Essay about Social Class and Public Health: Determining Your Health

Health status improves at each step up the income and social hierarchy. High income determines living conditions such as safe housing and ability to buy sufficient good food. The healthiest populations are those in societies which are prosperous and have an equitable distribution of wealth.

Your GP can assess whether you have incontinence, decide which type of incontinence you have, give general advice on controlling symptoms of incontinence, provide information on pelvic floor exercises and bladder retraining, and give treatment for incontinence with prescribed medicines. If lifestyle changes and treatments don't solve the problem, your GP can refer you to a continence adviser or specialist.

Communities are sometimes largely unaware that social factors rather than medical ones, such as income, and employment status, shape our health. Our health is also determined by the health and social services we receive, and our ability to attain high education levels, food and safe housing, among other factors.

According to the dictionary, the word health is “the state of being free from illness.” At a first glance, this defination seems to be very direct and simple, however the meaning of the word ‘health’ nowadays is much more complex. The above definition pretty much sums up our view of health in the first half of the 20th century.

Health is a concept that relates to and describes a person's state of being. It is highly subjective as good health means different things to different people, and its meaning varies according to individual and community expectations and contexts. In this paper the definition of health, care and wellbeing is looked from an Aboriginal perspective taking into account the history of Aboriginal health and contemporary issues in health and wellbeing of Aboriginal communities.

The determinants of health are economic and social conditions that affect people’s health status. These influence the living and working conditions that impacts people’s everyday living condition. Factors such as the place and the environment we live in, genetics, educational level or work status and income, as well as friends and family are some of the aspects that affects our health condition. On the other hand, the people that have an access to good health care and have financial stability are less susceptible and are often less affected. (NANB, 2009)

There is a strong correlation with an individual or group SES and the quality of health care received. Social Economic Class relates to what group of class an individual fit in based on their income, which can include wages, investments or other source. The quality of care depends on the facilities that is offering the services, the staff, accessibility to the service and the kind of health insurance that the person has. Affording health care is expensive and the lower or poor class has to decide between being able to afford food or other daily needs and going to a clinic for screening. Most of the time, individuals who fall in the class will ignore the health signs while

The geographic-level aspects involve a range of dimensions, ranging from physical characteristics of the area – such as location and climate (Bloom and Sachs 1998, APUD Wagstaff, 2001), to the infrastructure offered (Macintyre et. al., 2002) such as health services (quantity and quality), sanitation, water supply, roads, and so forth. One interesting hypothesis is that the presence of favorable aspects, like low crime rates, street cleanness and lightening, recreation places, among other “amenities” in the region under analysis mitigate the effects of unfavorable individual circumstances over health; whereas the adverse ones, such as pollution, lack of sanitation or low accessibility to urban facilities, amplify the already perverse influence of deprived individual characteristics on health status (Macintyre et. al., 2002; Kennedy et al., 1998). In California, for instance, Haan, Kaplan and Camacho (1987) found that people from poor areas experienced higher mortality rates (after controlling proper age, race and sex) than the population from non-poverty areas. Such risk of death persisted even after socioeconomic and behavioral adjustments. Similar findings have been reported by Humphries and Carr-Hill (1991); Jones and Duncan (1995) and Duncan et.al. (1993), supporting the hypothesis of the social environment´s influence over health, independently of the individual-level.

The correlations between level of education and socioeconomic status, and therefore the general health of an individual, are repeatedly proven to be evident across the globe.

First, there is Jim Taylor, Hospital CEO, District 16; second, Tondra Young, Clinical Lab Supervisor, District 24; lastly, Corey Anderson, Floor Technician, District 21. The population of each district decreases in average income, education level and life expectancy than its preceding district, beginning with district 16, Jim Taylor’s district. District 16 has an average combined household income of approximately $120,000/ annually. In this district, 65% of the population has a college degree and the life expectancy in this district is 82 years. Whereas, Tondra Young’s district, district 24, has an average combined household income of $70,000/annually and 15% of the population has a college degree. The life expectancy of district 24 is 75 years, that’s 7 years less than district 16. In district 21, Corey Anderson’s district, the average combined household income is less than $50,000/ annually and only 5% of the districts population have college degrees. Consequently, the life expectancy of district 21 is 70 years, 5 years less than district 24 and 12 years less than district 16 (Adelman 2008). The results of this study are indisputable: there is an obvious correlation between social/economic status and health status. As each districts average income and education level decrease, average life expectancy coincides. This leads to the next question: why does social and economic status so greatly influence health status?

According to the WHO, “The conditions in which people live and work can help create and destroy their health”. In general, mortality rate and social class are inversely proportional: the lower the level of social class, the higher the mortality rate.

This essay will discuss ways in which a person’s socioeconomic class and his/her social situation can have an impact on his/her health, using examples. We believe that there is a direct link between socioeconomic/social class and health (Adler et al. 1994). I will be defining the key terms: socioeconomic and health, social class then proceed to discuss about how poverty, income, employability, environment and housing can impact on a person’s social situation and their health.

Roux and Mair wrote that within neighborhoods both Social and Physical environments contribute to health and healthy inequalities. We know that where you live determine how long you will live and what type of health issues you will have, but I will focus more on physical environment. Communities with limited space for physical activities, limited sidewalks, limited playground, little access to public transportation all results in having unhealthy individuals. But even if kids are lucky to have some sort of playground or park, these communities are still plaque with unequal exposure to air pollution and other toxic substances that results in chronic illness. We are what we eat, and in these poor and low-income communities where fast food restaurants

The aim of this essay is to examine the influence that socio-economic status has on an individual’s health.

“Healthy individuals cannot survive when society is sick.” On the other hand, aspects of social structure influence health and illness. Social factors not only affect life expectancy, but the possibilities the one will experience diseases and in turn, the health care that they will receive.