How to Distinguish Medicalization from Over-Medicalization?

The article by Emilia Kaczmarek explores the nuanced difference between medicalization, which is not inherently negative, and over-medicalization, which can have adverse effects across health, economic, psychological, and social domains. The author introduces four guiding questions to help determine whether a condition should be medicalized: 1) Is it a significant problem causing discomfort or risk? 2) Is its recognition as a problem free from exaggerated social expectations? 3) Does medicine provide the most adequate understanding of the issue? 4) Does medicalization ensure the most effective and safest resolution? Using male-pattern hair loss as an example, the paper illustrates the complexity of these questions, considering the mental distress it can cause versus the influence of social expectations and commercial interests. The document also critiques the reductionist tendencies of modern biomedicine and emphasizes the importance of considering multiple levels of causation—molecular, physiological, psychological, social—in understanding conditions. The paper aims to foster bioethical reflection on the boundaries of medicine and was funded by the National Science Centre under Project No. 2015/17/N/HS1/02122.