As stated earlier, social capital of individuals increases their susceptibility to certain diseases. That is, relative differences in an individual’s status indicate absolute differences in life chances. One’s status in society is a relative concept rather than absolute, and it changes with time. Marmot notes that incomes are indicative of an individual are social ranking in society (2007). Income level, moreover, is determined by the capabilities of a given individual. Low earning individuals have less control and have low social participation thus increasing their risk of disease (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2011).Social participation is an individual’s contribution towards society through social networking and the receipt of social support from individuals (Subramanyam et al. The lower the social participation the higher the risks of mortality rates and vice versa. Reciprocity is another aspect of social participation; individuals often expend effort towards others with the expectation of being rewarded with similar gestures (Subramanyam et al. Status, as with health, plays a significant role in social participation. Individuals with higher social status are awarded social activities while their low-status counterparts are denied of the same. In addition, society fosters social participation, hence favoring high-status individuals in the process.Loss of trust, for instance, increases the prevalence of suicides in society (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2011). Trust and reciprocity are significant forms of social capital. Considering this, it is a known fact that social capital increases with status with high-status individuals having capital that is more social. With increased social capital, individuals are able to reap more health benefits that are resultant of social participation (Marmot, 2007). This leads to the unfavorable conclusion that the lack of autonomy and low social participation leads to the inequality in health evident in today’s society. Considering the work of Wilkinson and Pickett, how would the health of people on different levels of the social gradient be affected by living in a society with a Gini Coefficient of .250 as compared to a Gini Coefficient of .450 and why?The Gini coefficient compares the distribution of wealth across areas. Low coefficient denotes equality in resource and wealth distribution; whereas high coefficient
Marmot, M. (2007). Status Syndrome. JAMA, 295(11), 1304.
Phelan, J., Link, B., Diez-Roux, A., Kawachi, I., & Levin, B. (2004). "Fundamental Causes" of Social Inequalities in Mortality: A Test of the Theory. Journal Of Health And Social Behavior, 45(3), 265-285.
Seeman, M., Stein Merkin, S., Karlamangla, A., Koretz, B., & Seeman, T. (2014). Social status and biological dysregulation: The “status syndrome” and allostatic load. Social Science & Medicine,118, 143-151.
Subramanyam, M., James, S., Diez-Roux, A., Hickson, D., Sarpong, D., & Sims, M. et al. (2013). Socioeconomic status, John Henryism and blood pressure among African-Americans in the Jackson Heart Study. Social Science & Medicine, 93, 139-146.
Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2011). The spirit level: Why greater equality makes societies stronger. New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Yip, W., Subramanian, S., Mitchell, A., Lee, D., Wang, J., & Kawachi, I. (2007). Does social capital enhance health and well-being? Evidence from rural China. Social Science & Medicine, 64(1), 35-49.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples