The idea of "quality of life"
The idea of "quality of life" has received more focus over the last few years. Contrary to popular belief, interest in other disciplines such as sociology, economics, philosophy, psychology, politics, the environment, and sports has also been increasing (Barcaccia et al. 186).
But "quality of life" has proven to be a hazy and ill-defined notion. In other words, it seems like a long way off to arrive at a single, precise meaning. This essay will describe "quality of life" in terms of a variety of social, environmental, psychological, and physical values to provide an effective definition. The concept of “quality of life” based on a number of social, environmental, psychological, and physical values.
The concept of “quality of life” as a social condition
The concept of “quality of life” can be defined as a social condition. The concept could be considered as a state of association between a person and his or her physical and social surrounding (Cambir and Vasile 937). From this perspective, "quality of life" is not a function of the person as such, but of his or her way of life. Therefore, a poor "quality of life" evaluation does not out-rightly translate to a negative assessment of the individual or his or her worth, but could suggest a critical assessment of his or her environment. In this way, the assessment illustrates the manner in which the environment could be modified in order to improve the person's quality of life with regard to some standard of norms, for instance, health, pleasure, autonomy, justice, and so forth.
Defining "quality of life" based on physical values
"Quality of life" can also be defined based on physical values. In this case, quality of life refers to something that one has or possesses. For instance, according to various pieces of literature, quality of life is limited in diverse ways by economic circumstances (Cambir and Vasile 933). Economic circumstances, in this case, reflect the household's management of possessions and endowment with hard wearing commodities or goods. Physical possessions are the only ones that could ultimately be converted into wealth based on each person's likings and capabilities. Therefore, physical values, such as economic conditions provide a framework to evaluate a citizen’s potential to attain or safeguard his or her own "quality of life" (Cambir and Vasile 933). In other words, it could be argued that quality of life may refer to a state of being able or unable to forecast ahead and overcome an unexpected decline in the economic and the wider physical environment. Another aspect of an individual's physical environment that defines his or her quality of life is physical safety. For example, this could be measured by the number of homicides per county.
Protection of the environment and its impact on "quality of life"
Protection of the environment is also another physical aspect that can be used to define the notion of “quality of life.” In this case, “quality of life” might refer to a state of the environment that has a direct impact on the health of an individual and the prosperity of societies (Cambir and Vasile 937). For instance, the vast majority of people are certain that it is important to protect their environment. This is because, being exposed to air, water, noise pollution, and other pollutants in the environment have a direct impact on a person's health and economic well-being. From a different perspective, “quality of life” can also be defined by the health status of an individual. In this regard, quality of life is an outcome of physical, social, and psychological well-being and functioning (Theofilou 152). A person can only be considered to have a better quality of life when he or she shows positive health indicators (Theofilou 152). For instance, the social well-being is defined by the person’s social interactions such that he or she has positive relationships with family and friends, thereby providing a positive support system. Furthermore, considering that the mental state of a person determines his or her subjective well-being, good "quality of life" is characterized by positive emotions and a positive state of mind (Theofilou 152). Therefore, "quality of life" is more than the assessment of the direct indicators of health as it also emphasizes the impacts of health status on a person’s life.
"Quality of life" as an outcome of care
“Quality of life” can be defined as an outcome of care. The moral foundation of our interactions with each other, regardless of the circumstances or the nature of the association, is to maintain and enhance the quality of life (Barcaccia et al. 190). In this manner, quality of life is considered the point of reference that determines the actions of individuals. Furthermore, it is considered the basis for individual assessment and evaluation. However, it is important to recognize that the assessment is geared towards the caregiver as well as the process of caregiving, and not the receiver. The recipient receives the care, that is, “quality of life,” but he or she is not defined by it. In addition, “quality of life” can be regarded as an association between an individual and his or her environs as well as other persons (Barcaccia et al. 190). Therefore, as a goal of care, "better-quality of life" could be a positive change in an individual’s symptoms or attitudes. Alternatively, it could represent a change in the manner a person interacts with his or her environs. On that note, “quality of life” may be symptom relief, societal empowerment, and emotional contentment, among others when considered as an outcome of care.
The moral value of "quality of life"
The concept of “quality of life” is at times used to denote the moral value of an individual and his or her life. From an extremist point of view, “quality of life” can be considered as the “life unworthy of life” (Brody, Howard, and Wayne Cooper 500). For example, this concept was introduced by the Nazis as an attempt to justify actions such as active euthanasia of individuals with disabilities as well as the genocidal deaths at the time (Brody et al. 500). On that note, taking the life of a person considered to have no "quality of life" was justifiable at that time. From this perspective, a person can be considered to have poor or no quality of life at all, when prolonging his or her life has no moral importance neither to the person nor the community at large (Brody et al. 511).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the concept of “quality of life” can be defined in a number of ways. Based on the above discussion, it is clear that quality of life encompasses multidimensional factors that range from social, environmental, psychological, and physical values. According to the paper, it is also clear that subjectivity plays a crucial role in understanding the concept of “quality of life.” Based on the above definitions of quality of life, one could also argue that quality of life encompasses life satisfaction, which might fluctuate. Therefore, as it stands, there is still not a widely recognized single definition of “quality of life”.
Works Cited
Barcaccia, Barbara, et al. "Defining quality of life: A wild-goose chase?" Europe's Journal of Psychology, vol. 9, no. 1, 2013, pp. 185-203, doi:10.5964/ejop.v9i1.484. Accessed 20 July 2017.
Brody, Howard, and Wayne Cooper. "Binding and Hoche’S “life unworthy of life”: A historical and ethical analysis." Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, vol 57, no. 4, 2014, pp. 500-511. Johns Hopkins University Press, doi:10.1353/pbm.2014.0042.
Cambir, Andreea, and Valentina Vasile. "Material dimension of life quality and social inclusion." Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 32, 2015, pp. 932-939.
Theofilou, Paraskevi. "Quality of life: Definition and measurement." Europe's Journal of Psychology, vol. 9, no. 1, 28 Feb. 2013, pp. 150-162, doi:10.5964/ejop.v9i1.337. Accessed 20 July 2017.
