What you'll learn

• How sociologists define health, illness, disease, impairment and disability.
• Why these categories are seen as socially constructed, not just biological facts.
• How medicalisation and professional power shape people’s identities and life chances.
• How UK health policies affect the role of doctors, nurses, therapists and other health professionals.

1. Start with the core vocabulary

In everyday speech, people often use “health”, “illness” and “disability” as if they are obvious. Sociology slows this down: it asks who defines these terms, whose interests are served, and what consequences follow.

Blaxter (1990) found that people define health in different ways: as not being ill, as being able to carry out normal activities, or as having energy and resilience. This matters because definitions of “good health” are shaped by culture, age, gender, class and social expectations.

2. Social construction: not “made up”, but socially given meaning

A social construction is an idea or category that is created and maintained through social processes: language, culture, institutions, professional knowledge, law and everyday interaction.

Saying health and illness are socially constructed does not mean pain, disease or impairment are imaginary. It means that societies decide what counts as “normal”, what needs treatment, who is blamed, and who receives support.

The diagram below summarises how a biological condition becomes a social status through cultural norms, professional diagnosis, policy and everyday reactions.

For AO2, use contemporary UK examples. Mental health awareness campaigns have made anxiety and depression more speakable than in previous generations. Long COVID became recognised partly through patients, doctors, research and media pressure. At the same time, some conditions remain stigmatised or doubted, especially when symptoms are invisible.

3. Illness as a social role: Parsons

Parsons (1951), a functionalist sociologist, argued that illness can threaten social order because it stops people performing expected roles, such as worker, parent or student. He described the sick role: society gives ill people certain rights, but also expects certain duties.

The sick person is usually not blamed for being ill and may be excused from normal responsibilities. However, they are expected to want to recover and to seek competent medical help. Doctors act as gatekeepers, deciding whether the person is legitimately sick.

AO3 evaluation: Parsons assumes broad agreement between patients, doctors and society. Interactionists argue that illness labels can be negotiated and contested. Conflict theorists add that class, gender and ethnicity affect whether people are believed, treated quickly or blamed for their condition.

4. Medicalisation and professional power

Examples include childbirth, menopause, ADHD, addiction, grief, obesity and some forms of anxiety. Medicalisation can be helpful: it may reduce blame, provide treatment and give people access to adjustments. But it can also expand professional control over everyday life.

Zola (1972) argued that medicine had become a major institution of social control. Illich (1976) criticised modern medicine for creating iatrogenesis, meaning harm caused by medical treatment or by over-dependence on medical experts. Conrad (2007) showed that medicalisation is driven not only by doctors, but also by pharmaceutical companies, patient groups, media and consumers.

Foucault (1973) used the idea of the medical gaze: professionals are trained to view the body through clinical categories, sometimes separating the “case” from the whole person. Freidson (1970) argued that doctors gained professional dominance, meaning high status, specialist knowledge and control over diagnosis and treatment.

5. Disability: medical model and social model

The medical model of disability sees disability mainly as a problem within the individual body or mind. The solution is treatment, cure, rehabilitation or professional care.

The social model of disability, associated with Oliver (1990) and the disabled people’s movement, separates impairment from disability. It argues that society disables people through barriers: stairs without ramps, lack of British Sign Language provision, inaccessible websites, discrimination and low expectations.

Goffman (1963) is useful here because his concept of stigma shows how labels can damage identity. A person may be treated as “less capable” because others respond to the label, not the person’s actual abilities.

AO2 policy link: the Equality Act 2010 defines disability legally and requires “reasonable adjustments” in workplaces, education and services. This reflects some social model thinking because it places duties on institutions, not just individuals.

AO3 evaluation: Shakespeare (2006) argues that the social model is politically powerful, but can underplay the real pain, fatigue or limitation some impairments involve. A balanced answer should recognise both social barriers and embodied experience.

6. Health policy and the changing role of health professionals

Health professionals include doctors, nurses, midwives, psychiatrists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, public health workers and social care professionals. Their role is shaped by policy, not just by medical science.

The creation of the NHS in 1948 expanded access to healthcare and strengthened the role of professionals as providers of state-funded care. More recent policies have shifted professionals towards prevention, risk management and multi-agency working.

Examples include:

• NICE guidelines: standardise treatment decisions, increasing consistency but limiting professional autonomy.
• Public health policies such as the 2007 smoking ban and the Soft Drinks Industry Levy 2018: make professionals part of prevention and lifestyle advice.
• Equality Act 2010 and Care Act 2014: push professionals to consider wellbeing, accessibility and support needs beyond narrow medical treatment.
• Fit notes and disability benefit assessments: involve professionals in judging work capacity, which can be controversial because it links health to welfare entitlement.

AO3: Policies can improve rights and reduce inequality, but they can also increase surveillance. A Marxist or Foucauldian answer might argue that modern health policy encourages people to monitor their bodies, manage risks and remain productive workers. Tudor Hart’s “inverse care law” (1971) is also useful: those who most need healthcare may have the least access to high-quality care.