Horwitz,
A.V. & Scheid, T.L.(1999). A Handbook
for the Study of Mental Health: Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
This
work, A Handbook for the Study of Mental
Health, presents a broad-spectrum look at a variety of psychological and
sociological issues ranging from diagnosis of mental health to an examination
of the policies that affect those who either have or work with those who have
mental disorders. Consequently, the scope of this work is quite broad. It
presents a variety of information on a plethora of topics dealing with mental health;
however it does not dig too deeply into any one of those topics. The focus of
the work is on the effects of stress and social factors on mental health
(Horwitz & Scheid 1999, pg. XV). So, the broad scope of this work is
narrowed somewhat by a focus on these two themes.
The
authors state that the intended audiences for this work are, “Upper level
undergraduates, and lower level graduate students,” (Horwitz & Scheid 1999,
pg. XV). The authors accomplish this goal by writing a handbook that provides a
good overview of issues in mental health, but keep the language and topics
accessible to college students. Most of the articles that make up this work can
be easily understood with only a little background in psychology. Even the
layman should be able to read and grasp the majority of what is being presented.
But this handbook also provides good depth of information that would give even
the graduate reader material on which to build their own research, or to
broaden their understanding of the field.
This
work is dated. It was written in 1999, and thus it presents information and classifications
that are out of date. Perhaps the greatest indicator of this is that the
primary sourcebook used for the writing of the articles in this piece is the DSM-III-R. Since its publication, two
more iterations of the DSM have been
published, the most recent being the DSM-V-R.
Thus, the primary diagnostic and classification tool referenced in this
handbook is itself out of date. As a result, this particular work may not be
terribly useful for the individual studying mental health issues in the present
day.
While
dated, this handbook still carries a good deal of authority. Its two lead
editors, Horwitz and Scheid, are both respected academics from Rutgers
University and the University of North Carolina Charlotte, respectively. Both
are broadly published and have decades of experience in fields dealing with
mental health (Allan V. Horwitz, Ph. D,
Teresa Scheid). Additionally, the
contributing authors are all Ph. D’s in the fields of sociology or psychology,
and come from an assortment of well-respected universities and government
institutions, lending even greater credence to the authority of this handbook.
Finally, it is published by the Cambridge University Press, which is a
well-known and respected academic publishing company. Consequently, this
handbook is incredibly authoritative in the field of mental health.
In
addition to having strong authority, this work is also well documented. At the
end of the work is an extensive list of references used by each of the
contributing authors in the formation of this work. The only down side to this
style of documentation is that the references are not divided by author, nor
are the book sections demarcated. This means that a reader wishing to access
the references used by a particular author would have to locate the source in
the list of all of the references used in the writing of the book. While unwieldy,
this still does provide the reader with the documentation necessary to both
affirm the reliability and academic rigor used in the writing of each article,
and also provides a jumping off point for the reader to perform their own
research.
Finally,
this work is also relatively objective. It is written with the goal of
providing the reader with a good overview of issues pertaining to mental health,
and in doing so it balances a variety of viewpoints and issues. Because there
is a heavier focus on how stress and society impact an individual’s mental
health, there is a topical bias towards those two issues. However, this is
clearly stated by the authors in their introduction to the work, and thus does
not handicap its overall quality. As far as any other type of bias or leaning, this
work appears to be relatively free of it.
Rutgers
Department of Sociology. Allan V.
Horwitz, Ph. D. Rutgers Univesity Department of Sociology. Retrieved from https://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~avhorw/content.html
University
of North Carolina at Charlotte. Teresa
Scheid. UNC Charlotte Department of Sociology. Retreived from http://sociology.uncc.edu/teresa-scheid
No comments:
Post a Comment