Analytical report on the distribution of health, with supporting evidence of research process
This report will focus on the topic of childhood obesity in the UK in conjunction with social class and the correlation between the two. It will also present the four sociological explanations (as stated in the Black Report 1980) and, using the evidence and theories presented in this report, will be analysed and sited into one of the four explanations.
As countries around the world become richer and healthier, continue to formulate advanced medical findings (thus creating changes to the “big killers”) and endeavour to create lower divergence in mortality rates and class, health inequalities still remain. The United Kingdom is one of these countries.
Child obesity is becoming more and more prevalent in the UK, with the larger percentage falling on children from the lower class. BBC Online (2009) state that among those from a lower background, obesity is expected to rise to eleven point two percent (from ten percent as it stands now) while for those from a professional background it is likely to fall to five point four percent (from seven point nine percent) by the year twenty fifteen.
After studying this abstract, it is clear obesity is more prevalent in children of a lower class. This is also supported by Stamatakis et al (2005) where it is said that inequalities in childhood obesity have strengthened, with rates increasing most among children from poorer backgrounds.
Wikimedia Images (2002)
Perhaps the reason behind these statistics is that people of a lower class spend a lot of time eating ready-made food, takeaway meals and spending less on fruit, vegetables and the appropriate nutrition needed for a balanced diet. Also, it is easier and cheaper to eat from a take-away or buy microwave food especially if a lot of the parent’s time is spent working to compensate for the lack of income.
This report will present a descriptive paragraph on the four sociological explanations for the inequalities in health produced from the Black Report (1980). Using the evidence presented so far, it should become clear as to which explanation childhood obesity would fall under.
Firstly is the artefact explanation. This defines class and health as social constructions and challenges the strength of statistics (which can be inaccurate or misinforming). Secondly is the social explanation, which simply determines your health as to which class you belong to (to some extent). Thirdly is the cultural/behavioural explanation. This explanation leans toward the theory of blaming people, implying that they are accountable for their own health and choices (I.E diet, exercise, smoking etc). The final explanation is known as the materialist/structuralist approach, which is basically the blaming of society and the prominence of different living conditions and individual circumstances between groups of people.
Childhood obesity would appear to fall largely under the social selection sociological explanation, as it has been shown that more children that belong to the lower classes are more likely to be obese than those of a higher class, as obesity is recognised as a major health issue and children are born into their classes and are not given the immediate prospect of choosing which class they belong to.
Figure.2
Google Images (2004)
Weightlossresources (2009) cites research undertaken by the Peninsula Medical School (2009) that thirty three percent of mothers and fifty seven percent of fathers considered their child’s weight to be about right when, in fact, they were obese.
It is well known that social class and education have a strong correlation to one another. It may be that many of these parents who thought that their child was at the right weight when they were actually obese, were in fact uneducated and unaware themselves, as there is a huge divergence between obesity and “normal” weight that an educated parent would perhaps discern more so than an uneducated parent (many of whom would come from the lower class).
Perhaps a good recommendation could be to try and raise more awareness particularly with parents, and attempt to educate people more on how to recognise and deal with obesity in children to try and decrease the numbers of obesity in the UK. This responsibility falls largely onto the government and perhaps after viewing the figures stated in this report (one of which showing a “guesstimate” of prevalence of obesity in ranking order revealing England as being top of the list) this has become lucid, if not apparent. The economic factor of launching campaigns and advertisements may be an important dynamic for the government to consider, but in the long run may prove to be an important financial benefactor when one considers the cost the National Health Service has to pay for treating illnesses obesity can induce such as diabetes, heart and circulatory problems.
In conclusion, after having presented evidence for childhood obesity becoming more prevalent in the UK, a large portion of which falling under the lower class population, childhood obesity can be seen as an epidemic in its own right. This report has suggested the that not only are lower class people not focusing on the correct nutrition (due to finance and time convenience) but are also (due to lack of education) unaware of the risks of obesity in their children.
Word Count: 878
