The Sociology of Social Problems: Theoretical Perspectives and Methods of Intervention 0521599326, 9780749457044

Table of contents :
Jamrozik a
Jamrozik 2
Jamrozik 3

Citation preview

Adam Jamrozik and Luisa Nocella

Sociology I

SOCIAL PROBLEMS Theoretical Perspectives and Methods of Intervention

THE

SOCIOLOGY OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS

Theoretical Perspectives and Methods of Intervention

..

ADAMJAMROZIK and

LUISA NOCELLA

PllBUSHED BY THl: PRF.SS SYNDICATE OF THE Ul\IVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE

The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom CM1BlUOGF. UNIVERSITY PRESS

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RL1, UK http://v.·ww.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 \\lest 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA http://wwv•.cup.org 10 Sta1nfOrd Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia

Contents

© Adamjamrozik and Luisa t\occlla 1998

This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective li.-.:ensing agreements, no reproduction of any pan 1nay tak1 place without the wriuen permission of Cambridge ·uuiversity Press. First puhlished 1998

Printed in China by L. Rex Printing Co1npany Ltd. Typeset in '.\Jew Baskerville 10/12 pt .4. catalogue recor'd for this hook iJ available from llw British J .i&rar_'I /Vational Librar_"f ofAustralia Catalof!:11ing in Public(tlion. data

Jamrozik, Adain. The sociology of social problems: theorc.tical perspectives and nH•thoh eno ar1v . d 1· 11 or affected by , . y .inclu des a l iuma11 age, ncy 1nvo. l,,e of ree activ1t. deg stton ar"1ses as to the .it �r1ou� vvavs' the q11c . Is . ms problems in study of social proble the in ve hie ac may ist . . obj ectivity a sociolog . . ) p,ar tv-neutral or does one . . to remain ( as it '"ere possible in sueh st.ud 1es-. atio nr To l ne exa . tnines a sit.u . · e or another w·l en o blem unavo1dably take one sid s, · n stud"Ving a given pro laden t �r� 1, b, ·e- ,', or 'fron1 helo\.v' ? Or questio11 in less valuethis ut P l . nenon f10111 a O"\Phenor does one approac i the from both ends? . h w1t should one approach it , rl.cbated, .�· was eagcrlv on \Ve arc · , e sid se ho 0s. The � que_stto 'VV ociation during the 196 � neri c�n Sociological ....\ss and ker some hre, 1n t e AI re Howard Bec . each on oppos11e ,·,des , tv-e . that ) The two prolagomsts . - ' argued (19 6� t>TS H d ut O · �r, tlie a11thor of e tak to Alvin (;ouldncr. Bec k 1 values, bad e _ c 1nm1 t:�1ent to certai1 l nnua sociologist">, be ca11se of t.t: lf c� " ... al address at. the 1966 \ l · rlog· ln ns prcs1dent1 he , rns tl1e s1· a e o1 t lle un der ble . tht, Stud;, of Social Pro , tor Society c;.cneral Meeting of the (�ilbert's

.

.

·

·

.

,

Academics and Social Researchers People engaged in tertiary education, and in writing and research in the social sciences, are of considerable significance an1ong social actors in social problems. Through their work they identif)· and define tl1e nature of social problems, develop theories and concepts, and, in doing so, also imply or even directly suggest re1nerlies or solutions. As Alvin (;ouldncr observed: infOr1nation gathering systems or research methods always premise the existence and use of some system of social control. It is not only that the inforn1ation they yield may be used by syste1ns of social c· ontrol, but they the1nselves

are sp;tems

of social control.

(1 971 :50; etr1jJhasis in the original)

Research in the social sciences , especially research concerned with issues considered to be social problems, is never value-free. 1'his is not necessarily an issue, provided the value position of the researcher and the aim of the research are made public. The reason for conducting research into social issues rnay be the researcher's '"°'ish to explain certain phenon1ena, but it may also be a desire to achieve certain aims of social consequence - for example, to turn public attention to certain issues as social problems, or to provide data for ren1edial intc-rvention in such prohien1s. Sponsors of research, whether governrnent agencies or private corporations, also have certain aims, and these may not always be explicitly or clearly stated, or be identical '�:ith the researcher's aim:-;. \:'alue-cornmitted social research may be conducted with a high degree of intellectual objectivity, but on the other hand if it is n1otivated by a strong or extren1e com1nit1nent. to a value or interest, it may acquire the characteristics of \.vhat. Neil Gilbert ( 1995} defines as ' advocacy research ' . Research of this nature airns to elicit public and government response in a desired direction by presenting a probleni in an exaggerated per­ spective . This, Gilbert explains, is done in a nun1ber of \vays: defining a problem so broadly that extraneous ele1ncnts can be included in it; projecting onto the virhole society findings that rnay apply only to a small group; including data and evidence frorn other studies that are only marginally related to the proble1n in quest.ion; and using anecdotal 'atrocity tales ' to raise en1ot.ions in society. Research conducted using such methods usually receives interest and publicity from t.h e niass media, especially if the ' problem' rnakes a good hun1an interest story ( 1 995:108-9) .

'

·

·

,.

'

'

·,

-

�

-

·

·

..

· •


llovv tht' vallLes they clain1cd as their o'•.rn , ho\vever unpopular thel'.e values

migh t be

( 1975:59 ) . I!e argued that 'an empty-headed partisanship unable to con1n1itmcnt is simply just one more forrn of 1narket researcl1 . . . It is to values, not to factions, that sociologists 1nust give their most basic con1n1itiucnt' transcend the immediacies of narrowly conceived political

( 1 975:67-8) .

'fhe Bec ker-Gouldner debate brought into the public vie\.v the ever­

present issue of objectivity and subjectivity in social research and in the soc.ial sciences generally, and also recently, Neil Gilbert

added issue of partisanship. iVlore

( 1 995) raised the issue of partisan ship encountered aJI

in the form of 'advocac.y research ' , \•,rhich brings into question the

integrity of social research. These debates illustrate the political im pli­

cations of re�carch into social phcnon1ena that are perceived to be social problen1s, ue/need, explaiJJed in terms

�•h e h_ cl� p _ i•� • g hfUJ� not changed appreciably, except for son1e relatively miii.or shifts and reallocations, despite all the technological and economic transformations and in the face of the many effort� in Lhe past tvvo or three { 1992:91; nn.pha.si:s in thP. nrigi.nal) decades to introduce changes.

Inequality in a class society is structural and institutionalised. I t is embedded in the structure and operation of political and legal insti­ tutions - that is, in the social system itself. It is ernbedded also in the Weltansch auung of Lhe population, so that perceptions on social issues is pursued as a arc 1nediated tl1rough the class perspective. Inequality by those \vho va1idatetl and desirable goal and is particularly cherished from access excluded arc benefit from it and vvho are aware that others \Vith clothes 'designer' to those benefits. Obtaining scarce goods, buying with club a of member a the label prominently displayed, becoming limited metnbcrship, buying private health insurance ""·hen universal i nsurar1ce is already available, being ' upgraded' to business class on an aeroplane - all such instances give the satisfaction of exclusivity. I n the allocation of resources by govcr1unents, inequality is legiti­ rr1atcd by differential interpretatio11s of essentially the same service and purpose. The use of different narnes construct!"':

C"'l n ('. C..._ "')

t--'. r--: .,f O

"1< ::N" --