The Politics Of Preventable Deaths : Local Spending, Income Inequality, And Premature Mortality

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.

Widening economic inequality in the United States is being accompanied by increasing health care disparity. While the health care system seeks to provide health care as a human right, it fails to do so often worsening the disparities (Dickman, Himmelstein, & Woolhandler, 2017). While health care today has made major strides, there are many people who are still suffering from health care system injustices. Of the people who are still uninsured a majority of them are in the middle-working class or those living in poverty. Poor Americans have less access to health care than wealthy Americans. The life expectancy gap between the rich and poor continues to widen. Health care in poor communities is too often neglected. This issue has been a trend in the United States for many years. In Abraham’s book, Mama might be better off dead these very same inequalities are evident for the Banes family. Because of these inequalities, preventive illness becomes life threatening causing care to then become extensive and even more expensive.

These are a few potential links between social inequalities and the health of the population: income and wealth distribution, unemployment, the ageing society, gender and health, mental illness and suicide and disability and dysfunction. I am going to discuss each of these and see the health impact on people in each group.

These inequities in health and social indicators are perfect examples of the affect of political and economic factors that influence access to health services (Browne and Fiske 2001).

These disparities are obvious in some key measures of wellbeing including life expectancy, the risk for disease, and access to health care (Disparities in Health, 2015). Historically, the major factors contributing to shorter longevity and high rates of disease are overcrowding, poor sanitation and low availability of treatment facilities. However, the change of theses socioeconomic

Today, racial and ethnic disparities exist in the public healthcare system in the United States. It is strongly supported by data that depicts members of the minority groups receive disproportionately from different health issues such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and asthma, among other conditions. The main contributors to the racial and ethnic disparities in the public healthcare are the social determinants of the health external to the healthcare delivery system. In addition, social and economic status also affect people’s vulnerability to the disease and their accessibility to public health services. The article provides historical analysis that shows a deteriorating status in the

Although the overall health of the United States population has improved, large disparities in terms of health outcome and access to healthcare exist between wealthier Americans and their “poorer counterparts primarily because of differences in education, behavior, and environment.” (Longest, 2015, p8). Access to health care and other services is associated with wealth, employment, education and power. Higher education, which translates to higher income, allows people to buy healthier food, live in safer, cleaner neighborhood and access the best healthcare possible. Power on the other hand permits people to secure health for themselves and their families, while others without power have limited or no access to the resources they need to be

“Failure to acknowledge, and more importantly, to understand the role of Social determinants of Health (SDH) in health and access to health and social services will hamper any effort to improve the health of the population.” (Ompad, Galea, Caiaffa, & Vlahov, 2007). Unemployment, unsafe work environments, globalization and the inability to access health systems are some social determinants of health. Social factors would be considered place of residence, race and ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status are also part of social determinants of health. According to “Social Determinants of the Health of Urban Populations: Methodologic Considerations’ Place of residence and an individual’s status within the place are important determinants of health in urban settings. It is important to recognize that the place of residence is

The difference in health outcomes and the determinants between parts of a population caused by social, demographic, environmental and geographic characteristics is defined as health disparities (Dore & Eisenhardt,2015). Societal, economic, and political forces impact social determinants. (Dore & Eisenhardt, 2015) have indicated that health inequities are avoidable and preventable when appropriate actions are taken to lower the risk of illness.

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?

Health disparities are not based on income but on location. In Chicago, health disparities are a major problem because of segregation. While, on the Northside, someone is less likely to experience health disparities, it’s different on the South and West Sides. When someone looks at a map, they do not see how segregated a city is, but when someone is analyzing a certain neighborhood in Chicago, they will be able to see how segregated the city is. A study shows how neighborhoods in

The information that I found to be most thought provoking form this weeks reading was regarding the income gap. According to Shi and Singh in a given geographical area the larger this income gap is, the poorer the overall health status will be of the population (Shi & Singh, 2013, p.35.). I grew up in an impoverished area where the income gap was extreme in the case of some, but in general fairly even across the board. The majority of the people I knew received healthcare through their parents private insurance or were on government subsided plans. Most received preventive care and nonpreventative care when needed, even though their families often earned a wage below the poverty line. Coming to Spokane three years ago, a city with a large

Social determinants are highly interrelated thus, making them difficult to precisely classify. Hence, the main categories that will be focused on for this assessment are socioeconomic, race and ethnicity, social support, access to medical care, and residential environments. This breakdown of social determinants, I feel is adequate to develop an interpretation of the problem of CVD on a global scale.

The population of the poor in the United States represents roughly 15 percent of the total population (Macionis 2013:41). As of 2012, the poorest 20 percent of the United States only represents 3.8 percent of total income earned (Macionis 2013:35). People do not choose to be poor, and most of those who are impoverished try to overcome this challenge. However, there is a trend that is evident and is continuously noticed in society. Those who live in poverty experience worse health care, education, social status, and wages than the upper class. I believe socioeconomic status serves a large role in whether an individual is likely to experience poor health. Policies that increase unemployment insurance or allocate for equal distribution of wealth and opportunity are viable solutions to socioeconomic inequality (Babones 2010:141). The social conflict theory best explains the socioeconomic inequality in the United States and helps sociologists interpret how inequality causes increased health issues for the lower class.

The United States is world renowned for having the best health care if not the most accessible. Citizens have at their disposal a plethora of hospitals, physicians, and therapists to improve their well-being. Statistical data was taken back in 2010 under the Central Texas Region and studied health care coverage and income in regards to the community. The data displayed in the surveys heavily suggest that income/ health in general have a high correlation. The issue that arose with the given data imply that those who are on the lower end of the income spectrum subsequently have no health care coverage and poorer health than those with higher income. In any case with high correlation there are a number of factors influencing the statistical evidence, and in this case sociological barriers are present in regards of inequality and health care.