Here are the two parts of the Diagnosis podcast we listened to today. This is one episode of the amazing podcast RadioLab, which covers a host of scientific topics in an interesting, unique way. Seriously--the show blows my mind all the time. You will never think about some topics the same again!
I want to talk about the Final Project now, to get it on your radar with plenty of time to consider your options. Your Final Project is worth 50 points toward your final grade, and is due by 9:00pm Sunday, April 22nd.
For your Final Project, you will choose your favorite Blog Post, and expand it into a final paper, post or presentation. It may be a temptation to just automatically choose the Blog Post 5, as it is due one week later, but I hope you will choose the project that engages you the most, not just the one that is most convenient.
Your Final Project will be more than an expansion; it will be a deeper examination of the same project, and the concepts it addressed. I expect you to fix any problems you had in the original post, incorporating the feedback I gave you, as well as helpful suggestions from your peers. Then I expect you to push deeper with your analysis, showing off all that you have learned, and your ability to engage with your project at an academic level. You may need to conduct additional research, and you will have to use more of the course materials. Instead of using only the materials from the section in which you wrote the post, you will have the entire semester's worth of materials from which to draw.
You must use, explain and fully cite at least FIVE of the course materials (anything from the syllabus) in your project. I will be looking for you to integrate the concepts and materials from the class in a way that shows clear understanding, and an ability to synthesize materials into new knowledge. Remember to explain concepts well, as if the audience reading your post is not me, but someone with no prior knowledge of social deviance. Also remember that if the thought did not originate in your head--whether it be a historical tidbit, a concept, an idea or a theory--you MUST cite the specific originator of that idea. Be respectful, be thorough, and do no plagiarize.
Because I extended the word count for the individual Blog Posts, I need to adjust the word count for the Final Project as well. Where the syllabus says 1500-2000 words, the Final Project should now be 2000-3000 words.
As I said above, your Final Project can be a paper, post or presentation.
If you want to do a traditional paper, it should be on double spaced pages, with full in text citations and a works cited. The font must be 12 inch (and comparable to a Times New Roman-type font), and the margins 1 inch. No cover sheet is necessary, but be sure to put your word count at the end.
If you want to do a post, you may want to type it into your word processing software first, for word count, as well as spell check. The expectation will be the same as for the paper when it comes to content, but this will allow you the creative freedom to use images, videos, links and so forth.
If you want to do a presentation, you have a few options. You can do a PowerPoint presentation, a podcast, a video, a web site, an academic poster, a pictorial...I am open. Please talk to me in advance so we can work out details, but plan on creating a presentation that lasts 5-8 minutes. Note: if you plan to do any of these options, please let me know by Tuesday, April 10th so we can discuss details, and make we leave sufficient time for presentations on April 26th.
To submit your Final Project:
Extended Blog Posts should be posted to your personal blogs.
Traditional Papers (or anything else you can turn in electronically) should be submitted to the Final Project Dropbox on Angel (under "lessons").
Presentations will be submitted through Dropbox if possible, or you can email me a URL if it is posted online somewhere. If you create something that is available online, please link to it from your blog.
I strongly, strongly suggest you utilize the Writing Center if you have struggled with any of your Blog Posts. This is a Final Project for a 300-level, upper division course. I expect you to have ZERO mistakes when it comes to spelling and grammar, no matter the format. I also expect your citations to be perfect. If you are not 100% sure you can do this, get help. I will be grading with the highest of expectations.
As you are working on your next few blog posts....
And as you are reading the words of your classmates....
Keep in mind that at the end of the semester, you will be nominating your classmates for the Best of the Blog Awards! Here is your opportunity to be recognize, and be recognized, for your hard work and academic analysis this semester.
The categories for the awards are:
Best Writing: For this award, you will choose the blog that you thought showed the best writing ability. It could be because they were able to find that balance between keeping you academic, while they were teaching you. Or it could be because they brought the most unique voice. Be on the lookout for blogs that display great writing.
Best Use of Multimedia: For this award, you will choose the blog that used images and video, along with text, in the best ways. More than just throwing in fun images, they integrated multimedia into their posts to actually enrich the experience of reading their post, with humor, or for historic examples, or as a unique way to integrate other perspectives. As you are reading the blogs, take note of the ones that use multimedia well.
Best Use of Course Concepts: This award will recognize the blogger that gets it. This blogger weaves the course concepts into their posts so well, it is apparent they not only understand, but can take what we are learning to the next level. They explain things in a way you can understand, and also perhaps push you a little in your understanding.
Best Responder: Despite the fact that you were all forced to give both positive and negative feedback, this classmate did so with style. Their feedback was helpful, insightful, respectful, and helped further your understanding of the course concepts and materials. Whether they used humor, or just brought in a perspective you had not thought about, this award goes to the person who did the best job providing commentary on other blogs.
Best Overall Blogger: However you define "best" when it comes to our blogs, this is the award that will recognize the top blogger. It could be the person who made you laugh the most, made you think the most, pushed you the most, or just most consistently kept you engaged. As you read through all of the blogs, think about the posts that have lingered with you, and kept you thinking long after you've moved on to another post.
Best _________: This is a write-in category, where you get to make up the award. Feel free to be funny (but try to be respectful!). It could be anything from "best ideas" to "best research" to "best sense of humor" to "best grammar"...the possibilities are endless. I will choose a few of the best write-in awards, and those peers will be recognized with the other award winners.
Note: Because of the timing of the due date for the final Blog Post (April 29th), you will only be able to use the first FOUR blog posts to work with. Make your next Blog Post (and round of comments) count!
For your 5th and final homework assignment (worth 5 points), you will be nominating your peers for the Best of the Blog Awards. You will do so using a survey on Angel. It will come available Tuesday, April 17th at 9:00pm and will close Tuesday, April 24th at 9:00pm--you will have one week to make your nominations. The survey will be in a folder under "lessons."
Here is a story that is just coming out today, on how drug testers are turning to the poor areas of India to do their drug testing, so they can workaround all of the rules we use in the U.S. to protect people during human drug testing.
"Drug trial outsourcing to foreign countries is rapidly becoming an attractive alternative for U.S. pharmaceutical companies looking to save millions of dollars, avoid regulatory scrutiny and tap into a seemingly endless supply of drug study participants.
But a year-long Datelineinvestigation into one of the preferred destinations for overseas drug trials, India, raises questions about lax regulatory oversight in these studies, the integrity of some of the companies contracted to run them and the reliability of the data they produce. "
We have talked a bit about how much money can be made by making us feel insecure about our bodies (and minds!). We are made to feel so afraid of being "deviant" that this tactic works--if we were not so afraid of difference, we would not be so willing to spend to make ourselves "normal." Even the most informed consumers are left feeling doubt, when we have a constant barrage of messages telling us we are not measuring up to the ideals.
Unilever came up in class a couple of times, and I thought a few of you would appreciate this.
This is a clip from Steven Colbert's show, The Colbert Report. Here he discusses how Unilever socially constructs the problem of "unattractive armpits" and offers us a Dove product to save the day.
Dove (owned by Unilever) is a really interesting case. As was also pointed out in class, they were among the first companies to jump on the bandwagon when there was a public outcry against Photoshopping. The following commercial was beloved, and spread around like wildfire--they wanted women to believe they were on our side. And instead of making us feel bad about ourselves, they were going to save the day....by selling us their product. Was that progress, or more of the same clever marketing?
Here is a great podcast I found a couple of years ago, that really talks about this new type of marketing--selling us female empowerment as a product, with profits still the ultimate goal.
Here are a couple other perspectives, and critiques of these, and similar, marketing ploys.
For this section of the course, we are talking about how some people get labeled "sick" for the way their minds work. This is an extremely difficult topic, with much emotion and controversy wrapped up in those labels. It seems that some behaviors people used to shrug off as somewhere in the range of "normal" are now considered problematic. And some behaviors that used to be seen absolute as a sign of mental illness (like homosexuality) are no longer perceived that way (at least by most).
For some, getting a label of a mental illness has been life-saving and affirmative. Not only does it offer them an explanation for whatever symptoms they have been experiencing, but it also offers a chance at treatment. And, because we rely so heavily on insurance, receiving an official diagnosis is often a necessary step for getting therapy and/or treatment. Being given a label has also meant that individuals facing similar issues, barriers and concerns can form community together, and bond over their common experiences. With all of our technological advancements, we keep learning more about the body, and our brains--so are these new and expanded labels helpful? Are they getting us closer to the truth?
One of the downsides to getting a label of mental illness is the stigma that comes with such labels. Such a stigma is potent, because, as we have discussed about labels, they come with a whole package of assumptions. We see people with mental illnesses as "sick" but what else comes in that package--sick? Crazy? Unstable? Dangerous? What happens when your mental illness becomes your master status? Once you have been labeled, are you seen the same by society? Do you still have the same opportunities as everyone else? Or do your choices become more constrained?
One of my favorite examples of this quandary--should we accept this label or not?--is in a really fascinating story of Emanuel Frowner, from the outstanding podcast Radiolab. In the story of the Frowners, the father of the family refuses to believe that Emanuel has any problems, but his other son can see that Emanuel has textbook symptoms along the autism spectrum. Dad wants to avoid Emanuel being treated differently, but his brother wants him to get help--what is ultimately the best thing for Emanuel? The story is moving, and even the comments on the web site are telling about how difficult these decisions are. The clip is about 19 minutes, and is well worth a listen (sorry about the ad!).
The Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) is called "the bible" when it comes to diagnosing mental illness. The DSM-V is scheduled to be released in May 2013 and the process of updating it has been nothing short of intense. Right now at least 8 conditions considered "disorders" will be removed. Various groups have lobbied, protested or fought in a myriad of ways to get their illnesses labeled, so they can get health care, or removed altogether. And those groups are infighting with each other, because some want the label to access health benefits, and others are fighting the stigmas. Should this be how diagnoses are made? By political lobbies and activism, or are decisions made based on sound scientific evidence? And who pays for that scientific evidence--it really gets that messy. On top of everything, many of the people charged with updating the new DSM-V clearly stand to make a lot of money on the very changes they are voting on--should this conflict of interest, which impacts up to 70% of the panel members, be allowed?
For your fourth blog post, you will do your best to disentangle all of this in regards to an "illness" of your choosing. You can choose something that used to not be labeled an illness, but is now, or something that is no longer considered an illness. Or something that is currently going through a surge of awareness, and heightened diagnoses, like autism or ADHD (both of which we will begin to discuss in class). Really, it can be any illness you want to know more about. More than giving a history, you are going to give us an analysis of what has been involved in the process of this illness gaining, or losing, that label. You are going to tell us the academic story of that illness.
Choose something that has been deemed an "illness" either informally, or formally in the DSM. Not necessarily eyelashes--try to take on something with broader implications. Give a brief history of the diagnosis, or medicalization of that illness, then give a sociological analysis of the illness, using questions like these:
What were the behaviors or attributes that were seen as deviant, and how did they become seen as deviant/normal?
What was the process of medicalization (or demedicalization?) for this illness?
Who were the major players in the decision-making process, as far as you can find?
What parties stand to gain from the diagnosis?
What parties stand to lose from the diagnosis?
Are the people that will be impacted by the label part of the conversation, at all?
How did/does information spread about this illness?
What were/are the roles of social institutions in creating/maintaining the "sick" label?
What are the consequences (positive and negative) of having this diagnosis?
Are some groups more or less likely to be diagnosed with this illness?
What are the underlying social constructions of race, class, gender, size, ability, sickness, mental health, age, beauty, normal, deviance, sexuality, and so forth that impact this illness, and/or its perception?
Once this label is assigned, do we as society take any responsibility for the care of those who are labeled? Should we?
Who benefits from this illness being seen as an individual problem?
What are the possible social reasons for the existence of this illness?
A thorough post will include as many sides of the discussion as possible, to try to show just how complex this all is, and will do a really solid job of connecting to the concepts and materials from the course to their examination. My standards are only increasing; if you have any doubts, make sure you visit the writing center. At this point we should be past any typos or citation errors. Remember you must utilize and cite at least three of the assigned course materials, and you must EXPLAIN sufficiently how they connect to your analysis.
Not sure where to start? Here are a few suggestions, and some links to some places to start your thinking (also, of course, look at the required readings). Once you choose one, if you need some guidance, feel free to email me and/or set up a time to talk--I am always happy to bat around ideas with students. You will probably find you need to go back into the deviance blogs, so you can make sure you are getting a wide representation of perspectives and voices on the impact of these deviant labels(see the list on the right side of the page).
This is not necessarily reflective of what is "out there" but is just pulled from my personal collection I have gathered over the past few years of teaching this course.
81 Words (This American Life podcast on how 'homosexuality' came to be taken out of the DSM--amazing! Could help with any project, for understanding the politics of the DSM)
After Spring Break we will be continuing our discussions on the social construction of "sick" and what we consider to be individual vs. societal issues.
For March 20, we will take a slightly different look at violence than we did at the beginning of this section when we look at the concept of self-harm. What happens when we want to turn violence inward, and cause ourselves harm? Is that okay? Should we be able to legally do whatever we want to our own bodies? If we do cause ourselves harm, is it because we are "sick" or is it a valid form of self expression? Is it the result of other social constructions around gender, and so forth? What causes some people to self harm? Are some people/groups more or less likely to participate in self harm? We will be talking about several types of behaviors that have been considered "self-harm" including cutting (and related behaviors), Body Integrity Identity Disorder and eating disorders.
We will complete this section on March 22 with a discussion on drug and alcohol use. Why are some drugs seen as "dangerous" while others are seen as viable recreational opportunities, with wide public support? With any drug, why does one level of consumption get perceived as "normal" (to varying degrees) while another level of consumption gets labeled as "sick"? Who gets to decide when you have crossed that line? What groups benefit from some drugs being made legal, and others kept illegal? Who gets to influence policy decisions? What are the advantages and disadvantages to seeing drugs and alcohol as a medical issues? What about seeing them as deviance? Which drugs, if any, should be controlled? Is that a medical, or criminological decision?
Read "Hey Don't Blame Me...Blame The Booze" by Robert L. Peralta, available in your textbook.
Read "OxyContin: A Prescription for Disaster" by Inciardi and Goode, also available in your textbook.
