Mental health illness is a complex phenomenon, and it is highly challenging to classify it according to established frameworks. Depending on the perspective, many controversies have emerged, focusing on unique aspects and causes of disorders. One such controversy is the argument between frameworks that recognize the cultural impact, such as sociological psychology and social construction, and culturally independent perspectives, such as etiological and social response traditions. Ultimately, the current research paper thoroughly analyzes the two distinct approaches to mental illness classification and provides a personal reflection on the topic, claiming that individual factors are more significant than cultural specificities.
Cultural Dependency
The primary idea of this approach is that mental illnesses primarily emerge due to culture and specificities of certain times and places. According to Horwitz (2013), sociological psychology and social construction are two frameworks that highlight the significance of the environment as opposed to individual factors. For some experts, it is a controversial opinion because the approach implies that certain mental conditions cannot be present in specific societies. As Horwitz (2013) writes, “major aspects of central psychiatric illnesses found in contemporary US society, such as ADHD, autism, or personality disorder, could not arise in different sociohistorical eras” (p. 99). Similarly, social construction implies that every culture has a distinct understanding of what is normal and abnormal, and this division leads to mental illnesses. Ultimately, this classification prioritizes cultural impact as opposed to individual factors.
There is sufficient academic evidence that supports this perspective to a considerable extent. For instance, Krendl and Pescosolido (2020) confirm the cultural impact on mental illnesses via the analysis of Eastern and Western societies. The authors reveal that ‘prejudice’ and ‘stigma’ are critical concepts in this discussion, leading to primary differences in mental illness classification. This position supports the social construction perspective, emphasizing that additional stigma emerges in Eastern countries due to the fact that mental health conditions are deemed as more abnormal than in the West (Krendl & Pescosolido, 2020). Therefore, cultural specificities play a crucial role in mental illness classification.
Cultural Independence
The second perspective that aligns with the etiological and social response traditions is cultural independence. In general, they both imply that individual factors and social phenomena are more significant than cultural implications. Horwitz (2013) explains this perspective by stating, “Both mental and physical illnesses are clusters of symptoms whose nature is independent of the cultural milieu in which they arise” (p. 96). This approach recognizes the significance of social groups, such as families and communities, but does not incorporate culture as a variable.
Arguably, more evidence supports culturally independent perspectives than those focusing on cultural impact. For instance, the study by Zarse et al. (2019) is a fundamental work that emphasizes childhood trauma as the leading cause of mental illnesses. This problem is highly relevant in every culture, making this risk factor culturally independent. Empirical research confirms a significant correlation between Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and the development of mental illnesses (Zarse et al., 2019). Moreover, the more severe childhood trauma is, the more vulnerable the individual is to mental health complications, and the research finds zero to few exceptions to this rule (Zarse et al., 2019). Hence, many experts recognize individual factors to be considerably more significant than cultural specificities.
Discussion
The current analysis has demonstrated that both perspectives are correct to an extent, showing that both individual and cultural factors affect the development of mental illnesses. However, experts have contradicting opinions on the significance of these implications, leading to a controversy in classification. Personally, I believe that individual factors are more critical in this discussion, making the etiological and social response perspectives more credible. The work by Zarse et al. (2019) alone reviews more than a hundred articles from scientific journals to show the utmost impact of ACEs on mental illness development. At the same time, studies that focus on cultural impact primarily discuss the stigma and associated issues. Within one culture, every individual is affected by these issues, but not every person develops a mental health condition due to cultural specificities (Krendl & Pescosolido, 2020). In my opinion, it is a credible argument, showing that individual factors are more significant than a societal understanding of what is normal and abnormal.
Naturally, culture plays a significant role because it regulates and alters people’s behavior. Horwitz (2013) emphasizes this fact through the discussion of the anthropology personality school of thought, implying that any social organization inevitably affects individuals. However, I believe there is no sufficient evidence that culture is more significant than other social entities. Family, friends, and the workplace are narrower social groups that affect individuals to a greater extent, meaning that problems in these areas would also be more impactful. On the other hand, culture is a much broader phenomenon with less direct influence on people’s lives.
Conclusion
Based on the current analysis, there is more empirical evidence that supports the etiological and social response traditions. It means that the influence of individual risk factors that emerge from the immediate social environment has a more notable impact on one’s mental health than cultural characteristics. Ultimately, within the current controversy, I take the position that individual factors are significantly more critical than cultural specificities when discussing and classifying mental illnesses.
References
Horwitz, A. V. (2013). The sociological study of mental illness: A critique and synthesis of four perspectives. In Aneshensel, C. S, Phelan, J. C., & Bierman, A. (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of mental health (pp. 95-112). Springer Netherlands.
Krendl, A. C., & Pescosolido, B. A. (2020). Countries and cultural differences in the stigma of mental illness: The east–west divide. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(2), 149-167. Web.
Zarse, E. M., Neff, M. R., Yoder, R., Hulvershorn, L., Chambers, J. E., & Chambers, R. A. (2019). The adverse childhood experiences questionnaire: Two decades of research on childhood trauma as a primary cause of adult mental illness, addiction, and medical diseases. Cogent Medicine, 6(1). Web.