First of all, it should be explained why the application of sociological imagination is necessary in this particular case that concerns the film under analysis. By means of “sociological imagination people …hope to grasp what is going on in the world, and to understand what is happening in themselves …”, according to Mills (1958: 7). That is why the analysis of social events and tendencies in the light of sociological perspective enables a person to find the link between “the personal troubles of milieu” and “the public issues of social structure” (Mills 1958: 8). Thus the film “The Medicated Child” considers an urgent problem of humanity analyzing just three concrete medical cases.
However, though only three medical cases of bipolar disorder are depicted in the film, it does not matter that the problem that is disclosed through the film is of minor importance. According to statistics, nowadays the increase in kids’ diagnosis with bipolar is 4,000 % in comparison with the situation five years ago. Consequently, the theme of the film may be defined as the steep rise of problems in child behavior over the recent years and the measures that are being taken to overcome the problems.
“The Medicated Child” informs the audience about the seriousness of the current situation. It introduces such stimulants as Ritalin and Adderall that are prescribed for the treatment of children’s behavioral problems. The striking fact about them is that the stimulants have never been tested on children because such tests are illegal and for one more reason: bipolar disorder used to be diagnosed in late adolescence and young childhood only. Still, doctors admit that they come across younger and younger children with diagnosed bipolar disorder in their practice.
The creators of the film wanted to emphasize the “involvement of medicine in the management of society” and the process of medicalizing society (Zola 2009: 470). As for the arguments they adduce, the social construction of the boy’s illness may be mentioned. It means that DJ’s doctors did not know the possible effect and side effects of the drugs they prescribed and were acting at random, hoping that they will help little patients. This is, certainly, not admissible for doctors, especially if the matter concerns children. Besides, we know that in Jacobs’s case the side effect of the medicine was evident: once he started rolling his head and never stopped. DJ’s mother also stated that pills did not help her son and Jessica’s swings of mood were terrible. Brown (1995: 34) emphasizes “controversial and conflictual diagnoses, as the first step to more general sociology of diagnosis”. So, a correct diagnosis should have been the doctors’ first consideration.
One more evidence to be produced when speaking about medicalization of child’s conduct, is that so far there is no definite test for incontestable diagnosis for child behavior problems. Prescriptions are made on the basis of conduct and the drugs that were taken earlier as it was shown by the example of all three patients. And it should be taken into account that many kids (about 23%) are misdiagnosed. Besides, the observed side effects of the drugs are very dangerous even for an adult, that is why doctors are risking children’s lives.
In conclusion, the creators of the film wanted to emphasize the “involvement of medicine in the management of society” and the process of medicalizing of society (Zola 2009: 470). It cannot be denied that “rather than engaging in philosophical or even scientific debate toward a more full understanding of such problems, Americans are more likely to ask, ‘What can be done about it?’” (Conrad and Schneider 1992: 263). In order to make a correct step, scientists should study the nature and causes of the disease, invent reliable tests and study possible side effects of drugs for children. The nature of the behavior should be studied thoroughly instead of make children feed on antipsychotic drugs.
On the whole, the film is aimed at society on the whole, including parents, who should pay their children more attention and doctors, who should remember that they deal with children, most vulnerable members of human society.
Reference List
Brown, Phil. 1995. “Naming and Framing: The Social Construction of Diagnosis and Illness.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 35: 34-52.
Conrad, Peter and Joseph W. Schneider. 1992. Deviance and medicalization: from badness to sickness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Mills, C. Wright. 1959. Sociological Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zola, Irving Kenneth. [1972] 2009. “Medicine as an Institution of Social Control.” Pp. 470-80 in The Sociology of Health and Illness (eighth edition), edited by P. Conrad. NY: Worth Publishers.