During my studies, I explored sociological concepts that led me to critically examine the strong biomedical paradigms upon which healthcare is built. Social constructionism examines how social factors like norms and beliefs influence phenomena traditionally considered purely biological.
Exploring Sociological Concepts in Healthcare
A prime example is gender. Recently, there has been increasing discussion about how much socially constructed norms influence gender compared to genetic makeup. In health, social constructionist theory helps us question how much prevailing social and cultural norms influence the concept of disease. Historically, ideas about what it means to be healthy have changed significantly. The ‘lay’ interpretation of what it means to be “well” informs the conceptualization of health as much as scientific research and discourse. Both are subject to changing cultural, societal, and historical realities that shape our perception.
Defining Health in a Diverse Society
As part of a student discussion, we described how we define “being healthy.” It was fascinating to read comments from a diverse student body with varying cultural backgrounds, ages, academic disciplines, and pre-existing experiences with illness.
Societal influences on the lay understanding of health are easy to understand. However, digging deeper, I realized how much social norms, ideologies, and morals shape scientific “realities.” Consider the ICD—the International Statistical Classification of Diseases—used worldwide to label disease entities. This list has been constantly revised over the years, with many diseases disappearing from textbooks while new conditions are added. Biomedical research advances play a significant role, but social and political ideologies also inform research focus and fund distribution. For instance, homosexuality was classified as a medical condition until the 1980s.
Applying the social constructionism lens does not diminish the seriousness of many diseases or the need for appropriate clinical diagnosis and compassion for those suffering. It highlights that societal norms and personal beliefs influence the concept of “disease.”
Menopause: Biological Phenomenon or Social Construct?
Regarding menopause, I have long wondered how much social constructionism influences how women experience this transition and how medical science approaches it. Menopause is an observable biological phenomenon. We can measure hormones, observe ceasing periods, and investigate bone density. However, it is also a natural part of life, so should it be medicalized? Across cultures, women describe symptoms like brain fog, sadness, anxiety, hot flushes, and vaginal dryness. Yet, cultural differences affect the focus on physical or mental issues and the severity of symptoms.
Historically, menopause was framed as a “problem” in the 1930s and has been viewed as an issue to be fixed, at least in the western world. After reading extensively about how social norms, beliefs, and cultural realities influence our understanding of disease, I am curious: How much do these influences shape our experience with menopause? Is menopause a social construct? Could changing societal perceptions, including those within the medical and research sectors, improve our experience?
There is much evidence comparing different cultures’ approaches to menopause and critiques of over-medicalizing this normal stage of life. I am curious to hear others’ thoughts, especially from the diverse women at Grace of No Age.
Empowering Women Through Understanding Menopause
Menopause is both a biological and social phenomenon. Understanding how social norms and cultural beliefs shape our experiences can lead to more holistic and empowering approaches to women’s health.
By addressing these questions and considering diverse perspectives, we can better support mature women navigating menopause and aging. This empowers women to embrace lifestyle changes after 40 and promotes overall women’s health and well-being.
Dra. Doris Giess.
Aging. Lifestyle. Menopause. Women’s Empowerment.
Sources:
- Cragg L, Davis M, Macdowall W. Health Promotion Theory Second Edition.
- Singh A, Kaur S, Walia I. A historical perspective on menopause and menopausal age.Bull Indian Inst Hist Med Hyderabad. 2002 Jul-Dec;32(2):121-35. PMID: 15981376.
- Meyer VF. The Medicalization of Menopause: Critique and Consequences. International Journal of Health Services. 2001;31(4):769-792.
If you enjoyed this article and would like to help us support this beautiful project so we can continue creating amazing content; please help us by donating as little as the cost of a coffee or as much as you like.
and