H E A L |
What do we do?
HEAL BLOG
During HEAL this week, we explicitly defined the difference between health disparities versus health equity.
In one of our readings, "Health Equity: Moving Beyond 'Health Disparities,'" we discussed four primary factors that impact health:
We viewed another episode of Unnatural Causes which pointed to how the choices of individuals are greatly limited by their environment. The poverty tax was a phenomenon brought up during our discussion along with how this continues to perpetuate the cycle of poverty and preserve the status quo. In this episode of Unnatural Causes, the concept of mapping was introduced as well. Although the idea of being able to predict someone's health by a physical map is alarming, this could mean we would know where to start, what to invest in, and how to reform policy. Finally, we completed a case study on Flint, Michigan. After learning the background and context of the water crisis occurring in Flint, we discussed how access to clean water should be a human right and should not be privatized in the first place. We also discussed the additional burden of Flint residents under current laws which state that if lead is present in the home, it can not be sold until it has been fixed. However, if Flint residents can't even afford clean water and still expected to abide by this law, they would not be able to sell their house leaving them stuck and unable to move or relocate. We also discussed at great length the following cycle of disinvestment in Flint:
0 Comments
This week during HEAL we watched the documentary, Unnatural Causes, which gave incredible insight into the hierarchical nature of health equity. We were able to follow along the lives of four people: a CEO, lab supervisor, janitor, and unemployed mother, and see how their respective socioeconomic statuses impacted their health. The connection between economic policy and health policy and how one's socioeconomic status is equivalent with his or her health outcomes was made abundantly clear. Someone who is of a high socioeconomic status, has greater control in their job, and thereby less stress has better health outcomes than their counterpart of lower socioeconomic status with a less controlled, high stress job. This relationship holds true not only when comparing the CEO with the unemployed mother but in every category in between.
We discussed how the Whitehall study correlates to this fact as well. During this study, it was determined that the lower the grade of someone's employment, the higher the rate of every major cause of death. This relationship was evident even in the intermediate categories along the gradation of socioeconomic status that is often depicted as a ladder. One criticism brought up during our discussion was that this documentary created separate categories according to socioeconomic status, race, and other identities. What the documentary failed to do was determine how the intersectionality of someone's identities may have accumulative effects on health. In other words, what are the accumulative effects of not only having a low socioeconomic status but also being a person of color, a woman, etc.? By no means do these conversations end here. This semester should be a great opportunity for further discussions around health equity and ideas about where we should go from here. |
Archives
November 2016
Categories |