Moral Panics, Interest Groups and Social Problems
Moral Panics, Interest Groups and Social Problems
Sociology 254 Research Paper
As Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) suggest, moral panics often propel some issues forward as “social problems,” versus others that remain on the backburner of public opinion and of policymakers’ agendas. This can be seen in the case of healthcare in America. There are many factors that have an impact on an individual’s health besides just biological ones such as genetics. For example, socio-economic status, gender, race/ethnicity, social psychological issues, and rapid social change all affect Americans’ health. Therefore, health and healthcare is not just one’s personal problem but also an issue that affects overall society. “Compared with other developed countries, the United States has an inefficient and expensive health care system with poor outcomes and many citizens who are denied access” (Chernichovsky & Leibowitz, 2010, p. 205). This unequal access to health coverage in America combined with various moral panics, driven by the motives of interest groups to defeat healthcare reform, has propelled healthcare forward as a social problem in America.
In the article, “Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction”, Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) define moral panics as “…explosions of fear and concern at a particular time and place about a specific perceived threat. In each case, a specific agent was widely felt to be responsible for the threat: in each case, a sober assessment of the evidence concerning the nature of the supposed threat forces the observer to the conclusion that the fear and concern were, in all likelihood, exaggerated or misplaced.” The authors argue that “In a moral panic, the reactions of the media, law enforcement, politicians, action groups, and the general public are out of proportion to the real and present danger a given threat poses to the society“(Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994, p. 156).
Next Goode and Ben-Yehuda
Sociology 254 Research Paper
As Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) suggest, moral panics often propel some issues forward as “social problems,” versus others that remain on the backburner of public opinion and of policymakers’ agendas. This can be seen in the case of healthcare in America. There are many factors that have an impact on an individual’s health besides just biological ones such as genetics. For example, socio-economic status, gender, race/ethnicity, social psychological issues, and rapid social change all affect Americans’ health. Therefore, health and healthcare is not just one’s personal problem but also an issue that affects overall society. “Compared with other developed countries, the United States has an inefficient and expensive health care system with poor outcomes and many citizens who are denied access” (Chernichovsky & Leibowitz, 2010, p. 205). This unequal access to health coverage in America combined with various moral panics, driven by the motives of interest groups to defeat healthcare reform, has propelled healthcare forward as a social problem in America.
In the article, “Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction”, Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) define moral panics as “…explosions of fear and concern at a particular time and place about a specific perceived threat. In each case, a specific agent was widely felt to be responsible for the threat: in each case, a sober assessment of the evidence concerning the nature of the supposed threat forces the observer to the conclusion that the fear and concern were, in all likelihood, exaggerated or misplaced.” The authors argue that “In a moral panic, the reactions of the media, law enforcement, politicians, action groups, and the general public are out of proportion to the real and present danger a given threat poses to the society“(Goode & Ben-Yehuda, 1994, p. 156).
Next Goode and Ben-Yehuda