I appreciate the spirit of your post very much and agree with it, in that popular/media portrayals of psychology, as well as the general approach of clinical psychology, locates pathologies in individuals without due consideration of broader factors (which I think are actually the most influential).

However, I think it is a misrepresentation to say that psychology neglects broader sociocultural factors. Psychology is an expansive field; in fact, researchers and practitioners in the subfield of community psychology explicitly address sociocultural forces (e.g. media, economics, government policy, cultural narratives) that produce/contribute to psychological distress and other "dysfunctions" that are experienced at the interpersonal and individual levels. This helps to frame mental "illnesses" as social problems. (For example, SCRA - the Society for Community Research and Action)

I think that you are highlighting a problematic silo effect in psychology - there's too large of a divide between different subfields in psychology in general, and when it comes to applied psychology, that includes a separation between clinical psychology and community psychology, which have different orientations when looking at similar problems. These fields intersect at "community-clinical" academic programs where future practitioners are trained, but the two sub-fields actually don't interact as much as one might like in professional associations. Hopefully this can change in the future!

Thank you for bringing attention to this very important issue.

More Posts