Thursday, December 13, 2018

'An Analysis of the Social Gradient of Health Essay\r'

'â€Å"The conclusion of a hearty gradient of wellness look fors that simplification contrast itself has wellness benefits for all(a), non simply for the deprive or deprived minorities within populations. ” (Devitt, dormitory room & deoxyadenosine monophosphate; Tsey 2001) The higher up quote from Devitt, Hall and Tsey’s root is a relatively well grounded and well researched line of reasoning which draws on contemporary theoretical socio synthetic concepts to reward the assertion that lessen distinction is the key to change wellness for all.\r\nHowever the assertion that the demonstration of a friendly gradient of wellness predicts that a decrement in inequality go away lead to wellness benefits for all is a rather broad statement and requires closer interrogative. The intention of this essay is to examine the mixer gradient of wellness, whose live onence has been well established by the Whitehall Studies (Marmot 1991), and, by thinking o n those roots at the disap establish end of the favorable gradient, determine whether initiatives to address inequalities amongst brotherly fellowshipes will lead to health benefits for those classes at the littleer end of the companionable scale.\r\nThe feativeness of recent initiatives to address these accessible and health inequalities will be examined and recommendations made as to how these initiatives might be more than(prenominal)(prenominal) burdenive. The social gradient described by Marmot and early(a)s is interrelate with a variety of environmental, socio governmental and socio sparing factors which obligate been place as key determinants of health. These determinants interact with each other at a very complex direct to encroachment directly and indirectly on the health office of individuals and groups at all directs of indian lodge; â€Å" low social and scotch circumstances hit health throughout life.\r\nPeople further down the social ladder usually run at least(prenominal) twice the risk of serious illness and ill-timed death of those near the top. Between the top and behind health standards show a continual social gradient. ” (Wilkinson & angstrom unit; Marmot 1998) In Australian society it is pronto app atomic number 18nt that the trim down social classes are at great disadvantage than those in the upper echelons of society; this has been discussed at length in several break down papers on the social gradient of health and its effects on disadvantaged Australian groups (Devitt, Hall & adenosine monophosphate; Tsey 2001, Robinson 2002, Caldwell & axerophthol; Caldwell 1995).\r\n at bottom the context of the social gradient of health it can be inferred that natal groups, for example, are particularly susceptible to ill health and poor health outcomes as they suffer tautologicordinarily from the negative effects of the key determinants of health. A open example of this is the inequality in distri exclu sivelyion of economic resources: â€Å"Average original household income is 38% less(prenominal) than that of non- indigenous households. ” (AHREOC 2004). The stress and anxiety caused by scant(predicate) economic resources leads to increased risk of depression, hypertension and heart unhealthiness (Brunner 1997 cited in henry 2001).\r\nhigher(prenominal) social status and greater access to economic resources is concomitant with a reduction in stress and anxiety levels, as individuals in these groups confine more control everywhere economic pressures which create this stress. This simple comparison proves that the social gradient of health accurately reflects how socioeconomic determinants involve the health of specific social classes at the physiological level. An extension of the research into the social gradient and the determinants of health is the examination of the pathways through which specific social groups cause and respond to these determinants.\r\nThese à ¢â‚¬Ëœpsychosocial pathways’ incorporate mental, behavioural and environmental constraints and are closely linked to the determinants of health; â€Å"Many of the socio-economic determinants of health set about their effects through psychosocial pathways. ” (Wilkinson 2001 cited in Robinson 2002). These pathways have been demonstrated by Henry (2001) in the conceptual model of resource influences (Appendix A), a model which illust place the fundamental interaction amid the constraints mentioned above and their regard on health outcomes.\r\nHenry states that a central differentiator between classes is the come of control an individual feels they have over their environment. Whereas an individual from a lower class group holds a limited sensory faculty of control over their well being and consequently adopts a fatalist near to health, those in higher classes with a stronger sense of control over their health are more likely to take proactive steps in ensuring t heir future wellbeing.\r\nThis means that both individuals will supervise differently with the said(prenominal) health problem. This is partly as a emergence of socioeconomic or environmental determinants relative to their berth, but it is as well as a result of behavioural/physical constraints and, most burning(prenominal)ly, the modes of thought employ in rationalising their situation and actions. In essence these psychosocial pathways pursue an intermediate role between the social determinants of health and class related health behaviours.\r\nThis suggests that, while the social gradient of health is a good predictor of predisposition to ill health among specific classes, it can non predict how reducing inequality in itself will affect health outcomes or how a specific social class will respond to these changes. An examination of some(prenominal) initiatives aimed at reducing inequality in the indicators of health outcomes reveals this problem; â€Å"In 1996 totally be tween 5% and 6% of NT original adults had any kind of slip secondary school qualification compared with 40% of non- aboriginal Territorians. ” (ABS 1998).\r\nWithin the context of the social gradient of health, education is an important indicator of health outcomes. It is evident from the quote above that there exists huge inequality within the northerly Territory education system; this suggests an increased likelihood of ill health for immemorial mountain in later life. Even though there have been initiatives to address this inequality in one of the indicators of health outcomes (Colman 1997, Lawnham 2001, Colman & Colman 2003), they have had only a token(prenominal) impact on autochthonic second level education rates (ABS 2003).\r\nThis is partly due to the unworthiness of these initiatives (Valadian 1999), but it is also due to the disempowerment and psychosocial malaise (Flick & Nelson 1994 cited in Devitt, Hall & Tsey 2001) which are a feature of autoc hthonal interaction and responses to the social determinants of health. search has also been carried out into how effecting change in the inequalities in other indicators of health might affect health outcomes. Mayer (1997) cited in Henry (2001) examined the effects of doubling the income of low income families and concluded it would produce only low-down effects.\r\nHenry believes that this points to the strong influence of the psychological domain in influencing health behaviours. This suggests that the key to better health for all lies not just in reducing inequality between the classes but also in ever-changing those elements of the psychological domain which influence health behaviour. some other example of the gap between initiatives to reduce inequality and their impact on those inequalities is evident in an examination of economic constraints experienced by Indigenous Australians on social welfare.\r\nPrice and McComb (1998) found that those in Indigenous communities woul d spend 35% of their weekly income on a basket of food, compared to just 23% of weekly income for those life sentence in a capital city for the same basket of food. To combat this inequality it would seem logical to reduce the price of food in Indigenous communities or else increase the amount of money on tap(predicate) to those living in remote communities, i. e. a socioeconomic border on.\r\nIt has already been established that increasing income has only modest effects and in combination with the fact that sens, childs play and alcohol account for up to 25% of disbursal in remote communities (Robinson 2002), how can it be guaranteed that the extra funds made available through both of the two suggestions above would be employed in achieving a desirable level of health? hotshot likely suggestion is that a socioeconomic forward motion must be complemented by a psychosocial approach which addresses those abstract modes of thought, cultural norms and habits and health related behavioural intentions which dictate healthful behaviours.\r\nâ€Å"Culture and culture dis localizee are factors in fundamental health. But quite of the emphasis being placed on Aboriginal emiture to assimilate to our norms, it should rather be put on our failure to devise strategies that accommodate to their folkways. ” (Tatz 1972 cited in Humphrey & Japanangka 1998) Any initiative which hopes to resolve inequality in health must incorporate a sound understanding of the influence of the psychosocial pathways relative to the class level and cultural orientation of that group, otherwise its supremacy will be modest at best.\r\n employ Henry’s model of resource influences provides a framework for understanding how addressing these psychosocial pathways can lead to greater uptake of initiatives practiceed to address these inequalities. An analysis of the guinea pig tobacco Campaign (NTC 1999) reveals how this initiative failed to impact importantly on Indigen ous smoking rates. This was a strictly educational initiative which aimed to raise awareness of the effects of smoking on health.\r\nOne of the primary flaws of its bearing was its failure to even acknowledge those Indigenous groups at the lower end of the social scale; it also failed to communicate the relevance of its message to Indigenous mass; â€Å"The only thing is that when it comes to Aboriginal people, they will not relate to Quit television advertisements because they don’t see a black face…. I’ve heard the kids say ‘Oh yeah, but that’s only white fellas’. They do. ” (NTC 1999) Not only did this initiative fail to connect with Indigenous people, it also failed to influence the elements of the psychological domain which legitimate such high rates of smoking.\r\nWithin Indigenous culture smoking has give-up the ghost somewhat of a social practice, with the emphasis on sharing and borrowing of cigarettes (Gilchrist 1998). It is ineffectual to put across messages about the ill effects of smoking if the profound motivation of relating to others is not addressed. In a news report conducted on Indigenous smoking (AMA & APMA 2000 cited in Ivers 2001), it was suggested that one of the key themes of an initiative aimed at reducing indigenous smoking rates should be that smoking is not a part of Indigenous culture.\r\nThe ‘Jabby break’t Smoke’ (Dale 1999) is an example of an initiative whose design attempted to influence accepted social norms. Its focus was primarily on children, thereby acknowledging the importance of culture and the instillation of cultural norms at an early age. unfortunately no data is available detailing its impact on smoking rates. As mentioned earlier in this essay, another feature of the psychological domain which has an effect through the psychosocial pathways is the modes of thought employed in rationalising actions and responses to versatile determinant s and constraints.\r\nSelf efficacy or the amount of comprehend control over one’s situation is an important contributor to health status; â€Å" authorize individuals are more likely to take proactive steps in terms of personal health, whilst disempowered individuals are more likely to take a fatalistic approach” (Henry 2001) Examples of initiatives which have strived to empower Indigenous people in being responsible for their own health include ‘The Lung Story’ (Gill 1999) and various health advancement messages conveyed through song in traditional phrase ( Castro 2000 cited in Ivers 2001, Nganampa health Council 2005).\r\nBy encouraging Indigenous people to address these issues in their own way, the amount of perceived control over their own health is increased thereby facilitating a greater stop of self efficacy. The intention of this essay has not been to refuse that the social gradient of health does not exist or that it is not an effective too l in creating understanding of where social and health inequalities lie. Unfortunately programs and initiatives which have been guided by the social gradient of health and have been purely socioeconomic in their approach have failed to have a significant, sustainable effect on health inequalities.\r\nIn the US, despite socioeconomic initiatives to resolve inequality, the gap between upper and lower class groups has actually widened in recent time (Pamuk et al 1998 cited in Henry 2001). The scale of the preventative required to encounter a sustained impact on health inequalities has been discussed by Henry (2001), he also highlights the need to garner substantial political will in order for these changes to happen and makes the point that those in the upper classes are relatively heart and soul with the present status quo.\r\nThis essay has attempted to demonstrate that in an environment where well grounded, evidence ground socioeconomic initiatives are failing to have the desi red out comes, it is perhaps time to focus more on altering those strongly held health beliefs which not only dictate responses to social determinants of health but also dictate responses to initiatives designed to address these inequalities; â€Å" drugless behaviours are due to more than just an softness to pay. A mix of psychological characteristics combines to form typical behavioural intentions”.\r\n(Henry 2001) In the current environment of insufficient political will and finite resources it would be prudential to use every tool available to ensure initiatives aimed at reducing inequality between the classes will have the maximum amount of benefit. This approach is not a long term solution, but until it is possible to achieve the large scale social remodelling indispensable to truly remove social inequality, and consequently health inequality, it is the most viable solution available. REFERENCES. ABS, 2003. ‘Indigenous discipline and Training’, Version 1301.\r\n0, A Statistical Overview, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, viewed 22nd princely 2005, http://www. abs. gov. au/Ausstats/abs@. nsf/hunt/FC7C3062F9C55495CA256CAE000FF0D6 A statistical overview of Aboriginal and Torres walk islander peoples in Australia 2004, Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunities consignment (AHREOC), Sydney, viewed 20th August 2005, http://www. hreoc. gov. au/social_justice/statistics/. Brunner, E. 1997. ‘Stress and the biota of Inequality’. British Medical Journal. No. 314, pp 1472-1476. Castro, A. 2000. ‘ individual(prenominal) Communication’. No other details available. Caldwell, J. & Caldwell, P. 1995.\r\n‘The cultural, social and behavioural component of health feeler: the evidence from health transition studies’, Aboriginal health: Social and Cultural transitions: Proceedings of a collection at the Northern Territory University, Darwin 28-30th September. Colman, A. 1997. ‘Anti -racism Course’, younker Studies Australia, Vol. 16, Issue 3, p. 9, viewed 22nd August 2005, EBSCOhost Database Academic look to Premier, item: AN 12878155. Colman, A. & Colman, R. 2003. ‘Education Agreement’, spring chicken Studies Australia, Vol. 22, Issue 1, p. 9, viewed 22nd August 2005, EBSCOhost Database Academic search Premier, item: AN 9398334. Dale, G.\r\n1999. ‘Jabby Don’t Smoke, Developing Resources to plow Tobacco Consumption in Remote Aboriginal Communities’, Paper presented to the Eleventh National wellness advance Conference, Perth. 23-26th May. Devitt, J. , Hall, G. , Tsey, K. 2001. ‘An Introduction to the Social Determinants of Health in telling to the Northern Territory Indigenous Population’, fooling Paper. Co-operative Research inwardness for Aboriginal and Tropical Health. Darwin. Flick, B. , Nelson, B. 1994. ‘ body politic and Indigenous Health’, Paper No. 3, indigene Titles Researc h Unit, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Canberra.\r\nGilchrist, D. 1998. ‘Smoking Prevalence among Aboriginal Women’, Aboriginal and Islander Health Worker Journal, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 4-6. Henry, P. 2001. ‘An enquiry of the Pathways through Which Social Class Impacts Health Outcomes’. academy of Marketing Science Review, vol. 3, pp 1-26. Humphery, K. , Japanangka, M. D. , Marrawal, J. 1998. â€Å"From the Bush to the Store: Diabetes, terrene Life and the Critique of Health Service in Two Remote Northern Territory Aboriginal Communities. ” Diabetes Australia Research Trust and Territory Health Services, Darwin. Ivers, R. 2001.\r\n‘Indigenous Australians and Tobacco; A Literature Review’, Menzies check of Health Research and the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal and Tropical Health, Darwin. pp. 67-80, 93-107. Lawnham, P. 2001. ‘Indigenous Push at UWS’, The Australian, 27th J une, 2001. p. 34, viewed 22nd August 2005, EBSCOhost Database Academic search Premier, item: AN 200106061025662941. Marmot, M. G. , Davey Smith, G. , Stansfield, S. , Patel, C. , North, F. , Head, J. , White, I. , Brunner, E. and Feeney, A. 1991. ‘Health Inequalities among British Civil Servants: the Whitehall II Study’, Lancet, 337, 1387. reading 1. 5.\r\nMayer, S. 2001. What Money Can’t Buy: Family Income and Children’s Life Chances. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. National Tobacco Campaign. 1999. ‘Australia’s National Tobacco Campaign: evaluation report Volume 1’. Commonwealth surgical incision of Health and Aged Care, Canberra. Nganampa Health Council. 2005. Nganampa Health Council, Alice Springs. Viewed twenty-third August 2005, http://www. nganampahealth. com. au/products. php Pamuk, E. , Makuc, D. , Heck, K. , Reubin, C. , Lochner, K. 1998. ‘Socioeconomic Status and Health Chartbook’. Health, Un ited States. National Centre for Health Statistics, Maryland.\r\nPrice, R. , & McComb, J. 1998. ‘NT and Australian Capital Cities Market Basket watch over 1998’. Food and Nutrition Update, THS, Vol. 6, pp. 4-5. Robinson, G. 2002. ‘Social Determinants of Indigenous Health’, Seminar Series, Menzies School of Health Research. Co-operative Centre for Aboriginal Health. Valadian, M. 1999. ‘ blank Education for Indigenous Minorities in Developing Communities’, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 24, Issue 2, p. 233, viewed 22nd August 2005, EBSCOhost Database Academic Search Premier, item: AN 6693114. APPENDIX A. CCONCEPTUAL sit around OF RESOURCE INFLUENCES. [pic] Henry, 2001. .\r\n'

No comments:

Post a Comment