This assignment will be analytically evaluating the Public Health report England 2014 ‘Understanding inequalities in London’s life expectancy and healthy life expectancy’. This will include examining factors which influences health inequalities, comparing theoretical explanations and the policies put in place that potentially reduce the levels of health inequalities in London.
AC.1
Health inequalities are preventable differences in health status experienced by certain population groups. It is suggested people of a lower socio-economic group are more likely to experience chronic ill-health and earlier death expectancy than those who are more privileged. The causes of health inequalities have been considerably argued between theories and
…show more content…
Secondly the figures contained in this report have been obtained and analysed from the year 2009 to 2011. It has also been updated and revised several times including a revision of life (healthy) expectancy in November 2013. Regular updating and adjustments of data increases the accuracy and relevance of the outcomes, furthermore findings gain more validity and recognition.
Another advantage of this report is its use of quantitative research. The selection of charts, tables and graphs are highly creditable in terms of measuring validity and reliability. It provides data with precise and non-bias numerical findings.
Additionally this report has been published by Public Health England and is part of the Government’s department of health. It is a government obligation to provide public access to this report and others completed by the public health department. This wide accessibility suggests that the data obtained has been greatly measured to support its claims.
On the other hand some disadvantages of reliability can be identified. The data provided on the life expectancy and healthy life expectancy from birth presents difficulties in the consistency and replication of the findings. The figures are an estimated average of new-born mortality rate (2010-12) and cannot provide exact figures of expected life span. The reason for this is because health prevalence and mortality rate between areas are changeable. In
Inequality stands out as an extremely broad and influential determinant of health. The known and uncontrollable inequality of the world around us, almost chooses for us individually, the access we will have to health care based on the social-structural hierarchy. In other words, individually, you can be born into a country with a degree of inequality that affects your outcomes
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
When looking at infant mortality rates in the lowest class evidence shows that double the amount of babies die in comparison to the highest class this can be linked to poverty the poorer you are the worse your chances are even at birth. These following factors increase the risk of infant death; the age of the mother aged less than 18 years is the highest and the lowest for mothers between 30 and 34. With the high teenage pregnancy epidemic and women from lower social class background the most at risk from losing their baby.
Social influences and class structure affect people’s health. People who live in poverty and are at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder have worse health than those who have more money. In essence, inequality in society is making people sick. For example, the United States is a country that has very wealthy people along with a staggering amount of poor individuals, yet it is one of the richest countries in the world. It is clear that there is a widening gap of inequality in America, and according to the film Unnatural Causes: Is Inequality Making Us Sick? (2008), the United States spends $2 trillion per year on medical care, but American citizens live shorter, sicker lives than most industrialized countries. But how is this possible?
Aim: The aim of this study is to reduce socioeconomic and geographical inequalities in health by exploring how organisations like NHS, Local Authority, private and third sector could work with communities and individuals on service delivery model(s) that tackles wider determinants of health and
The main factor that seems to alter the inequality of health among the world is the social gradient. Throughout life, poor social and economic circumstances seem to affect health, and those people further below the social ladder seem to have twice the chance of serious illnesses or premature death, compared to those near the top (Marmot & Wilkinson, 2006).
The Report itself is based on a detailed scrutiny of the relevant scientific literature including four reviews commissioned by the Department of Health in 19981 as well as an update commissioned by the Home Office and completed in November 2001.2
Income-related health inequalities is a significant issue which is widely spread across the globe. The issue is not limited to the developing countries, yet it has spread to the developed countries like Australia. From the beginning of the 21st century, income inequality is growing across the states of Australia and the level of inequality fluctuates rapidly. As a result of income inequality, it impacts on the factors like health, education. This cross-sectional study aims to discern the trends, and prevalence of income-related health inequalities between 2001 and 2011 among the working population of Australia, age range between 20 years to 65 years old. A 1000 sample will be used from Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey
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.
The Australian population is showing an increase each year from previous years. The natural increase of births minus deaths is on the rise and can be contributed to the nations advancement of healthcare technology increasing life expectancy and lower infant mortality and a decrease in fertility rates, mean we as a nation are living longer (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011). Life expectancy rates have also risen due to the
UK society is distinguished by health inequalities, they are the unfair and avoidable differences in peoples health across social groups and different population groups due to social, biological and geographical factors which usually result in people who are worse of financially encountering poor health and shorter lifespans.
In essence these psychosocial pathways occupy an intermediate role between the social determinants of health and class related health behaviours. This suggests that, while the social gradient of health is a good predictor of predisposition to ill health among specific classes, it cannot 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 initiatives aimed at reducing inequality in the indicators of health outcomes reveals this problem;
Have you ever thought about your starting point? Have you ever thought about what kind of life you were born into? Have you ever thought about where you would be in life if you were born into a household belonging to a different social class? These are the types of questions one must consider when discussing the lower classes and the fact that they are less active and therefore less healthy than the middle to upper classes. With that being said, it is debatable as to whom to blame for this problem in our society. Although many believe that lower class people have only themselves to blame for this fact, I believe that their health is based off of societal contributors that are largely out of the control of the individual. Within this essay, I will prove why our system is unfair by looking into different case studies that provide evidence as to why lower class people suffer as a result of the social determinants of health.
The data within this document could be considered as a valid and reliable outlook into London’s life expectancy because it is a published document by Public Health England which is a health organisation. The publisher is reputable and therefore it is deemed as being trustworthy (Public Health England. 2013). Furthermore the information has been collected and analysed by professionals. Validity of the document is reinforced as the data given does reflect life expectancy within a given borough (Office For National Statistics. Unknown).
For a better understanding of the policies, it is necessary to define the term health inequality. The term health inequality is defined as a differences in health status or the differences among the different populations (WHO, 2015). The purpose of a policy to address health inequality is to reduce the gaps in the differences that arises due to race, gender, and ethnicity (Healthy people, 2015). For example, health policies help to promote healthy behavior and ban cigarette and tobacco advertisements (WHO, 2015). There are policies that do not focus on such practices and thus they do not impact the people (WHO, 2015). Furthermore, creating a policy helps people to meet the goals of reducing health disparity (WHO, 2015). There has been a national level policy named “Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation”, which aims to improve health for the population in England (WHO, 2015). By implementing