Sociological Appraisal Of Covid 19 In Nigeria And The Legal Interventions –Part 3: The Symbolic Interactionist

By Matthew Godfree

INTRODUCTION

The symbolic interactionist is another school of thought in sociology that was founded by George Herbert Mead (1863 to 1931). He is deemed to be the father of symbolic interactionist because of his contributions to this genre of sociology. His book titled “Mind, Self and Society” is of immense importance to this school of thought to the extent that it was tagged as the “Charter of Symbolic Interactionist.[1]”Other scholars that later developed the concepts of this sociology are Horton Cooley and William Isaac Thomas.[2]

In discussing this sociological perspective in relation to COVID-19 in Nigeria, this work is divided into three parts. The first part deals with the brief expositions of the basics of symbolic interactionist. The second part will concentrate on the perceptions of COVID 19 in the views of symbolic interactionist. The third part of the work is the conclusion on the gist of this paper.

BRIEF EXPOSITIONS OF THE BASICS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONIST

This school of thought believes that there is no single meaning to describe a particular thing that happened in human society. The meanings attached to certain things do not described the reality attributed to them; rather, it is in the process of human interactions that meanings are ascribed to a particular phenomenon. For example, when two table tennis players are said to be ‘in love’, that does not describe their emotional engagements in dealing with affection. Rather, ‘love’ is diction in the game of table tennis which means that the players have not scored any goals yet. It is a stage where their scores are 0:0.[3]

The symbolic interactionist believes that there is no particular development or happening that is capable of objective reality. Thus, every situation is subject to multiple interpretations.[4] Their belief stems from phenomenology- which believes that reality is a subjective fact and not an objective acts. Therefore, the central themes of the symbolic interactionist are outlined as follows:

• Human beings act towards things based on the meanings it have for them,
• Meanings of things are product of social interactions, and
• Social actions results from fitting of lines of actions. [5]

Flowing from the above parameters, the symbolic interactionist believes that social reality are not necessary what they are portrayed to be. They are merely the interpretation of the society on the people. In the same vein, the fundamental perspective of the symbolic interactionist centers on three features. These are:

• Self-concepts
• Construction of meanings
• Negotiation of roles or role-taking[6]

The notion of self-concept implies the tendency of human being to imagine themselves from the stand point of others. It is simply putting oneself in the shoe of others. Hebert Meads identifies two types of self-concepts; the ‘me’ and the ‘I ’concepts.[7] The ‘me’ concept deals with how one defines himself in relation to a particular role. For example, one may see himself as a loyal football fan of a club or a faithful husband. Thus, the ‘me’ concept is simply, one’s definition of himself in a specific social role in a society.[8]

On the other hand, the ‘I’concept deals with one’s belief or opinion of himself in the estimation of the society. He is concerned with how he projects and promotes himself in the eyes of the society. He is interested on what is his world view in the eyes of the society. Thus, the ‘I’ self concept is built on the perception of how the society judges and assess an individual. At such, self concept is built from the reactions of others around a person, and how that person interprets those reactions.[9] For example, if one views himself as a coward, he will not act bravely and courageous when a dangerous situation arises. It is from this view that Charles Cooley consolidated on the concept of self by inventing what he termed as ‘looking glass-self.’[10] The concepts of ‘looking self glass’ states that:

• We imagine how we must appear to others,
• We imagine the judgments of our appearances, and
• We developed ourselves through the judgments of others [11]

Moreover, the symbolic interactionist espoused the concept of construction of meanings.  By this doctrine they maintained that meanings of a particular things came up as a result of social interaction and not that those meanings have been in existence from the beginning. For example, it is believe, that the sky, earth, water and other firmament predate the existence of man. However, man came into the world and met with money as medium of exchange of goods and services, which was not in the beginning of human’s life, but man came to terms with money as results of commercial interactions. Therefore, to them, meanings are created, modified, developed and changed within the context of social interactions. At such, meanings do not describe the reality or the objectivity of a thing, rather they are mere labeling that tends to rationalize the identity of that object.

Another proposition of the symbolic interactionist is the concept of negotiations of roles or role-taking.[12] To them in the course of human interaction, men tend to define, suggest and ascribed to themselves certain roles. To them, action is a product of negotiated meanings that emanates from ongoing interactions. Thus, the symbolic interactionist views negotiation of role as a deliberate process whereby a person takes the place of another by imaginatively placing himself in the position of that person. Aligning negotiations of roles and self, Herbert Meads developed two stages in the development of self and role-taking. He believes that negotiation of role is a concept that man started learning at the socialization processes.

The first stage, according to Hebert Mead, is the play stage. In this stage children engaged in plays that ascribe certain roles to them. [13]One may be a doctor and another, a patient.  In the same vein, a girl act as mother cooking and petting toy baby to stop crying, while the boy plays the role of father with full authority dashing out instructions and directions. By this ‘role play’ the children became conscious of the fact that there is difference between their identity and the role they are playing.[14] These prepared their minds on what role awaits them in the society.

The second stage is the game play stage. Here the children in the course of playing games saw themselves from the perspective of the various participants. For example, in the course of playing hide and seek, one child will assumed the role of police and the other the role of fugitive. In the course of playing the game, these children become self conscious of the roles that the society ascribes to them.

Therefore, flowing from the foregoing discourse, this paper will examined the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of the symbolic interactionist. In doing so, the central theme of engagements will be sociological views on ill health, self and medicine. On the same corollary legal positions that support or oppose any of the views propounded by symbolic interactionist will be examined

REFLECTIONS OF THE VIEWS OF SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONIST AND COVID 19 PANDEMIC IN NIGERIA

The views of symbolic interactionist on ill health are paramount before x-raying the socio-legal impacts of COVID-19 in Nigeria. According to them for a condition to be interpreted as sickness the members of the society must defined it as such.[15] It is the members of the society’s belief and notion that constitute what disease is. It is the members of the society that conclude on whether a particular situation amounts to ill health or not. They do that by negotiating the definitions of the disease.

The spread of COVID-19 is no doubt a product of negotiations among the members of the global community. Firstly, it was the Chinese government, through the Wuhan Institute of Virology that tagged the disease as ‘Wuhan Virus or Covid-n 19’.[16]At that level, the virus was an epidemic that only affected the Chinese community. However, when the virus started spreading (interacting) to other members of the global community, it has now become a pandemic, beyond the sphere of Chinese society. Therefore, because it is now a pandemic the WHO, through the International Committee for the Taxonomy of Virus (ICTV) had to change the name of the disease from Wuhan Virus or Covid-n 19 to COVID-19.[17] The christening of the disease by the WHO also made Nigeria to abide the use of the name as COVID-19, if not Nigeria might have its own name to describe the disease.

From the above, one will agree with the symbolic interactionist that the coding of COVID 19 is a process that emanates from social interaction. This is because at the time the disease was discovered in China, its name was Wuhan Virus (very provincial code) or Covid-n 19. But as the disease started having a widespread effect on global community, the International Committee for the Taxonomy of Virus (ICTV) had to change (negotiate) the name of the disease to COVID-19. Who knows whether the name of the disease may be changed once there is a cure to it?  Thus, these processes that are involved from the origin, naming and later modification of the naming of the disease to the present name as COVID-19, shows the processes of negotiation espoused by symbolic interactionist. At such, meanings are not fixed but are change, developed and modified to fit a particular social context-in this case, the COVID 19 pandemic.[18]

The concept of self also applies to Nigerians in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. A person’s perspective about himself has a great impact on him in the process of interaction with other members of the society.[19] It is apposite to state that the notion of self-concept reflects a lot among Nigerians in the COVID 19 pandemic saga. The self concept notion demonstrates itself in Nigeria in three folds (a) the Africans Immunity from COVID-19, (b) the Richman Disease mantra, and (c) the role of belief system.

The first misinformation that psychologically appealed to the minds of Nigerians was the notion that black and Africans have stronger immune system that can combat COVID-19. The story behind the African immunity came as a result of the ‘Senou factor.’ Senou is a Cameroonian student who is studying at Yangtze University in China. He got infected with COVID-19 in the early days of February, 2020. After his admission, he was successfully treated. The Chinese doctors who treated Senou said that he recovered because of his genetic composition which is mainly found with people in Sub Saharan Africa.[20] The Chinese doctors remarked that:

Senou remained alive because he has black skin, the anti bodies of black are 3 times stronger, powerful and resistant compare to that of white [21]

Based on the above opinion, some Nigerians being Black people believe that they have immunity against the pandemic. This increases the general assumption (self-concept) among Nigerians that they are immuned from COVID 19 pandemic. To support this position an online poll was conducted in April, 2020. The results of the poll shows that 3 in 10 Nigerians believe that there are immune from the disease because of their race.[22]

Again, the perception among many Nigerians that COVID-19 is a Richman’s disease is another interesting angle to view the self-concept of symbolic interactionist. This view has a Janus -headed effects on Nigerians. This is because as the poor are exercising, the ‘me’ notion of self-concept, they believe that the COVID 19 pandemic does not concern them. May be poverty, in their perception, is an antidote to the pandemic.

With regards to the ‘I’ notion of self-concept, the rich also cry in Nigeria. The social factors affiliated with the disease such as foreign trips and leaving in urban areas, also affected the rich. The notion of ‘I’ self deals with one’s perception of how the society judges and assesses an individual. At such, since the rich are labeled to be the dominant carriers of COVID 19, the rich are conscious of their self-worth. This is because the ‘I’ concept is concerned about the estimation and interpretation of others about one’s image in the society.[23]

Another angle of self-concept that manifests itself in Nigeria is the role of belief system in the lives of Nigerians. Nigeria is no doubt, a religious country inhabited by the Christians, Muslims, Traditional Religions and atheist. Here, the notion of ‘me’ concepts envisaged by symbolic interactionist plays a prominent role. The members of these religious beliefs may be vigorously developing their self-concepts by assuming and denying any role to do with COVID-19 pandemic, either as a patient or in isolation. Thus, phrases like ‘it is not my portion’, ‘it is well’, ‘la samah Allah’ (God forbid in Arabic)[24] and other self denunciation mantras, are employed as psychological anti-dotes against COVID-19.

The legal intervention with regards to the notion of self-concept is the restriction by the government on civil liberties. The laws employed to restrict the notion of ‘self-concepts’ that Africans are immune from COVID 19, Richman’s syndrome and the beliefs system are in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999, Quarantine Act, Regulations, National Centre for Disease Control Act, 2018 and the NAFDAC Act,[25]

A further appraisal of symbolic interactionist is the concept of construction of diseases. By this, they believe that certain conditions are attached meanings as diseases by the actors who have the monopoly of interpretation. From this prism, they believe that there are certain situations that were already in existence as normal way of life but are later termed as disease because of the construction and labeling by actors and interpreters of the social context. For example, a typical symbolic interactionist will argue that before COVID 19 pandemic, it is possible for a patient to experience multiple illnesses in the form of severe headache, coughing, dry throat, vomiting and malaria; and also have problem with breathing. Such person may end up been successfully treated for all these diseases that are imprisoned in his body. Medical records might have successful records of such persons who might have survived this incidence for the last past 10 years.

Therefore, the questions that a symbolic interactionist will be asking is that what is so special about COVID 19 (whose symptoms have been observed in the preceding  paragraph) that it is becoming a Goliath that is taking too long for David to conquer? To them, the reality of COVID 19 may not be in its effects, but on the construction of the meaning attached to the disease by the actors and interpreters of the health institutions.

To further buttress how the notion of construction and labeling of diseases operates, they maintained that medical profession defined certain conditions as disease even when there is no scientific basis that such conditions have biological causes or medical conditions.[26]  For example, prior to1973, the American Psychology Association includes homosexuality in its manual of illness;[27] however, advanced studies rebut that assertion.

The concept of medicalisation is another key element of symbolic interactionist. They believe that medicalisation tends to make certain behaviours that are ordinarily termed as immoral or sinful are labeled or construed as sickness by health institution.[28] In doing so, the health institutions have construed and labeled certain deviant acts of the society as illness.[29]Thus, issues like smoking, drugs abuse, alcoholism, child abuse and domestic violence are termed as acts that require medical attention.

In Nigeria, the concepts of construction or labeling of disease and medicalisation abounds. The first notion of construction of the ailment was the notion that chloroquine was the cure of this pandemic. After the denunciation of chloroquine, herbal remedies were once construed as panacea. A top executive who was isolated after he tested negative commented that he used honey and bitter kola to combat COVID-19. Another therapy includes drinking hot waters and steaming. Others also resort to traditional dieting of hot porridge and fresh beans (gote da kanan nade) as panacea. The list is proliferating as days go by.

The above are subjective interpretation of what many assumed is the cure for COVID 19 pandemic. Therefore, in order to curb the excesses of these tendencies, Nigeria government had to intervene through statutory agencies such as National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC) and Nigeria Center for Disease Control (NCDC) to rebut these assertions.

Another offshoot of construction of disease that is intertwined with self concept is what is termed medical suggestibility[30]. This concept posits that there are certain lifestyles in human society that are normal ways of life. Such habits like yawning, coughing, back pain as a result of hard labour and stress are normal life experiences. However, once it is construed or suggested by health authorities as symptoms of diseases, the individual will believe that he is actually sick and so he needs medication. This is because the presupposed disease suggests that he needs medical care, while in fact it may not be necessary.

In order to rebut the notion of medical suggestibility, 3 scientists embarked on research at Bay College of Medicine in Houston.[31] They recruited 100 volunteers. In the course of the research, each person was attached by electrodes to a stimulator. They were told that they will experience headache because of the electric current. However, the researchers did not use a real stimulator; the one they used was a sham. The fact that the stimulator was a sham was not revealed to the volunteers. However, about 50% of the volunteers reported that they had pains on their heads.

The above illustration clearly describes how labeling theory influences one’s self-concept about the perception of a social reality. This further means that our social realities are defined and created by what others tell and not what we experienced. In Nigeria medical suggestibility was a common phenomenon in the early days of COVID-19 pandemic. People who battled with cough and catarrh prior to the advent of the pandemic have already condemned themselves because coughing is one of the symptoms of the disease. People with malaria are scared to consult doctors on the assumption that they may be declared COVID19 patients. People became suspicious of neighbours with catarrh and cough, and sometimes stigmatized them. It is at this juncture that Nigerian statutory bodies empowered with enlightening Nigerians on the heath education surrounding COVID 19 intervened.

CONCLUSION

The subjective nature of the self-concept espoused by symbolic interactionist is in tandem with legal concepts of autonomy -where freedom of thought, conscience and religion are expressed. It also respects the notion of freedom of opinion provided by the Nigerian constitution. On the construction or the labeling of the institution, their postulations tallies with freedom of expression and right to name. However, the Achilles Heels of symbolic interactionist is that, it is highly subjective and individualistic. This is a notion that is antithetical to pluralistic and democratic society like Nigeria. Consequently, in the overwhelming public interest, the perception of symbolic interactionism must be subject to the Constitution which upholds the collective interest of the state.

Finally, from the onset of this series of writing we examined the functionalist, Marxist and now symbolic interactionist. It is clear that those who might have been following this series of discourse may already reach a conclusion on which schools of thoughts in sociology best described the situation of COVID 19 pandemic in Nigeria. However, in an objective sociology (value free judgement), it is apposite to state that all these schools of thought act as building blocks in one way or the other with respect to how sociology evaluates COVID 19 pandemic in Nigeria. An objective position of how the various schools of thought apprised COVID 19 pandemic in Nigeria this will be ultimate aim of the next series of this writing, which will be termed as “the conclusion of the matter.”

Thanks for reading.

Written by Matthew Godfree, Pwajok,Ikowe & Co. NO 28 Ahmadu Bello Way,Jos.
Email: godfreematthew15@gmail.com
Contact: 08139102473.

1.Gary Fine and Kent  Sandstroms, ”Symbolic Interactionist”, Oxford ^{Bibliographies@www.Oxfordbibliographies.com/view..<accessed} on May25, 2020>

2.Ibid

3.Martin Hughes, “Table Tennis Terminology-A Glossary of  TableTennis-All About Table Tennis”@https://www.allabouttabletennis.com>…<accessed on May25, 2020>

4.Social Science Libre Text, “1:3D The Symbolic Interactionist Perspective” October 7,2019@socialsci.libretyexts.org<accessed on May 25,2020>

5.Ibid.

6.MichaelHaralambos and Martin Holborn, ”Sociology Themes and Perspectives”,  8th Edn., ( HarperCollinsPublishers, London, 2013) @P.979

7.Ibid

8.Ibid

9. Social Science Libre Text. Loc. Cit

10.Ibid

11.Ibid

[12] Michael Haralambos and Martin Holborn, OP Cit @P.981

13.Ibid @P .979

14.Ibid

15. James W.Vander Zanden,’ Sociology: The Core”4th Edn.,(McGrwaw-Hill,Inc.,1996) @P.348
16. Channelstv.com.
17. Ibid

18 Muhammad Adnan Shereen , Suliman Khan, Abeer Khazmi, Nadia Bashir and  Rabeea Siddique, COVID-19 infection: Origin, Transmission, and Characteristics of Human Coronaviruses”Pdf, Journal Of Advanced ^{Research2020@www.https://www.sciencedirect.com<acceesdon}May26,2020>

19.Ibid

20..The Star, “Are Africans immuned to Coranavirus?”,-March 4, MSN,Com@https//:www.msn.com>news>other<accessed on May 26, 2020>

21.Ibid

22..Ebuka Onyeji and Nike Adebowale, “Nigeria: Three in Ten Nigerians believe They’re immune to Coronavirus –Poll” Premium Time, April  17,2020 @https://Africa.com>stories<accessed on May,2020>

23..Michael Haralambos and Martin Holborn, Loc. Cit

24.”How do you say this in Arabic? “God Forbid”|HI ^{Native@https://hinative.com}questions<accessed on May 29, 2020

25.Section 45 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999provides for the suspension of all rights in the interest of Public Safety. Also, Section 20 of the Quarantine Act,  provides the restriction of any person suspected to be carrying communicable disease should be detained and isolated. Also section 17 of the Infectious Diseases (Emergency Prevention)Regulations 2020, provides that it is an offence for anybody not to comply with the sit-at-home other, gathering of 50 persons, 2 meters spacing, etc. .Furthermore, section 5 (c)of NAFDAC,ACT provides that  it is only the agency that has power to regulate  the use of drugs and also section 5 and 6 of the NCDC Act, 2018 provides the responsibility of coordinating the use and importations of drugs. All these regulations take away whatever notion an individual feel about himself(Self-concept) rather, it is the collective concern of the society that matters.

26. James W.Vander Zanden,’Loc Cit

27.Ibid

28.Ibid

29.Ibid

[30] James W.Vander Zanden,’Loc Cit

31.Ibid