in the last 20 years there is now a need to bring down this compactness of poverty and social exclusion. Evidence suggests that this solution can be brought about through high density housing that are affordable and of mixed tenure. (Bretherton & Pleace, 2008).

With particular reference to high-rise and high density development in the provision of housing as they are both designed on the basis of accommodating more in less space, the debate on whether better designed, affordable and mixed tenure housing can provide a solution that tackles the demand for housing to accommodate without derogating quality is the essence of what has developed interest in doing this research.

Aims and Objectives

The Aim of my research is to investigate whether high-rise and high density housing can provide ‘good quality’ homes while providing housing to cater for the increasing demand.

To aid my study of this aim, I will use the key question noted below.

The following objectives will help in achieving the aim.

Objectives:

To provide an overview of the Increase in high-rise and high density housing in the U.K

To identify factors that affect the quality of homes that will be used in this research

To explore the negative and positive design features with high-rise and high density buildings and their effect on occupants

Key question:

Can better designed, affordable mixed tenure high-rise and high density housing provide a solution for quality homes for the future?

Literature Review
Scope of chapter

This chapter will critically appraise the literature review, identify similarities of statements, commonalities and contradictions of the body of evidence. It is divided into the following five main sections

Definition of high-rise and high density buildings (300)

History and growth of high rise and high density buildings (500)

High rise debate

Evaluating the literature on the drivers and barriers of key features of good design in high-rise and high density buildings(2000)

Definition of high rise and high density buildings
High rise buildings:

While the most prominent name for tall building remains ‘high rise’, in Britain and several other European countries high rise buildings are sometimes referred to as ‘tower blocks’. Various definitions are used to define high rise buildings as the terms do not have agreed definitions recognised internationally. Langdon and Everest et al (2002) affirm that it is not possible to define high rise buildings using absolute measures. Most sources define high rise building to suit the subject being studied, the definitions not always expressed in terms of number of storeys but rather in linear height ‘feet and meters’. According to the Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (1969), a high rise building can be defined as a building of 10 storeys or more. Craighead (2009) defines a high rise building as that which extends between 75 feet (23metres) and 100 feet (30 meters) or about seven to ten storeys depending on slab to slab distance between floors. For the purpose of this research the definition of high rise buildings is considered that of Langdon and Everest et al (2002) who believe that;

“In relative terms tall buildings are best understood as buildings who’s planning, design construction and occupation is influenced by height in ways that are not normally associated with more typical, local developments”.

High density buildings ( might need adding more)

Literature suggests that measuring density figures is problematic as there are many differences in the approximations of determining density figures. A wide variety of measurements to density have been used since 1918 including: dwellings per hectare, persons per hectare, habitable rooms per hectare, floor spaces per hectare and bed spaces per hectare (Woodford et al., 1976 cited in Jenks 2005). Although the common unit recommended by the research for the government is the dwelling per hectare the rest of the measurement are also frequently used (DETR, 1998).

To give a base for the purpose of this study, density in housing is considered the ratio between the number of households or people and the land area they occupy, the government considers 60 and above dwellings per hectare and 140persons per acre to be high density. As mentioned above the planning policy guidance 3(PPG3) encourages high density building by setting requirements for more efficient use of land stating that new developments should aim for a density which is not less than 30 dwellings per hectare (Ibid).

Therefore where high rise housing is mentioned throughout this study, it is referred to that of which is considered to be of high density.

History and growth of high rise and high density buildings

According to Reddy (nd), the growth of a city is closely linked with the growth of high-rise buildings. In England, the tallest buildings that were above the skyline were always the cathedrals, churches, palaces, castles and public buildings. The stable skyline in England was primarily contributed by the locally applied height restrictions and lack of demand for housing. In Britain, high rise buildings were first developed after the Second World War in the 1930s (????). The high rise buildings construction went hand in hand with the demolition of Georgian and Victorian housing. The destruction of houses and drastic population growth were among the main reasons that led to the construction of high rise buildings. High rise buildings seemed to be a ‘quick fix’ to the population problem in order to accommodate more people at that time. Built in central locations with excellent views, high-rise buildings were welcomed as were seen as modern living. The construction of high-rise buildings was reckoned as the modern and most effective way to handle the demand for more housing issue and the shortage of land issue.

In addition to population growth after the war, the ageing 19th century houses also led to the growth of high rise buildings in the United Kingdom. High rise buildings seemed unpopular in Britain as the ‘English houses’ concept had dominated most parts of the country. However, the situation seemed to be different in Scotland, as tenements (staircase-access blocks of any height, but most usually 3 or 4 storeys) appeared to be the common urban type for most people. Along the 19th century, different types of flats arose in London and other English towns. The four to six-storeyed tower blocks became popular among the lower classes of people and was subsequently seen developing in the west end of London as well (Glendinning & Muthesius,1994). Up until the 1990s, an estimated 400,000 flats in 6500 multi-storey blocks were built in Britain, with the most booming period being the late fifties to the early seventies. To that end, about 20% of all public housing constructed post-Second World War was provided in tower blocks primarily with 6 or more storeys (Ibid). Glendinning and Muthesius (1994) contend that the high-rise construction trend continued during the post-war years in London and the majority being built by the local authorities.

High rise and high density debate

The debate arising from whether high rise and high density buildings have brought more harm or benefits to its occupants and society is rather challenging. Tall buildings seem to be an important topic of debate in London more than any place in the United Kingdom. A scheduled debate to discuss the planning decision for a tower near Vauxhall Bridge was held in June 2005 after the House of Lords reckoned it to be as a possible threat to the London skyline. Both the benefits and the unpleasant outcomes of high-rise buildings were discussed.

To begin with, several reviews and early studies seem to have concluded that high rise and high density buildings have not had pleasant outcomes to their occupants as compared to their advantages (Cappon cited in Gifford 2006). Some major contributions to the high-rise debate are the reports commissioned by the Corporation of London, Tall buildings and sustainability (Pank 2002) and by Development Securities PLC, Tall Buildings: Vision of the Future or Victims of the Past? (LSE Cities Programme, 2002). The two reports both concur that high-rise buildings could for sure bring about an outstanding contribution to the inevitable new wave of redevelopment. However, the LSE report emphasises the need of highest standards of design for high-rise buildings whilst the Corporation of London report seems to be emphasising more on sustainable design.

ADD DEBATE ON HIGH DENSITY HOUSING

In terms of the societal level, high-rise buildings have been accused of exacerbating traffic problems, burthening existing services and infrastructure and in some ways inflicting damage on the character of neighbourhoods (Broyer cited in Gifford 2006). The attack that occurred in the United States of America in September 11th 2001 inflicted fear within occupants of multi storey buildings (Gifford, 2006). The fear that they may be attacked at any particular time raises questions as to whether high-rise buildings are good for people. This, according to sources, describes high-rise buildings as bad for its occupants people living fear of attack makes high rise buildings bad.

As for the positive side of high rise buildings, they offer excellent views especially to the upper-level occupants and not forgetting urban privacy. As mentioned above in the growth of high rise buildings, the views that high-rise buildings offered its occupants was one of the primary reason they became popular among the working class in London, therefore this terms high rise as good for its residents. High rise and high density buildings are often although not always located in central urban location, therefore their location seems to point out that they are preferable to those who like central locations. Churchman (1999) highlights that the location of high rise buildings in central areas indicates that services and public transport systems are more likely to be near as well as a significant number of close neighbours therefore one may have greater choice of friends and acquaintances for support.

High rise buildings, according to Kunstler and Salingaros (2001) have to some degree deformed the function, the quality and the long-term health of urbanism. The public realms of the streets are being clogged by the infrastructure of high rise buildings. Krier (1984 cited in Kunstler and Salingaros 2001) referred to this as ‘urban hypertrophy.’ He further asserts that they prevent the organic development of new healthy, mixed urban fabric anywhere further than the centre.

On the other hand, Broyer (2002) suggests that high rise buildings which are at times thin buildings leave more room for green space and parks. High rise buildings have smaller footprints than the low-rise houses, therefore take up less land area than the low-rise housing units. He further points out that the unused land near high rise buildings has been seen to be a no-man’s land and frequently used by dangerous elements.

ADD DEBATE ON HIGH DENSITY HOUSING

As seen from the above points, the high-rise debate has raised many questions as to whether they are good or bad. High rise buildings have both the good and bad side of them. However, the negative side of high rise buildings seem to outweigh the positive sides of high-rise buildings.

Drivers and barriers of key features of good design in high-rise and high density buildings

The increase of population has been considered to have negative outcomes from the past when cities and towns in the UK experienced rapid growth and urbanisation. The seriousness of the state of high population density now can be seen by looking at how far back density brought about consciousness to the government and the public in general. According to Jenks (2005), it was since the 1840’s where London was considered a huge city with a population of 21/2 million. More recent statistics from the Office of National Statistics indicate that the UK population is already at its fastest rate in growth and is estimated to increase from 62.3million in 2010 to 67.2million in the next ten years, taking into account higher birth rates than deaths. A further increase of 73.2million is projected in the next 25years, an estimated figure which makes up an average increased growth rate of 0.6%. (National trust). Migration figures also published by the Office of National Statistics show figures in the year 2010 to be 575,000 immigrants, a figure which is said not to have broadly changed since 2004, shows the effect of rising population due to migration into the UK. (HBA, 2011) =??

Population Increase is regarded by many sources as the core driver towards the demand for housing thus as the UK population continues to increase the demand for housing grows strongly. In London, where population is predicted to grow to 10million, a 2milion increase of Londoners will need housing over the next 20 years which means that 1million new homes will have to be built (Housing and planning consultant). Despite this, the National Housing Federation (NHF) (representatives and campaigners for better housing in England) point out that fewer houses are now being built than at any point since the Second World War. This gap between supply and demand in housing is a prominent issue in UK has instigated vast amount of research in this field.

With regards to space required for these new homes and taking into account the restrictions of protecting the green-belt, Colin Wiles, a house and planning consultant implies that “London has simply run out of space and its out-of-date green belt is the culprit”(The Guardian). With only 4,000hectares of Brownfield land, it provides barely a fifth of the space required to build 1million new homes in London”(The Guardian). To be able to house Londoners, Colin Wiles insists “London must either build upwards or outwards” hereby highlighting the demand for high-rise developments to solve the housing issues (Ibid). Many other sources including Mark Fairwether (2000) agree on the increase in population factor with planning policies that encourage development on Brownfield sites to protect the green as major influences to the market for high-rise and high density housing.

Demographic changes in everyday living is yet another factor that is seen by many sources to be influencing the demand for housing. Without going further beyond the scope of the research, the following other factors are worth iterating when identifying the drivers to more housing in a place where land is very limited (parliament)=??

Increasing number of one-person households

Life Expectance Rates

Desire for city Living

Cost of housing

Housing trends

Overseas influence

Housing rights and Eligibility

Add on more drivers

Increasing number of one-person households

Cost of housing

Research Methodology
Statement of research Aim

It is vital to analyse the different strategies of research therefore understanding the difference between quantitative and qualitative, knowing the different sources and techniques of data collection and the ethics involved is what this chapter aims to cover.

Having identified a topic and considered the purpose of study, a way of which this study is going to be performed has to be identified. It is important to determine the appropriate methodology and how to use it in order to carry out an investigation into living in high-rise and high density housing. It is by conducting this methodology that a conclusion will be arrived at (Peter, 2001). Getting to this conclusion however has to go through several steps which include collecting and analysing data that is relevant to the purpose of study (Naoum 2007).

The choice of the methodology will depend on the kind of subject which has to suit the methodology that goes with it. As it may be possible to conduct the research for the subject of study without having knowledge of the various methods, having detailed knowledge of planning an investigation will give you an insight into different ways of doing so and also enhance your understanding of the literature (Bell 2010). The main importance is to make sure that the research maximises the chance of realising its objectives (Fellows 1997).

It is important to first understand what research is about before actually conducting and planning the research. Although research can serve many purposes, the most common and effective ones are exploration, description and explanation (Babbie 2010). Exploratory research is used when only limited amount of knowledge is known for a particular subject or when a new interest is examined by the researcher. Research therefore is being done to explore more about the topic (Naoum 2012). Description serves the purpose of observing situations and events and then describing what was observed by answering questions such of what, where, when and how while explanation in the other hand tends to explain things answering questions of why (Babbie 2010).

Foundations in Research

As the type of research in this case is that of social research, it is essential to first consider the underlying of social research in order to prepare the way into which the research will be approached. Understanding and considering the two elements of science which are logic and explanation will mean that the findings have to first make sense and also correspond to what has or can be observed. These two important elements relate to three major aspects of social science representations; theory, data collection and data analysis. The theory deals with the aspect of logic in science, data collection deals with observations while data analysis analyses patterns achieved in the observations and compares what was logically expected to what was actually observed where necessary (Babbie, 2010). The order in which these three aspects can be approached is what differentiates the two important methods of reasoning in research which are; inductive and deductive.

Inductive and Deductive

Deductive theory takes the process of having a theory, reasoning it by deducing it into a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis which then gives you a pattern of observation which will help you confirm whether or not the theory is right or wrong (Deduction and Induction, 2006). Whilst deductive theory breaks down from the more general to the more precised, inductive reasoning works out the opposite. It moves from measured patterns of general observations which lead to the formation of tentative hypothesis that can then be explored into a general conclusion or theory. In understanding the social effects of living in high rise buildings, these two approaches both are effectual approaches which when both work together can provide more accurate and complete understandings.

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research uses a scientific approach and is objective in nature. Naoum (2007, p.37) defines quantitative research as:-

‘An inquiry into a social or human problem, based on testing a hypothesis or a theory composed of variables, measured with numbers and analysed with statistical procedures, in order to determine whether the hypothesis or theory hold true.’

Quantitative research therefore based on the above definition is strong and can be reliable. When there is presence of a theory and testing is needed to determine whether it holds true, a quantitative approach is to be considered (Naoum, 2007). It can also be used in the collection of known facts and studying the relationship between one set of facts to another evaluating them in numerical data (Bell, 2010).

In the case of investigating living in high-rise and high density housing, whilst finding research from data and facts that have been collected previously, testing and analysing the variables and measuring it in numbers may contribute to achieving a conclusion. Whether the findings only achieved from this method of research will be enough is highly doubtable thus other strategies of research may need to be considered.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is more concerned and seeks to understand the purpose of study based on opinions and feelings of individuals’ perceptions of the world (Bell, 2010).

‘Qualitative research is subjective by nature. It emphasises meanings, experiences (often verbally described), description, and so on.'(Naoum, 2007, p.40).

The information obtained from this strategy of research falls in two categories;

a) Exploratory research

b) Attitudinal research.

In order to explore more about a subject, Interview technique is usually used to collect data so as to diagnose a situation, screen alternatives and discover new ideas. Attitudinal research is used to evaluate opinions of people towards a particular ‘object’. The ‘Object’ in this case refers to an ‘attribute’, a ‘variable’, a ‘factor ‘or a ‘question. (Naoum, 2013). Babbie (2010) defines variables as ‘logical groupings of attributes’ whereas attributes are ‘characteristics of a person or things’.

The two ways in which data can be collected are primary data collection and secondary data collection. To investigate the living in high rise and high density buildings, using exploratory research would be beneficial to the study to personally question the residents using interview techniques hence getting their opinions of the effect of living in the schemes.

Naoum (2012) describes primary data as that of which is collected at first hand coming directly from the source, while secondary is data that is obtained from other sources using desk study approach. Using both primary and secondary methods of collecting data may be useful, with secondary data helping to back up the views and opinions of people collected from primary sources which may be in question.

Whilst the primary research method technique will be interviewing personnel, an awareness of any restrictions or requirements to be considered is worth knowing. Lutz (cited in Bell 2010) who writes about ethnographic research suggests that some type of ‘contract’ should be established with the associated field, ‘contract’ in this case referring to the set of restrictions and requirements that a researcher is to consider. Many professional bodies and organisations have set their own ethical guidelines as Lutz (cited in Bell 2010) stresses, it may well be that whilst investigating about living in high rise buildings issues such of care needed when involving children, manner of conducting the interview, rights of the interviewee, voluntary participation, what subject may or not be examined and more need to be considered before research is being done. The research being done in this case will represent an intrusion into people’s lives, knocking on people’s doors for them to participate in interviews perhaps is a disruption in the persons regular activities. Moreover, the information required may be personal and often not known to people associated to them let alone a stranger intending to research. Therefore it is worth reiterating that understanding the importance of ethical agreements about what is proper and improper when conducting research need to be considered beforehand. (Babbie, 2010, p.63)

The studies were carried out by Joanne Bretherton and Nicholas Pleace who were greatly supported by Kathleen Kelly and Alison Darlow who managed the project on behalf of the Joseph Rowntree foundation.

Case Studies

This chapter will discuss three case studies. One in the North West of England, one in London and one in Scotland. The case studies will briefly describe the characteristics of the case study schemes, their design, location, number of storeys and their tenure mix. Subsequently, the case study schemes will also consider the following:

Reasons as to why the occupants of the case study schemes moved in.

The report findings on the attitudes of occupants towards living in the case study properties.

Finally analyse the lessons learnt from the study that can towards establishing quality housing for the increasing demand.

Case Study 1:

Case study one is located in the North West of England and was completed in 2001. The developer of the scheme was a housing association. The size of the whole site was 0.49 hectares while the whole scheme was of 120 units per hectare built between four-to-six storeys including both accommodation and work sites. This scheme provided 75 flats set around a communal courtyard including:

14 one-bedroom flats

42 two-bedroom flats

19 three-bedroom flats.

An on-site meeting room was also available on site. The primary focus of the scheme was providing social housing for rent and had a high level of involving the occupants in management. The main aim of the scheme is connected to urban regeneration as the entire area was being redeveloped. Other developments have come up around the area since the construction of the scheme. The design, however, is rather uncommon in trying to adhere to an outstanding architectural style in a user-friendly modern development (Bretherton & Pleace, 2008).

Case Study 2:

Case study 2 is located in London and was completed in 2003. The developer of this scheme was also a housing association. The size of the whole site is 0.53 hectares with 122 dwellings per hectare; this had the highest density compared to the other case studies. The site had about 70 units per hectare, made up of:

31- one bedroom flats

12-two bedroom flats

16- three bedroom houses

6- Four bedroom houses.

This scheme was built on brownfield and a large shared communal area around it. The whole site was affordable, providing social rented housing, key worker Low Cost Home Ownership (LCHO) and renting and LCHO. Accommodation for people with support needs was also available which was designed for easy access. The scheme was fundamentally designed as an example of low-cost housing in a very pricy part of the country within the remit of it being high density, energy economical and advanced in construction with a balanced sustainable mixed community (Bretherton & Pleace, 2008).

Case study 3:

Case study 3 is located in a large urban area in Scotland and was completed in 2000. The size of the whole site is 1.6 hectares while the whole scheme was of 75 units per hectare in a two-to-four storey perimeter block with a community centre, surrounded by terraced gardens and enclosed by allotments for use by the occupants of the scheme. The development was made up of 120 flats including:

35-one bedroom flat

46-two bedroom flat

39-three bedroom flat.

The tenure mix was chiefly balanced towards social renting, covering 70% of the flats, with most of the remainder being LCHO through shared possession. Some of the flats had been constructed for market sale owner occupation. Similar to case study 2, some of the flats were particularly designed for people with support needs. In contrast to the other case studies, this one was designed to be car free, ther

The research paper will briefly introduce the topic of research paper work specifically defining the key words. In the discussion part, the research paper will examine the reasons for high divorce rates in the military. The research will set out reasons for high divorce rate in the military especially those of marriage age, and the previous existence marriages. It will focus also on the race impacts upon marriage, which are the largest influences behind high divorce rate in the military. The paper will explain the sociological research findings, and sociological theoretical perspectives of high divorce rates in the military. The conclusion will finally summarize the causes of high divorce rates in the military basing them on sociological theoretical perspectives.

Introduction

Military people are those brave individuals employed by a government in the armed forces in order to take care of national security. Divorce is a final marital union termination, and cancelling a legal marriage duties and responsibilities, and dissolving matrimonial bonds between two partners. Research indicates that military men and women have high divorce rates in the military.

Discussion

There are wide ranges of cases in the last few decades that have risen within the marriage institution among the military populace. Early marriages leads to a short lasting period of familial stability than those enacted later on, in adulthood. An estimate of divorce rates shows that 48 percent of all initiated first marriages ends before a wife attains the age of 18 years. The first marriages of about 25 percent begin when female spouses attains at least 25 years old. Amongst divorce predictors, establishment of age at marriage is the most consistently indicative regardless of starting period of marriage (Hack, 2008). The issue of high divorce rates is a big question for the sociologists. Sociologists have studied vigorously in order to find direction and solid reasons that lead to high divorce rates in the military. There are more informed reasons and sociological theories attempting to explain the high divorce rates in the military (Crown and Karney, 2007).

The highest rate of divorce in the military branches continues to be a worsening statistic compared to other careers. Many causes contribute to it. Inadequate time spent with the family is the leading cause. This is because most military personnel spend little time with their families. Military men and women also undergo divorce problem because of a lot time spent out in a war thus lack adequate time for their loved ones. This makes their partners to move away from such marriage in search of the partners who are ready to stay with them every moment.

This contributes to another cause; poor communication. Families with poor or lack of communication, and those spending many hours in the work place have high chances of divorce. The spouses of military men and women have a tendency to become unfaithful when the former are far away from their families. When their partners discover this, they end up separating. More often than not, they finally end up filing divorce cases in the courts. With vital communication, military people can build solid block or lay well foundation basing on trust, loyalty, and love (Chall, 2001).

The work involved in military is hard and needs full dedication as well as devotion. Because of this, most military people get to deal with the stress in fighting, and defending their countries. They encounter problems in handling divorces especially when the spouses are not even within the same country they are serving. Most military people try to handle divorce related stress through counseling available from couples who have encountered problems of separation for long periods (Hack, 2008). Another thing that can help them to reduce divorces rate is by ensuring that before they engage and marry, they should be ready for commitment.

Strenuous jobs contribute to the increased rate of divorce. It is not only in the military divorce that the rates are rising up, but also in 50% of the couples doing strenuous jobs end up divorcing. The statistical research shows that the bigger percentages of married people working in the military have high divorce rates than other ordinary couples (Crown and Karney, 2007). In military, there is little time to rest and almost no time to socialize with family and friends. Therefore, military people should try to talk about their feelings with their families if they want to secure their marriages, and avoid chances of separation and divorce.

Place of women in the society theory attempt to define and explain the role of the female gender in the society. It details how they have violated their roles. The place of women in the society is nowadays changing and is leading to high divorce rates. The military is neither spared. The role of woman has undergone modification and has become manly. Women are no longer watchers of the house, cooks, or cleaners, but they do the same roles that men play. Men dominance is now fading because they compete with women in places of work, and in almost all fields in the economies (Chafetz, 2006).

The marriage question in the institution theory has it that social dynamics keeps on changing making marriage less meaningful than it was before. People no longer have respect to moral ideals. Mothers who are working nowadays are common in the military, and the marriage expectations are very different than they were, previously. It is no longer the responsibility of men to use their own income to support an entire family. This is because women can comfortably support them in household chores. Most communities have accepted this kind of changed arrangement. Therefore, divorce rates keeps on rising due to changes in the roles of women, especially those in the military (Sowers, 2006).

Conflict theory better explains various phenomena that occur in the military. The conflict perspectives focus on a wide range of things for instance drug abuse, and extra-affairs. Abuse and affairs are justifiable in some extents, and is the most obvious reason for high divorce rates in the military. It is understandable that couples would not like to live with someone who causes violence in the family. Many couples consider divorce especially when they do not want to stay in a miserable marriage. This have an even bigger impact on children especially when their parents fight in front of them and it worsens when parents divorce. Children may feel unsafe, or lack parental love when of the parents walks out of marriage.

Some military men abuse substances such as marijuana, cocaine, and laudanum thinking that they will make their minds function properly. These drugs finally end up causing addiction and the result is violence, or conflict in the family. The conflict theory attempts to refute the perspective of the functionalist explaining social problems in the military. This theory considers that a society function in order to ensure each group of persons play a certain role just like body organs (Sowers, 2006).

Stress factor can be an enormous cause of marital difficulties in the military. Research indicates that money factor especially limited financial income leads to divorce. This is quite evident among junior enlisted personnel with children, and those on long-term deployment. Many marriage counselors are of the notion that money is the root cause divorce in military marriages (Crown and Karney, 2007). Some say society itself contributes to divorce cases, but more value placed on individualism, self-expression, self-realization, and choice of personnel are the main causes of increasing military divorce. In financial cases especially among enlisted junior personnel, divorces often occur because of separation of couples for a long time on multiple occasions. These problems can reduce incase there is allowance of shorter deployment periods to limit marriage issues and to better family life (Karen, 2008).

Cultural theory traces back where early marriages were discouraged in the society. Research further indicates that, each year, cases of early marriages made between the ages of 15 to 19 are on the increase. Many young married couples often do not keep their original relationship together. High divorce in the military is increasing because of changes in the law. Over the decades, marriage institution earned respect, and there were rare divorce cases because it was illegal to divorce. Nowadays this has changed, and military people keep walking in and out of marriages because of non-restriction in marriage. Anybody can file cases of divorce if there are minor disagreements in a marriage.

The sociological context in cultural theory places divorce in traditional society as something that deteriorated the society thus divorce rarely occurred. The present society has high divorce that result even from sexual problems in the family. Several couples in military are sexually frustrated. They are not having enough sex when their partners keep on spending long working time outside (Anderson and Taylor, 2007).

Conclusion

The high divorce rates in the military are explained well by sociological perspectives. These sociological theories have their premises on the behavior of human beings. They blame contrasting and dynamic features of social life in expounding on high divorce rates in the military. Cases of divorce in the military are increasing every time, and the research shows that the military, as an occupation, is leading in divorce. These perspectives put several reasons forth, and all seem to justify. Therefore, the causes of high divorce rates are multifaceted and are dependent on the nature of a given case.

Today, in our world one of the biggest issues that have risen amongst health care activist in the United States is how health disparity and inequality has affected rural areas and culture. However, it is important to keep in the back of our minds that this is not a problem that only exists in the U.S., it is a worldwide concern. Health disparity is taking an in depth look at the differences in health status between different social groups, gender, race, ethnicity, education, income, disability, and sexual orientation. While on the other hand, health inequalities is taking a look at the unjust and unfair treatment one gets because of their socioeconomic status and demographic area in which they are part of. Having such a wide array of difference in health inequality and disparity is what also contributes to the United States ranking in the bottom of industrialized western nations when it comes to life expectancy rate, and infant mortality rate. Finding ways to close the gap between life expectancy from one race to the other may greatly contribute in making the U.S rank as one of the top nations in the western part of the world.

One of my main reasons for selecting this topic was because I wanted to take an in depth look through research and studies to find out why health inequality and disparity still exists in a great and rich country like the United States. In addition to that, my second point in selecting this research topic was to find out how there can be equality amongst people living in urban and rural areas in the U.S. when it comes to the area of health care. Even though over the years they have been great improvements and minor changes; there is still more work to be done in order to make health and equality for all.

Health should be a right for all, and not a privilege based on whether one lives in a rural or urban area, or whatever socioeconomic status they may have. One should get the rights to have the same privileges. One of the huge differences when looking at health disparity is life expectancy age between white, black, and African males, and black, white, and African American females. For example, the life expectancy for an average white male is 76.7 years old while on the other hand for an African American male the average age of life expectancy is 67.8 years old. Comparing the two ages there is a difference of 8.9 years between a Caucasian, and an African American male. After looking at the difference one may ask themselves these questions: they are all American why can one race live longer than the other? This is a question I have asked myself before, however taking this class through the semester helped me to understand why. Baer mentions, “African Americans experience about 67,000 more deaths than they would have had their mortality rates been similar to whites.” “This translates into 2.2 million more years of life lost.” One of the main reasons for this is that most Caucasian males live in an urban area with good jobs, good incomes, good health insurance, and access to good doctors, while on the other hand, an African American male living in a rural area does not have access to health insurance, does not have a good job, or does not have access to a family doctor. This may lead to a lot of stress to an individual which may cause different diseases such as chronic heart disease, hypertension-which may lead to stroke, heart attack, and renal failure. This in turn may lead to premature death of an African American male. These results are the same for women also. As stated by, “premature mortality (75 years of age) is greater rural residents than among urban residents, and rural-urban mortality differences vary by age.”

Premature death and mortality is one of the key issues when taking a look at health and inequality in the United States. Nevertheless, another subject to closely examine is how health and diseases are not distributed fairly. Individuals who live in rural areas are more likely to get a disease than one who lives in an urban area. This also contributes to the kind of health individuals may get. For example, diseases like tuberculosis would be common in a rural area because of the life style one may live, the kind of income they may earn, and the health care they may be receive could be totally different than the one they receive in the urban area. According to, (levy and Sidel) “The cause of many diseases are complex interplay of multiple factors, many of which are due to social injustice.” For instance, Caucasians receive more attention and care when they visit a doctor which may lead to a wide variety of issues. However, the one that stands out the most is because the color of the individual’s skin, he/she may be looked at differently, or not given the same care a Caucasian would have received.

The subject of disparity and inequality does not only stop with adults, it also reaches down to children. Unfortunately it is a subject that affects all ages from infants to adulthood. In some cases there have been findings that when it comes to certain diseases and long term hospitalization, infants whom their parents are of different social class or race are treated differently and are cared about differently than kids that are Caucasian, or not minorities. While doing my research for this project I was amused to find out the inequality and disparity comes down to this level that even infants are cared for differently because they belong to a certain minority group. As I have stressed out in my paper and continue to do so, I really believe that everyone should have equal access to health care regardless of their differences. In one of my articles it takes and in depth look at how children’s asthma hospitalization and urban areas in Texas are different. Grineski mentions, “It talks about how poor children are dispropriately affected as they have higher asthma prevalence rates (and more servere asthma) than non poor children.” I found this to be a very interesting finding that areas where poor children and non- poor children were living would affect their health. This could be because of several reasons, for one it could be because of the demographic area or the type of housing conditions in which these infants live in. All these factors could play a big part in contributing to the findings that kids in rural areas are more probable to get Asthma.

However, there are also many other factors that also contribute to health disparities. There are socioeconomic factors that include the individual’s race, ethnicity, the kind of education they may have, and the kind of income they earn annually that also contribute to the individual’s health. As mentioned earlier, the individual’s health may allow him/her to receive a different treatment from another individual whom is of a different race. For example, John, an African American male, goes to see his doctor because he has been coughing for a week and wants to get checked out. Instead of giving John all the different tests, the doctor would just give him medicine and tell him he just has a cold or flu, yet if it is a white male they would probably give him a thorough check up to see what was really wrong with the individual, and then give that person the necessary medication they need.

Also, ethnicity brings an additional dimension to health disparity. As mentioned earlier, when it comes to health care for minorities they generally have a harder time getting the kind of care they need, especially ones that live in the rural areas. Baer mentions that, “Health disparity research suggests that ethnic minority groups like African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans suffer a triple burden in seeking health care: 1. They are significantly less likely to have health insurance than whites, and so accessing care is a major challenge, and while adequate acute care is hard enough to come by, preventive care is all but impossible for those who are insured”

The kind of education one has also contributed to the gap between health inequalities between individuals. The more education one has the longer they live, and the healthier life style they have. This is mostly due to the fact that the higher education you have the higher income one may get, and the better education one may get the more likely the individual may have a good job with great security which helps to provide financially for their families. The less education they have the less they can earn, the more stressful the job can be, and the less job security they have in order to provide for their families. Also, the more education you have the more educated you become about living a healthier life style. For example, eating healthier by getting good nutrients and a having a good diet is smart, but in order to live this kind of life style one must be able to afford it which does not allowed everyone in the United States to have this opportunity. Kaplan states, “On this view, we can understand why controlling for the SES and education reduces the health disparities between blacks and white Americans but does not eliminate them.” “Because black Americans are also systematically disadvantaged with respect SES and education and because SES and education are associated with health outcomes in the United States.”

Another determent that also brings a problem to health inequality and disparity is the environment one lives in. The environment we live in plays a big role on the kind of diseases we get and develop. Plus, the area one lives plays a big part in the kind of health care one receives. For example, one living in a rural area may not have access to a hospital, or the right doctor they may need to help them give them the right attention they need to live a healthier life style. An additional thing that plays a role on the kind of health we get from the environment could be the kind of water one has access to. The kind of water people in rural areas may use may have things in it that are not healthy for one to drink and may cause different kinds of stomach viruses or stomach problems. The kind of food individuals get in the grocery store maybe not be as healthy as the ones individuals from urban areas may get. Some food may contain more fat and carbohydrates, than the ones they have in the grocery store in urban American cities nationwide. According to McElory and Townsend, “That changes in components of their model (e.g. new subsistence patterns) can cause in balances in the other components ( e.g. new subsistence strategies can lead to exposure to new risk ), and a very severe imbalance to generate stress and disease.” As the above quote points out, health inequality and disparity can be a big part of the kind of environment one lives in. After selecting this topic I wanted to personally drive through the urban and rural areas of Fort Wayne and compare the differences. Hartley mentions, “Traditional concerns as to access to primary and hospital continue to dominate rural health policy.” As I drove through town I observed a few things. One observation was that there were barely any hospitals in the rural area. I found a couple of clinics but all the major hospitals, and big health facilities were located in the urban areas. In my opinion, this is a huge disadvantage for someone living in a rural area in Fort Wayne. Another thing I observed during my drive was that there are far more liquor stores located down south. For example, you can drive down a block and you can see three or four liquor stores by the time I was done driving through the block. In contrast, up in the urban areas there are liquor stores but not as many as the ones I came across while in the rural areas. Another thing I also noticed while I was doing my observation was that the urban areas are well taken care of. The streets are clean, buildings were properly done, and roads were done properly with no dirt on the streets. Yet in the rural areas the opposite was true. There were several buildings that were left unfinished; roads were not as clean, housing areas were not as properly done as the ones done in urban areas in Fort Wayne. These are several inequalities I observed on my own. It was a firsthand experience, and I was very shocked to find out that such things are going on in our on back yard here in Fort Wayne. I believe that in order for us to address this problem as a nation we must first focus in our own cities and towns and then work our way up.

Individuals in rural areas have been accustomed to receive unfair health care attention that people that live urban areas in the United States are used to recieving. As mentioned earlier in my paper this not only a problem in the United States but a problem that is effecting millions of other continents around the world. Joyce and Bambra state that, “Despite overall improvements in health outcomes since the second world war, health inequalities between the best and worst of society are persistent in developed nations and in some in some instances are continue to widen”

As a community how can we address health inequality and disparity in our communities to help this stigma get away? Studies have definitely shown that they are minor improvements that have taken place over the years, but never the less, as a community we have a lot of work to be done. Hartley mentions, ” Recent trends in rural health research and policy suggests that effective policy interventions must be based on differences among rural regions. “When arguing for progressive rhetoric for rural American, “rickets noted that Urban-Rural comparisons.” One of the first things I think we need to do as a community is first try to improve our rural areas. The next step I believe we should do as a country is have a universal health care program in place where everyone will be able to have insurance for every citizen in the United States. In making health insurance accessible to every one in the United States any person will be able to receive the health care they need. An additional thing we as a community need to do in order to address health inequality and disparity is to have more hospitals in the rural areas and not just in the urban areas. We need to have hospitals and clinics more accessible to them. So if they need to see the doctor they do not need to make a fifteen to twenty minute drive they can have it right in their neighborhood.

I firmly believe education is the key to removing health inequality and disparity from our communities. The better we educate individuals that are of a different race, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity, the more adequate a person knows about how to live a healthy life style and eat properly. We need to get them to exercise more in order to live healthier, and also educate them about the effects of smoking cigarettes and what it causes. For example, have health fair programs that will tell them how smoking can cause lung cancer, and many other chronic diseases, and also better educate them how drugs and sharing needles can affect one’s life style and cause many diseases such as HIV-which is a very serious epidemic that is killing millions of people in our world today. Also having different organizations that are pro-health that would go into the different rural communities and talk and mentor individuals on what they can do to live a good and healthier life would be a great asset in educating individuals.

Another way for us to draw the gap when it comes to health and inequality is to create more jobs for individuals, so that they will be able to work and support their families. In doing this it will give them something to stress less about, which in turn will help individuals to be stress free. As mentioned earlier in my paper, stress causes a lot of health issues which can lead to different cardiovascular heart problems, effect once growth, diabetes, and hypertension which are all various disease one can get from living a healthier life style. So hopefully creating more jobs in rural communities may be able to create a less stressful life for individuals.

Improving the environment are also ways in which we can address health disparity in our communities and country. For us to take the next step in which we can overcome health disparity and inequality is to clean up the rural areas. They should be cleaned up, they should also have access to clean water to drink, and tap water should be sterilized to certain standards to meet the States regulations. Also fountains and lakes should be monitored and kept clean, having clean water is important in other for mosquitoes and other parasites to not take over rural communities. Not having all these necessary steps taken people in rural areas may have easy access to malaria and other diseases which may greatly affect their community.

Doing away with majority of the liquor stores in rural areas will also help to bring inequality to our neighborhoods, because having alcohol in rural areas in my opinion just helps to destroy the individuals in these areas. Drinking may also contribute too many other diseases that may cause premature death in one area. Another substance that we can do away with is creating awareness about drinks and get them off the streets. In getting both drugs and alcohol out of the rural areas we can only hope that we can try to get the rural areas to be almost equivalent to urban areas although one that will not be easy to do.

In doing the following we can hope that health inequality and disparity in rural areas can be improved to met the standards that urban areas have. The U. S is such a wealthy nation that they should not be anything such as health inequality and disparity amongst different areas in the . From my research I do however believe that there is hope for the future. Changes are been made however, we just have to put our differences apart in other for us to reach the point where health is equal and available to everyone no matter how much income they make, the amount of education they have, or the color of the skin they should have access to it .

Overall, I learned a lot of from this project I gained a lot of knowledge from it. I became aware of things that I was not previously not aware of in the past. I never looked at health as inequality and disparity; I rather looked at it from a different prospective but in doing this project it made me understand what it means when one mentions the United States health care system has inequality and disparity in its system. From doing this project I also gained passion for this topic and down the road I would like to volunteer, or be health activists, because as repeated earlier in my paper I believe health services should be offered to everyone.

HEALTH INEQUALITIESINTRODUCTION

The aim of this essay is to compare and contrast different sociological perspectives of health and illness. The definition of health, rather than being absolute is always relative and it differs from person to person. According to the WHO: “Health is a state of complete physical, social and mental well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being, without distinction of race, religion, political beliefs or economic and social conditions.” (World Health Organisation 1948) (WHO, 1946). Thus, illness can be defined as a disturbed physical, social or mental state of an individual.

The second objective is to analyse the existing evidence of social variations in health and illness in the society. Various reasons such as social factors, lifestyle, race, nationality etc. have an effect on the health of an individual. Reasons for inequalities in health due to such factors will be studied.

Lastly, sociological issues which effect a person’s well being will be explained. These can be bad habits, poverty, work environment, geographic factors, unequal distribution of health services etc.

We again go back to the first paragraph and look at the definition of health as provided by WHO. As we can see, though all the factors of health (physical, social, mental) have been taken under consideration, as to what is “the highest attainable standard of health” is a matter of debate. This might depend on the society, class, religious or cultural beliefs or even personal expectations of the individuals. These standards will definitely differ according to the nationalities and the type of government. There are a range of perspectives presented by sociologists, philosophers and economists regarding health and illness. Presented below are a few of those.

Talcott Parson, an American sociologist, was a believer in the ‘Functionalist’ perspective where the “whole world (or the community, society) is treated as a system having various parts which function in tandem to maintain the vitality of the system.” In such a system, illness is seen as a condition which is not normal. Hence, a sick person is not bound to follow the social norms or rules of the society due to his or her condition. Also, it is understood that the sick person is not the one who is to be blamed for his or her condition. The person’s illness is due to external factors and the person could not have done anything to prevent the illness (or sickness). But the person should try their best to get well as soon as possible. Also, it is important that the person should seek the best technical help possible and should cooperate with the physician in order to get better. The Functionalist perspective describes illness as a temporary, medically sanctioned form of deviant behaviour which can be cured by technical expertise and proper attention.

Another approach is that of the Marxist perspective as presented by Vicente Navarro (1986). This perspective states is more concerned with conflict rather than stability. According to this approach, economic system shapes societies therefore the class system has produced two distinct classes, the bourgeoisie (those who own the means of production) and the proletariat (those that sell their labour). Further, it states that the NHS is responsible for the wellbeing of the working class of the society and it has to see that the workers remain fit enough to work. Even when two classes are in existence, the workers must believe that the system is fair and beneficial for all. Also, the sale of alcohol and tobacco should have limited control as these products garner profits.

Looking at the first perspective, it becomes obvious that the illness of a person is the only thing that is taken into consideration when putting forward the views while in the second approach, a marked distinction is made between the two classes. Parson believes that though person is not responsible for the sickness, it is the persons responsibility to acquire adequate health care in order to get fit again. Marx, on the other hand holds the NHS responsible for providing health services to the masses and making them good enough to work. While the functional approach treats all factors and forms of illness as the same, the Marxist perspective provides various reasons for the illness. Thus, as can be seen, there is a stark difference between the two perspectives on health and illness.

A few more perspectives such as the interactionalists & social action approach and the feminist approach looks at health care with an objective viewpoint. The Feminist approach is mainly concerned with the male domination of the medical profession. According to this, many woman specific conditions such as pregnancy and childbirth have related to medical issues though they are natural processes which are bound to occur in every woman at a particular stage in their lives. Also, contraception is not given enough priority and thus risking women’s health. As women have to balance family and work, they suffer from stress in addition to other mental and physical illnesses. The interactionalist approach treats illness as an individual’s viewpoint. What condition can truly be defined as illness differs from person to person. This approach does not take into consideration the cause of illness but is only concerned as to what illness.

As discussed earlier, each and every individual does not have the same health requirements. Neither do everyone have access to the same facilities. These variations can be due to a variety of factors. In the following paragraphs, some of them have been discussed and analysed.

There are a number of reports that claim that there is a link between the social class of an individual and health of that individual. The social class is decided by the occupation, the income level, education and housing. These factors together decide in which social class an individual belongs to.

The first report in this category is the Black Report of 1980 which states that the gap in inequalities of health is ever widening between the higher and lower classes of the society. Some interesting findings were made in this report. As we go down the social ladder, the percentage of people affected by ill health increase. This has little to do with the facilities provided by the NHS. Unemployment, poor hygiene and housing, lack of education, low income are stated as the major reasons for this inequality. Another such report, the Acheson report (1998), had an in-depth survey conducted of the lower classes in the society. The results were same as those of the black report. The Acheson report blames poverty to be the root cause of the disparity observed. A startling fact of this report is that it states that health inequalities start before the birth of an individual. It also recommends lessening the gap between the rich and the poor to improve health standards for everyone, irrespective of the class.

While the Black report simply states the factors which affect health and illness, the Acheson report actually provides statistics for the same. It shows that as we move from social class I to social class V, there is increased risk of variety of diseases like cancer, respiratory, heart, strokes etc. Also, the chance of accidents and suicides also increase in the lower classes. It states that poor men and women are more likely to die than rich ones. Thus mortality is also proportional to the social class that an individual belongs to.

Other than the social aspect of inequality in health and illness, sociological factors also come in play when we talk about an individual’s health. Unlike social factors, sociological factors cannot be grouped in broad categories as they involve many personal characteristics. Some of these are unhealthy habits such as drinking in excess, smoking, no exercise, too much junk food etc. Also, such an unhealthy lifestyle maybe an outcome of lack of knowledge or education. People might not be informed about the harm such a lifestyle may cause them in the wrong run or the services offered to them to overcome these habits. As a result, more inequality in wellbeing is created.

Some criticism is offered against the propaganda of a healthy lifestyle. One major concern is the cost of following a healthy lifestyle. It is argued that healthy meal options are expensive than their fast-food counterparts. The recommended five a day is also considerably costly than everyday food. In order to exercise, one has to pay a gym or a club membership which adds to the expenses made for a fit lifestyle. In some cases, bad habits like drinking and smoking might be adapted due to the pressure and stress of work rather than at will.

It is also argued that as the working-class people usually have blue-collared jobs that involve more manual work than what is done by the people of the upper class, they are more exposed to accidents. Also, as the masses get paid less than the cream class, there is less security in case of death or physical injury of the earning member of a family. If repetitive, monotonous work is done by an individual, various physical as well as psychological problems might arise. Due to lack of job satisfaction, these problems might aggravate to a dangerous level.

The theory of social capital is put forth which is the measure of how connected people are to their communities via various means such as work, family, clubs, faith groups, organisations etc. This connectedness is believed to have a direct impact upon the health of a person. A study showed that in a community where people are more connected, there were 50% less heart-attacks than the neighbouring areas where such amount of social capital was not present.

Another reason of health inequalities may be the “Inverse care law” which states that the resources are distributed in inverse proportion to the need. When most required, they are least likely to be available and where there is no need, they will be in abundance. An example could be of physicians who setup practices in major areas where there is little need rather than in small towns where there is a true need. Also, some doctors show a bias while treating a well-to-do patient as they expect a higher fee in return.

Not quite unlike the social capital, Pierre Bourdieu (1960) defined the cultural capital (which is essentially money), is a deciding factor in obtaining health care. Money is directly related to a better lifestyle, higher status in the society and better education. Instead of waiting for obtaining health care facilities due to limited funds, cultural capital gives people power to immediately get access to them.

Due to the inequality in the health services provided in various areas, it is thought that the patient’s chances of survival can be affected largely by where they live. This is because health care provision is not the same across the country. The inner city areas have fewer health care facilities and qualified doctors. This results in below par health amenities and further health and illness inequalities.

Another theory looks at the gender bias as the cause for health inequalities. It states that poor mental health of women can be directly related to discrimination by male doctors. It also states that as woman manage multiple things at once like doing house chores, working and taking care of children, it all adds to the mental stress they experience. Lack of social contact or inability to have time for one might further harm health.

James Nazroo (1997) provided more theories which try to explain the existing inequalities in health in the country. A genetic condition may put individuals at a disadvantage to their healthier counterparts. Cultural factors such as unhealthy food, no exercise etc. may also result in illness. Other factors like material (less income, poor work condition), racism or discrimination, irregular work hours etc. seriously affect productivity and health of the individual.

In conclusion, it is wise to say that although there are many theories and explanations for health inequalities, the reasons provided by all of them are quite similar. The top amongst them are poverty, unhealthy lifestyle and lack of health care facilities. If an improvement is done in the above mentioned areas, these inequalities can be controlled and uniform health care can be provided to all the people of the society. Awareness should also be spread regarding these inequalities so that people themselves protest against these.

Bibliography

Michael Hughes, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University

http://www.bukisa.com/articles/132985_functionalist-perspective-of-sociology

http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/007240535x/student_view0/chapter1/chapter_summary.html

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

http://www.ucel.ac.uk/shield/parsons/Default.html

http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/apryce/marxist.htm

http://www.sochealth.co.uk/history/black.htm

http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/doh/ih/ih.htm

Compare and contrast two of the five approaches to mental health & illness within Sociology. (social causation, social reaction (labelling theory), critical theory, social constructivism & social realism)Mental Health Illness

The issue of mental health has long been an object of study for society, the psychiatric professions and sociology has similarly had a long tradition of offering theoretical insights into the phenomenon. Why this might be is open to debate and many of the key sociological theories in relation to mental health have in fact as much to say about the prevailing viewpoints within society and within professional bodies towards mental health as they do about those who suffer from mental health related problems (Cockerham, 1992). The two most radical of the sociological theories concerning mental health have been social reaction or labelling theories as well as that of social constructivism.

Both these theories examined within this essay offer a radical conception of mental health in comparison to what might be called the dominant medical and social views on mental health. However while both of these theories offer a radical view of mental health they differ substantially in the theoretical framework which they respectively utilize towards understanding mental health. These differences can be located in broader trends which have occurred within the discipline of sociology itself as a shift in the major theoretical traditions within the discipline, (Delanty, 1999). The two sociological theories examined are that of social reaction and social constructivism.

Social Reaction

This critical theory emerged in the 1960s which in itself might serve to highlight the broader critical strands present within society when this theory was formulated. Labelling theory works from the simple premise that to define someone as mentally ill conveys upon them a stereotypical image which the person will then act. It drew its framework from the symbolic interactionism school of sociology so at its root this theory sought to examine the ways in which roles and actors interacted and played out within the drama of mental illness (Pilgrim and Rogers, 1999. Thus for labelling theory the relationship between the patient (or the individual defined as ill), family, medical professions and society generally is the determining factor for analysis in relation to mental illness.

For labelling theorists then the primary framework for analysing mental illness is to examine the twin concepts of primary deviance and secondary deviance. Primary deviance relates to things which might actually be wrong or actions or circumstances which involve actual rule breaking, (Pilgrim and Rogers, 1999) and for labelling theorists the most interesting item regarding this is the way those around sufferers rationalise and ignore this behaviour up unto a point, (Ineichen, 1979:11). Perhaps the most illustrative study of this phenomenon was the work of Yarrow, Schwartz, Murphy and Deasy (1955) which illustrated the various ways in which wives would dismiss strange behaviour up until a point was reached in terms of deviant behaviour.

However it is secondary deviance which labelling theory sees as the much more problematic of the two forms of deviance and it is here that the links also between the second of our theories examined are strongest. For labelling theorists secondary deviance has a number of critical factors. But simply put secondary deviance refers to those manifestations of symptoms which are not related in any way to the actual physical incidence. Thus we might say that the aetiology of secondary deviance is a function of the societal conditions surrounding the individuals rather than intrinsic conditions within the individual themselves. As Rosenham (1973) states The question of whether the sane can be distinguished from the insaneis a simple matter: do the salient characteristics that lead to diagnoses reside in the patients themselves or in the environmentsin which observers find them (250).

In Rosenham’s case where eight pseudo-patients gained entry into hospitals on the pretence of being insane to answer to this question lay firmly in the area of the observers. While popular at first with a number of studies finding the concepts expressed in the theory to be true in a number of famous studies labelling theory has not decreased in popularity with a number of major criticisms being levelled at the theory as a result of further investigation and continued studies

While labelling theory surmised that primary and secondary deviance were linked in that one will tend to lead to the other as a result of the ensuing interaction between the individual sufferer and those that label the sufferer this was not borne out by the research. In the case of Rosenham’s study it was found that the label of deviant though at first an uncomfortable and disturbing experience did not persist for a great length of time with the pseudo-patients in the experiment, (Pilgrim and Rogers, 1999).

Another weakness expressed in labelling theory is the relationship between the stereotypical images of the insane believed to be held by the public. If society was to blame for labelling the insane then it would have been expected that the images lay people had conformed to the images of diagnosis, yet research has shown that this is not the case. Indeed lay perceptions to mental illness have been demonstrated to only marginally relate to the images associated with medical diagnosis, (Pilgrim and Rogers, 1999:18).

Labelling theory accepts then (and is a criticism of the theory) that a distinction can be drawn between physical disorders, primary deviance, and the ensuing reaction from society which causes secondary deviance. For the second theory we examine here the existence of both categories is dependent on society or in other words that mental illness exists as a completely subjective definition.

Social Constructivism

While referring to a broad range of social critiques across a many wide variety of disciplines it is perhaps best represented in terms of its comments on mental health by the works of the French theorist Michel Foucault. In particular his seminal work The Birth of the Clinic sets out the radical viewpoint with which social constructivism is associated. In this Foucault argues that insanity exists as a classificatory concept derived from the subjective description of medical knowledge. Or that the objectification of insanity occurred after as well as in tandem with the development of psychiatric knowledge, the insane developed as a problematised group which in turn led to strategies being developed to manage them, (Foucault, 1976)

Superficially then we can see many similarities between these two theories in that both see a critical role for society in the determination of the meaning of mental illness. The critical difference is that while for social reactionists and labelling theorists a division exists between primary deviance which has a physical locus and secondary deviance which arises out of societal causes whereas social constructivists assign the loci of mental health strictly to the social environment. It does this through utilising the theoretical framework of discourses, thus the subjectivity of being mad is defined through the objectifying process of psychiatric or medical knowledge generally (Pilgrim and Rogers, 1999).

While many works recently have adopted social constructivist viewpoints in relation to medical knowledge it is Foucault’s works which are the best known and also which have been the most influential in developing this theoretical viewpoint. Foucault’s work was in particular concerned with how the shifting conceptions of what madness meant to society led to the development of a discrete set of knowledges which pathologise mental states according to a classificatory system related to madness and what were the strategies which developed as a result of this knowledge towards the control and management of the insane (Foucault, 1972, 1976).

This concept has had radial implications for a consideration of mental health and how it is defined in as well as by society. This theoretical framework can be seen thusly to criticise not only psychiatric practice but also psychiatric knowledge and even more critically the processes through which psychiatric knowledge is generated. Indeed from a social constructivist viewpoint it is the very construction of knowledge which leads to the boundaries and categories which delineates and determines who it is we call insane and indeed what it is that makes them insane for society.

Perhaps the biggest criticism we can make of the social constructivist viewpoint is the lack of a normative basis to its analysis. While the critique may be valid social constructivist theories can be distinctly vague about resistances to the all powerful discourses which they describe and analyse. Similarly the ability to formulate social policies arising out of the critique may similarly be limited (Rogers and Pilgrim, 2001: 175). A secondary point and one which we have already made in relation to labelling theory is that perhaps social constructivism deconstructs too much certain incidences of mental illness, perhaps there are some illnesses which in their aetioloigcal sense reveal themselves to be indeed physical manifestations of what we might actually be able to call a disorder (Zinberg, 1970).

Thus from this analysis we can see the close links as well as the clear differences between these two theories. While both are radical in their outlook we can argue that social constructivism has even been more radical. Similarly while social reaction theories have fallen out of favour along as well it must be noted as symbolic interactionsim in general social constructivist theories have been and continue to be hugely influential not only in relation to mental illness but to a broad range of social scientific disciplines and social issues.

References

Cockerham, W. C. (1992); Sociology of Mental Disorder; 3^rd Ed., Simon and Schuster Co.; New Jersey US

Delanty, G. (1999); Social Theory in a Changing World, Polity Press, Malden US

Foucault, M. (1976); The Archaeology of Knowledge, Tavistock, London UK

Foucault, M. (1976); The Birth of the Clinic, Tavistock, London UK

Ineichen, B. (1979); The Social Structure of Modern Britain: Mental Illness, Longman, London UK

Pilgrim, D. and Rogers, A. (1999); A Sociology of Mental Illness, 2^nd Ed., Open University Press, NY US

Rogers, A. and Pilgrim, D. (2001); Mental Health Policy in Britain, Palgrave, Basingstoke UK

Rosenham, D.L. (1973); ‘On Being Sane in Insane Places’; Science, Vol 179 Jan

Yarrow, M., Schwartz, C, Murphy, H. and Deasy, L. (1955); ‘The Psychological Meaning of Mental Illness in the Family’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol 11 No. 12

Zinberg, N. (1970); ‘The Mirage of Mental Health’, British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 21 No. 3

Americans mistakenly believe that the reason we spend more on health care is because we have the best health care system in the world. It would not be wrong to state as a matter of fact that we spend more on health care than any other developed country in the world. We as Americans spend twice as much on health care as the Japanese, but there are really very few who would argue, without a doubt, that our health care is better (Paraphrase Mahar 20). Or let us take a closer look to home, if one were to ask any Canadian what the main difference is between Canada and the United States, two countries so close geographically speaking, yet so different ideologically speaking, the Canadian would most likely say “health care.” “Ninety-six percent of Canadians say they prefer their health care system to the U.S.’s and nearly every politician in Canada knows to support the Canadian health care system as if it were some sort of sacred trust” (Armstrong, Armstrong & Fegan 1). The United State’s Canadian neighbor has a government that not only provides insurance, but the government pays for it. In a 2006 Harvard Medical School study, it was found that Americans are “42% more likely to have diabetes, 32% more likely to have high blood pressure, and 12% more likely to have arthritis then citizens in other industrialized nations (Associated Press). This study came right after another study that found that middle aged, white Americans are much sicker than their counterparts in England a country that has a national health care system (Associated Press). Universal health care can improve the health of Americans by affording them the health care that other countries such as Canada, England, and Japan already have. The problem with health care in the United States is essentially how we view it. Many view health care as a luxury, something for the rich, but health care is not a luxury, it is a right, and if America were to implement a universal health care system, Americans would be healthier overall. Healthier citizens would not just mean a happier country, but it would also mean a wealthier country, and this is something that countries like England, Canada, and Japan have already figured out. By denying our citizens health care, we are putting off costs that will be tripled in the long run because of the fact that people have to put off being seen by a doctor and thus their illnesses become either more severe or irreversible. Either way, Americans end up paying more.

Approximately 50% of Americans do not have some form of health insurance coverage. This number seems absurd when there is the fact that “the United States has a $2 trillion health care system, which is as large as the economy of China” (Herzlinger 15). Despite the fact that millions of dollars are spent on this so-called system, millions of people with chronic diseases and disabilities cannot get the treatment that they need. So where are these millions of dollars going? A universal health care system would allow people with chronic diseases and disabilities to get the treatment that they need. It would also benefit people in helping to prevent disease, which is a major part of modern medicine. In our system, doctors and hospitals are paid for treating sick patients, not for keeping them healthy, but without preventative medicine people are bound to be sick as opposed to bound to be healthy. Therein lies a major ethical dilemma. In a universal health care system, doctors and hospitals would take more of an interest in preventative doctoring because health care would already be paid for. All of this would lead to healthier individuals in the bigger picture. We have to ask ourselves, when did medicine become about simply fixing and not about preventing? The question is especially valid when we consider that modern medicine cannot even fix, unless for less than an exorbitant amount, the most common of illnesses and diseases that people are acquiring.

The U.S health care system is commonly referred to as the health care industry. Health and industry become one in terms of health care in the U.S. It is no wonder why with our health care, being an industry, people in America are, on average, unhealthier than their counterparts in Canada, Europe, and Japan, and pretty much every other developed and progressed country in the world. When we consider that the current U.S. health care system comes in at over $2 trillion dollars a year, that averages to roughly “$7,000 per man, woman, and child, healthy or sick or roughly $25,000 annually for the average family” (Relman 113). With that kind of money, it would be possible to have universal coverage in the U.S. This would equate into good quality care for all, which would therefore mean that our sick could be treated and our healthy taken care of with preventative measures. Most people who do not get health coverage through their jobs or through other means such as their family cannot afford the exorbitant costs of individual health insurance policies, therefore many people simply go without insurance, harming their health in the long run. This leads me to my next point, physicals performed by doctors are crucial to maintaining good health. It is through annual check-ups that many doctors spot issues that could turn disastrous if the person were to have gone without care. For Example, some types of cancers that if caught early enough could be kept from being fatal. Moreover, high blood pressure and cholesterol tests alert people to make changes in their diets and adapt to a healthier lifestyle. However, the 26 million uninsured in America are denied the right to these tests. People who are denied access to regular check-ups are being denied the right to good health.

In our current health care situation, there is a proliferation of sickness among the poor because they cannot afford health insurance or the out-of-pocket costs of seeing a doctor or buying prescriptions. Many advocates of universal health care believe that health care is as much a birthright as is education, yet half of our country slips by without access or means to doctors and hospitals to keep them healthy or cure them of their illnesses. It does not speak well about a country so prosperous that denies its citizens the right to the best health possible. When politicians turn their back on this important issue, they are turning their backs on the country. Without the people, there is no country, and so it makes sense that our country develops a universal health care system immediately.

Many Americans are in favor of a universal health care system, especially when we hear of a top health insurance company executive bringing home $24 million a year, many believe that a single payer system is the only way to ensure the health of our citizens (Paraphrase Mahar). Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) reports that a single-payer option is supported by a majority of doctors, nurses, as well as general public and health care experts. When the very people who provide care are in favor of a different health care system, we have to stop and take note. When our own doctors and nurses are telling us that a universal health care system is crucial to our collective health, the people in the United States should listen. But what has happened is that America’s medical system has become a system that is driven by money rather than by the health of its citizens (Paraphrase Herzlinger). Insurance companies have become massively rich corporations that profit by taking money away from the citizens. They are companies that pay their executives out of this world wages yet deny to pay for screenings and physicals for its clients.

Japan, another country that is much healthier collectively than the United States, has a universal health system where all citizens are covered equally and they can go to any doctor or hospital they want, with no difference in cost (Summary Mahar 219). If Americans had the option of seeing any doctor that they needed or wanted to, no matter where they were in the United States, it would prevent many deaths and treatable diseases. The fact that Americans are lashed to one doctor or one hospital means that many will choose to wait to see a doctor or even forego seeing a doctor at all when they really need to. Perhaps lives could have been saved and perhaps more will be saved if a universal health care system is put into place.

The bottom line is that a universal health care system is the only fair and right system. It is a system not an industry that would be for the people and the people are what make up a country, so why shouldn’t our country care about the health of its citizens? Without insurance forms, policies, paperwork, high premiums and other red tape, our citizens would be in better health. The situation right now is that if a person has to choose between feeding their family and seeing a doctor for a pain in their chest, they will probably feed their family. This is not the way it should be, people should not have to choose between what is best for them and what is best for the people they love because an insurance company is standing in the way of their lives. People have the right to health care and the right to be the healthiest that they can be, whether that health is given through medical visits or through sustenance. A universal health care system would ensure that every citizen has the opportunity to receive the best care possible so that they can live a healthy and long life no matter how much money they make and what job they have. Health care is not something that should be negotiable in a country as wealthy and developed as the United States.

Universal health care would improve the health of the people of the United States and would ensure the health of the individuals who will become citizens in the future. The research shown has proven that countries where a universal health care system is in place have much healthier people when compared to U.S. counterparts. The research is obvious and the facts cannot be denied. The United States can learn a lot from the countries that offer a universal health care system such as our close neighbor, Canada, and neighbors not so close like Japan.

The United States adoption of a universal health care system is the only way that America can go when it comes to health care. One has to ask, where can a country, which is made up by people, go wrong when its citizens are not only treated, but they are taken care of? To prevent illness and disease is what medicine should be about these days and not just treating the already sick and disease ridden. We have the tools to see that certain diseases, certain cancers are avoided, so why would we put our nation in jeopardy by not giving people the preventative care that they not deserve but have a right to as citizens of the United States?

The United States is one of – if not – the richest nations on the earth. It does not matter that are health care system is embarrassing or an abomination in the eyes of other countries, what does matter is whether or not our health care system is embarrassing or an abomination in the eyes of ourselves and our own nation. If we cannot see that everyone in this nation, this rich nation, deserves health care, has a right to health care, then we are what the abomination is – not the “system” or the “industry.”