Wellness in society has been a topic of discussion among scholars and specialists, leading to a wide view of the social, psychological, and physical aspects pertaining to human well-being. According to Horwitz (2020), an individual’s social, emotional, and behavioral characteristics are dependent on their mental health. To fully comprehend its place in human wellness, it is essential to unravel the historical perspectives surrounding it. Grob (2019) underscores that mental health has been a core part of American society since the pre-colonial period, although its perceptions have changed over the years. The interlink between social sciences and humanities provides a framework on which the social impact of mental health can be understood. Natural and applied sciences have attempted to explain the existence of mental illnesses in nature, following a scientific approach. In essence, history, humanities, social sciences, and natural and applied sciences approach mental health and wellness from different perspectives, contributing to a deeper understanding of the issue.
Historical Perspectives
There have been three primary hypotheses of mental illness genesis throughout history: supernatural, somatogenic, and psychogenic. According to supernatural theories, mental illness is linked to possession by wicked or demonic spirits, gods’ anger, eclipses, cosmic gravitation, plagues, and sin (Jones & Beauvais, 2022). Somatogenic theories examine bodily dysfunctions caused by sickness, inherited characteristics, or neurological damage or imbalance. Stressful or traumatic situations, maladaptive learned linkages, cognitions, or skewed perceptions are all discussed in psychogenic theories (Jones & Beauvais, 2022). Etiological concepts of mental illness determine the diagnosis and support that mentally ill people get. Over the years, these theoretical approaches played a key role in determining the approach and attitudes toward mental health.
Mental illness has long been regarded as religious penance or demonic possession in many civilizations. The mental disease was classified as a religious or personal concern in ancient Egyptian, Greek, Indian, and Latin texts. Grob (2019) records that Hippocrates was a forerunner in managing mentally sick people using scientific procedures that diverted from religion or superstition around the fifth century. Negative stereotypes regarding mental disease lasted in the United States well into the 18th century, resulting in stigmatization and imprisonment of mentally ill people.
After observing the unsafe surroundings in which many patients resided in the 18th century, activist Dorothea Dix pushed for improved living arrangements for the mentally ill. According to Jones and Beauvais (2022), Dix got the US government to support the construction of 32 public psychiatric facilities over a 40-year span. The most efficient approach to treatment for the mentally ill was to use the institutionalized inpatient care system, where many patients stayed in health facilities and were served by trained staff. State hospitals were usually under-resourced, despite the fact that institutionalized treatment enhanced primary care access. Following a succession of high-profile revelations of terrible living circumstances and human rights breaches, the systemic medical system garnered considerable criticism (Grob, 2019). In summary, historical paradigms have reflected a change from traditional and inhuman treatment of mental health disorders to a more scientific, humane, and professional approach, contributing to improved wellness in society.
A Humanities Perspectives of Mental Health
The complex nature of mental health calls for a humanities approach to enable conceptualization of the mind and brain for improved mental health care and human well-being. Horwitz (2020) asserts that humanities through psychology are vital for shaping human experiences, which is crucial for mental well-being. Psychiatrists can use philosophy to further their knowledge of empathetic curiosity. The scientific inquiry that pushes health professionals to seek diagnostic information and medical knowledge is not the same as empathy curiosity.
On the one hand, scientific curiosity is driven by a desire to learn more about why people develop schizophrenia and to determine whether an individual is traumatized or clinically depressed. On the other hand, Empathic curiosity is a need to understand how the condition occurs, by adopting a quasi–first-person approach to the patient’s situation (Schlozman, 2017). Evidently, humanities have the potential to rekindle interest in patients’ experiences, leading to a better understanding of mental health in all its dimensions and facilitating policy change for improved human welfare.
The role of humanities in mental health goes beyond the patient, underscoring the medical crisis affecting young psychiatric doctors. Burnouts, depression, and loss of purpose among medical practitioners underscore the connection between humanistic approaches to mental health and overall human well-being. Students of psychiatry might approach the existential issues of self-other dichotomies via the humanities lens. The notion that early psychiatric patients were dubbed alienists emphasizes how often mental illness has been defined by the self’s separation from itself (Horwitz, 2020). In summary, humanistic approaches to mental health view wellness as a person’s ability to manifest their true self for fulfilling life experiences. This perspective stems from Scheid and Wright’s (2017) assertion that mental health circumvents an individual’s everyday surroundings, determining how they feel, what they believe, and their actions. From this point of view, mental health is analyzed through the humanistic lenses as entailing all the processes through which individuals tap from their innate potential to shape their health through positive self-perceptions.
Mental Health from a Social Sciences Perspective
Sociological approaches emphasize how life experiences, social contexts, societal norms, social hierarchies, and cultural systems of interaction influence mental states. Many sociologists investigate how societal factors influence mental health. The sociology of psycholoical wellness has confirmed the high value of social relations for mitigating mental disorders (Scheid & Wright, 2017). Psychological well-being is approached from a sociological perspective in a variety of ways. Sociologists consider the impact of social factors on mental health and sickness instead of psychobiological approaches that examine personal attributes and brain features (Scheid & Wright, 2017). According to social perspectives, individuals in similar circumstances are assumed to have comparable degrees of mental wellness and illness. Consequently, what decides how positive or negative people feel is influenced not only by their own personality characteristics or brains but also by the social circumstances they confront.
Sociologists consider two main aspects of an individual’s mental health in relation to society. First, they concentrate on prevailing social conditions within the environment. These are primary factors beyond the control of an individual that impact their psychological well-being. Second, they identify how individual reactions to social circumstances affect people’s perceptions of themselves and the world around them, leading to various mental health implications. Scheid and Wright (2017) record that social inequality, integration, and stratification are some of the social factors that have had the highest impact on mental health. Therefore, sociology bridges the gap between biological factors and physical aspects of health by assessing patients’ wellness in the context of their environments.
The reaction to mental health issues is also entrenched in important aspects of social life. People’s perceptions of their issues, the treatments they pursue, and the resources available to cure them are all influenced by social dynamics. Horwitz (2020) notes that in the past few decades, cultural perceptions of what it implies to be mentally healthy have shifted significantly. Pharmaceutical firms, mental health professionals, the media, and state agencies are among the social organizations that urge people to medicate their emotional pain. As a result, mental illness is now defined much more broadly than in the earlier years, encouraging more people to identify themselves as experiencing mental issues that require professional help.
Mental health and sickness, according to sociological perspectives, are not merely personal characteristics but also result from a variety of societal factors. Individuals’ feelings of themselves and and the chances of being mentally ill are profoundly influenced by social subgroups, historical events, the societies to which they belong in, and the value systems they recognize (Scheid & Wright, 2017). In addition, these factors determine the types of psychological issues people are likely to experience, their approaches once they face mental challenges, and the types of help available to them.
Mental Health from a Natural and Applied Sciences Perspective
Anxiety and depression are among the primary causes of sickness and disability, impacting millions of people worldwide each year and having enormous social and economic consequences. Despite the great value individuals place on psychological health, the role of natural and applied sciences in mental well-being has not been well researched. A poll conducted by Wellcome Global Monitor 2020 revealed that many people are unsure about science’s role in identifying and relieving mental health difficulties. 27% of respondents believed science explains a lot about how emotional reactions work or may assist in alleviating symptoms of depression and anxiety (Wellcome, 2021). In contrast, nearly half of those polled believed science could be significantly beneficial in treating infectious diseases (Wellcome, 2021). Nevertheless, science has been central in developing evidence-based solutions backed by the understanding of how phenomena interact to influence human well-being.
The natural and applied sciences field has undergone key developments that have significantly changed how people view mental health and the available solutions. Since the institutionalization of mental healthcare in the 18th century, scientific research has been ongoing, facilitating the application of technology for developing more effective treatments (Grob, 2019). The scientific approach to mental well-being recognizes the interrelationships between biological processes and psychological health, seeking solutions to resolve natural body responses to factors that lead to mental challenges.
Sociological and humanistic approaches view mental well-being as a condition resulting from individual personalities and responses to social structures, ignoring its existence as a medical disorder needing diagnosis, treatment, and management. Deer (2022) reports that biochemical reactions and imbalances are a potential explanation for the increase in psychological illnesses and require a scientific approach. From this perspective, scientific processes within the brain influence how patients react to mental issues, further revealing the connections between social, humanistic, and science-based approaches to well-being.
Conclusion
In conclusion, mental health has been a topic of discussion in the past few decades following an exponential rise in psychological challenges within the healthcare sector. Historically, several theories have been formulated to explain the origins of mental illnesses, with some citing religious and cultural influences. Through a shift from traditional to humanistic approaches, social sciences have revealed that socio-cultural elements affect patients’ responses to mental illnesses by shaping their perspectives of themselves and the world around them. Currently, more focus has been on developing next-generation treatment options for mental disorders breaking away from stereotypes and unfounded claims.
References
Deer, B. (2022). The science behind mental health – WISE initiative for stigma elimination. WISE Initiative for Stigma Elimination – Building Resilience, Inclusion, and Hope for Mental Health in All Communities. Web.
Grob, G. (2019). Mental illness and American society, 1875-1940. Princeton University Press. Web.
Horwitz, A. (2020). Creating mental illness. University of Chicago Press. Web.
Jones, J. S., & Beauvais, A. M. (2022). Psychiatric mental health nursing: An interpersonal approach (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning
Scheid, T. L., & Wright, E. R. (Eds.). (2017). A handbook for the study of mental health: Social contexts, theories, and systems (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Web.
Schlozman, S. (2017). Why psychiatric education needs the humanities. Academic Psychiatry, 41(6), 703-706. Web.
Wellcome. (2021). What is the role of science in mental health? Wellcome Global Monitor 2020. Web.