Evans-Campbell, T., Lincoln, K. D., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2007). Race and mental health: past debates, new opportunities. In Mental health, social mirror (pp. 169-189). Springer, Boston, MA.

Abstract

169 Given its pervasiveness in American social life, race as a construct and topic has a long history of scholarship and debate in sociology and a corresponding research literature, albeit not as extensive, in the sociology of mental health. We argue that inquiries about race and its consequences tend to reflect existing attitudes during different time points. In this chapter, we examine some of the key frameworks used in sociology to study race and mental health. Rather than focusing on specific research contributions, we discuss the general themes that highlight how sociology contributes to the study of race and mental health and vice versa. A second purpose of this chapter is to focus on some directions that may help to advance the sociology of mental health. Sociology and the Study of Race and Mental Health Sociology provides some of the theoretical underpinnings on which race and mental health research is constructed. In turn, the sociology of mental health contributes to the discipline by providing theoretical refinements and empirical evidence about how race is linked to psychological and emotional states such as through traumatic events, discrimination, and treatment biases. This reciprocity between the sociology of mental health and the larger body of sociological work is evidenced in some of the common frameworks we outline below that have been used, over time, to study race and mental health. Our review also serves as a reminder that current studies on mental health are influenced by the social and political realities that frame discussions and conversations about race. Past debates have usually reinforced, often unintentionally, the social positions of racial groups rather than contesting the inequities found among racial groups. Support for one theoretical frame over another become solidified into ideological positions about the nature of race, inequality and appropriate policy solutions (Takeuchi & Gage, 2003).