Blog
Article
From populations to patients.
SECOND THOUGHTS
No disciple of the wise may live in a city that does not have a physician, a surgeon, a bathhouse, a lavatory, a source of water, a synagogue, a school teacher, a scribe, a treasurer of charity funds for the poor, a court that has authority to punish.
—Moses Maimonides1
The medieval Jewish scholar Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, known to us by his Greek name Maimonides (1135-1204), was considered the greatest authority of his time in medicine, philosophy, and Torah scholarship. Maimonides brought together a surprisingly contemporary worldview regarding what we call public health and social psychiatry. His list of essential ingredients for choosing a healthy city includes elements of basic public health needs to attend to the body, the mind and spirit, and to social justice and public order. In other texts, Maimonides also emphasized the need to locate a dwelling on an elevation where prevailing winds ensure fresh air and to locate lavatories and refuse dumps away from human habitation.
In the first column on social psychiatry in this series of Second Thoughts, I identified 3 related branches of social psychiatry from my Social Psychiatry Manifesto2:
In a later column, I discussed family therapy as the third branch of social psychiatry. In this column, I want to highlight our first, foundational branch of social psychiatry—psychiatric epidemiology and public mental health by focusing on the social determinants of health (SDoH). I consider SDoH the basic science of social psychiatry.
Psychiatric Epidemiology
Already in the Middle Ages, Maimonides was aware of the environmental and SDoH, not forgetting education, social justice, and spiritual factors. And yet, it took centuries before medicine integrated these social and environmental factors into medical research and practice.
As it happens, my graduate training in clinical psychology was at the Institute of Psychiatry (IoP, now the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience) and The Maudsley Hospital in London, England where Michael Shepherd, MD, became professor of Psychiatric Epidemiology, the first of its kind in the world. He was also a noted social psychiatrist, following in the footsteps of Sir Aubrey Lewis, MD, who led British psychiatry to pay attention to the social context of psychiatric illness. Another IoP pioneer was my mentor Sir Michael Rutter, MD, who conducted the first child psychiatric epidemiology with the Isle of Wight Study.8,9
I chose to go into medicine at McMaster University Medical School where clinical biostatistics and epidemiology were basic sciences as much as pharmacology and genetics and where evidence-based medicine was invented. More significantly for my career in child psychiatry, Dan Offord, MD, conducted the first Canadian study on child psychiatric epidemiology at McMaster adapting Rutter’s methodology in the Ontario Child Health Study,10 later conducting my own child epidemiological study, The Children’s Food and Mood Study, for my doctorate at the University of London. Later still, after being recruited by the University of Montreal, I conducted a substudy of the Quebec Child Mental Health Study on single-parent families in an underprivileged neighborhood where I work in Montreal.11
“Build Back Better”—Sir Michael Marmot, Epidemiology’s Working Man
Building on this foundation, rooted in Britain’s postwar Labour government’s commitment to social justice and the welfare state, Sir Michael Marmot, MD, conducted the authoritative WHO study on SDoH.3 Along with the complementary ACE studies,4 SDoH now form an empirical grounding for social psychiatry and have made Marmot the world’s most consequential epidemiologist, advocating for a “Fair society, healthy lives.”12
A major debate in policy making and public health has been the dichotomy between universalism (dealing with the whole population) and targeting (focusing on a particular segment) in the health field.12 Marmot's solution is in Proportionate Universalism (PU). This notion evolved from the classical opposition of universalism to targeting in European socio-political history, to “targeting within universalism” or “progressive universalism” and, finally, to the PU approach which focuses on “upstream determinants” by advocating on social policies such as education or employment.13
A tireless worker on behalf of the working classes, following a moral compass with a commitment to human dignity, Marmot makes the case in a series of evidence-based studies, projects, and policy papers for improving health outcomes by reducing inequality—“build back better.” “Most of the things that doctors treat,” Marmot contends, “are failed prevention.”14 Highlights of his career include the landmark Marmot Review of health inequalities in England, leading the Institute of Health Inequality in London, and a network of local authorities in England, “Marmot Cities,” which is tackling health inequalities.14
Closer to home, Dilip Jeste, MD, APA Past President and Chair of the APA Task Force on the SDoH,15 founded and directs the Global Research Network on Social Determinants of Health and Exposomics (SDoMHE Network), “a multi-disciplinary worldwide research Network of scientists, clinicians, educators, public health advocates, professional societies, and institutions” in a promising new synthesis for academic psychiatry. (Full disclosure: I am on the Advisory Board of the SDoMHE Network.)
The Still Hidden Injuries of Class
As a social psychiatrist, I share Marmot’s vision for healthy lives in a fair society and see SDoH as the empirical grounding for all our work. Now, if I had to hone that down to a message that resonates, I would invoke American sociologist Richard Sennett’s work, The Hidden Injuries of Class,16 and talk about the still hidden injuries of class. (See what Michael Marmot says about the impact of poverty on nutrition in his interview.14)
Today’s cultural psychiatry talks about the hidden injuries of race and gender. I get that.
I am talking about something that cuts across all of that. To all those concerns, from racism to anti-Semitism to gender discrimination; with every kind of mental, relational, and social suffering, from anorexia nervosa to schizophrenia to social isolation; and to all the issues of colonialism, power, and privilege, I point to: class, class, class. That is, social class, not as status anxiety but the socio-economics of class with a cascade of consequences affecting housing, education, health, and social services.
From Populations to Patients: Social Determinants of Health in Clinical Practice
A. Population Studies. With epidemiological or population studies, the shift is away from the individual and the clinic, and populations become the focus of research. Two major studies are worth noting here:
Epidemiology to reflect the burden of disease. Service allocation should be based on reliable epidemiology—“the science of denominators”—not the “numerators” that happen to catch our attention in the clinic. Overdiagnosis and overprescription are as dangerous as poor access to care.21,22 This is partly a side effect of overspecialization.
B. Translational Research
C. Ground-Level Prescriptions
Conclusion: Towards a Clinical Social Psychiatry
We need to practice social psychiatry in the clinic where populational studies are integrated and translated into psychiatric and mental health practice11 in the 4 domains of:
I am calling for clinical social psychiatry as a bridge between populations and patients, society and psychiatric/mental health practice.
To conclude, here are some practical steps:
Special Note: While this column covers “second thoughts” on a wide array of topics in psychiatry, psychology and psychotherapy, my focus for the next 18 months, the rest of my term as President of the World Association of Social Psychiatry (WASP), will be on social psychiatry and I will offer an updated lexicon for social psychiatry, interspersed with related reflections. I will call this sub-series, “Terms of the Social,” covering the words social and society; the complex history of social class and socialism; the terms sociopetal and sociofugal from socio-architecture, all three terms coined by British-Canadian psychiatrist Humphrey Osmond, MD, and the related social space from American anthropologist Edward Hall’s proxemics; how to understand the social sciences from sociology to social psychology to social work, and such philosophical-clinical notions as R.D. Laing, MD’s social phenomenology and social construction versus social constructivism in understanding social reality as part of social philosophy; and, finally, the place of social psychiatry in all of this.
Resources
Dr Di Nicola is a child psychiatrist, family psychotherapist, and philosopher in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, where he is professor of psychiatry & addiction medicine at the University of Montreal and President of the World Association of Social Psychiatry (WASP). He has been recognized with numerous national and international awards, honorary professorships, and fellowships, and was recently elected a Fellow of the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences and given the Distinguished Service Award of the American Psychiatric Association. Dr Di Nicola’s work straddles psychiatry and psychotherapy on one side and philosophy and poetry on the other. Dr Di Nicola’s writing includes: A Stranger in the Family: Culture, Families and Therapy (WW Norton, 1997), Letters to a Young Therapist (Atropos Press, 2011, winner of a prize from the Quebec Psychiatric Association), and Psychiatry in Crisis: At the Crossroads of Social Sciences, the Humanities, and Neuroscience (with D. Stoyanov; Springer Nature, 2021); and, in the arts, his “Slow Thought Manifesto” (Aeon Magazine, 2018) and Two Kinds of People: Poems from Mile End (Delere Press, 2023, nominated for The Pushcart Prize).
References
2 Commerce Drive
Cranbury, NJ 08512