Being Mentally Ill: A Sociological Study

by Thomas J. Scheff

In incorporating social process into a model of the dynamics of mental disorders, this text questions the individualistic model favoured in current psychiatric and psychoanalytic theory. While the conventional psychiatric viewpoint seeks the causes of mental illness, Scheff views "the symptoms of mental illness" as the violation of residual rules - social norms so taken for granted that they are not explicitly verbalized. The sociological theory developed by Scheff to account for such behaviour provides a framework for studies reported in subsequent chapters. Two key assumptions first, that most chronic mental illness is in part a social role; and second, that societal reaction may in part determine entry into that role. Throughout, the sociological model of mental illness is compared and contrasted with more conventional medical and psychological models in an attempt to delineate significant problems for further analysis and research. This third edition has been revised and expanded to encompass the controversy prompted by the first edition, and also to re-evaluate developments in the field. New to this edition are discussions of the use of psychoactive drugs in the treatment of mental illness, changing mental health laws, new social science and psychiatric studies, and the controversy surrounding the labelling theory of mental illness itself.

Genres: Sociology, Psychology, Health

244 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1966

Reviews

[Claire · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read a lot of texts from this period which discuss this topic and found most of them interesting from a historical perspective, but none of them have been as convincing as this text. Perhaps it's because this was revised in the 1980s and thus his arguments have the qualifications and the consciousness of its limitations that I like to see in theory. Granted, some of the text was a little lost on me because it is so heavily sociological in nature and meant to be read by other sociologists (of which I am not), but even so I was able to comprehend his larger arguments and found them to be quite logically sound. I very greatly appreciate that he inserted almost none of his own feelings about mentally ill people - too often these texts become treatises on how humanity can learn from mentally ill people, how mentally ill people are the key to some hidden knowledge, how we're trapped, helpless animals that the rest of society needs to save - very medieval. This text was incredibly focused on the question at hand: how and why is "mental illness" a social label and not a true illness? I really appreciate his ability to be so logically focused on proving his hypothesis (in a very careful and critical way) while still also writing with clarity and without dryness. I wasn't completely on board with his criticisms of medication (I do understand his point of view and his wariness is understandable, but I still stand by my opinion that medication can be helpful and even life-changing) and think that he could have dedicated more time to proving why the neurotransmitter theory is unsubstantiated, but perhaps that was outside of the scope of the text given that it was originally written in the '60s. Overall, I was really surprised that I enjoyed this text as much as I did and even more surprised that I feel like it has opened my eyes to a more sociological view.

[zoe · Rating 2 out of 5]

don’t ever bring this book up to me again because NO.

critiques:
- does not know the difference between type I and type II errors
- emphasis on double standards for physicians and psychiatrists
- analyzed a psychiatric interview in which the client was an abuse victim and then blamed how depressed she felt on the fact that she cheated on her husband and not THAT SHE WAS BEING ABUSED??
- ignores the biological aspect of mental illness until the very last section of the book and instead puts an emphasis on how mental illness is just people wanting to be deviant and that mental illness is a social role
- uses “awayness” instead of just saying dissociation. even though by the time this book had come out DID was already in the DSM

good things:
- finally at the very end of the book says that mental illness has social AND biological factors!!