7.1. Formation of Western schools of sociology of medicine
Probably, all prominent Western sociologists examine the problems of sociology of medicine. Transformation of this discipline into independent science went on in parallel with individualization of such disciplines as family sociology, sociology of science, sociology of law, sociology of education, sociology of religion, sociology of art, etc.
Great contributions to the formation and development of sociology of medicine had been made by prominent scientists W. Petty, E. Chadwick, F. Guenn, H. Mayhew, K. Marx, F. Engels, A. Frank, T. Parsons, J. Denton, R. Straus, E. Freidson, M. Foucault, P. Mercon, M. Susser, F. Steudlez, G. Reader, M. Goss, D. Mechanic, K. Winter and others. The social determinants of health had been examined by such outstanding scientists and the healthcare managers as Rudolph Virchow, Sa1omon Neumann, Henry Sigerist, Bernard J. Stern, and Nikolai Semashko.
There is general consensus that the largest contribution to the development of the theoretical problems in post-war sociology of medicine had been made by three researchers: Talcott Parsons, David Mechanic, and Eliot Freidson. They substantiated the concept on the need to transfer the general sociological regularities to medicine and public health. In the following, sociology of medicine positioned itself as a rather progressive independent branch in sociology mainly focused on systematic theoretic development of the conception of sick role (Т. Parsons, 1951). The theoretical sociological concepts of these scientists exerted a pronounced influence on the formation of methodology of sociology of medicine. In this chapter, we consider the most important facets of the theories advanced by Talcott Parsons and David Mechanic.