Author(s)
Schramme, ThomasKeywords
public healthsocial determinants of health
concept of health
health inequalities
noncomparative justice
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
https://www.raco.cat/index.php/rljae/article/view/338154Abstract
In this paper I critically discuss the normative significance of so-called social determinants of health and their use in public health policy. I will highlight certain possible and real misperceptions that are common in public health research and public health policy. After introducing the concept of the social determinants of health, the first issue I discuss concerns the confusion surrounding the notion of health in public health. Public health is mainly concerned with health dispositions or risks. This is different from a concern for people being unhealthy in the sense of suffering from a disease. The difference is important for the notion of health inequalities as well. In order to deem some people less healthy than others, a gradual concept of health is needed. Once the two concepts of health are confused, it is more difficult to acknowledge normative differences between being unhealthy and being less healthy. I submit that public health policies tend to exploit the common attitude towards diseases, namely that they ought to be treated and that they establish claims of justice. It is then another step of public health practitioners to campaign against social conditions that lead to certain health inequalities, which are deemed unjust. In other words, public health allows a normative argument, via the value of health, against specific social conditions. I reject this approach and allow only an indirect role for inequalities of health dispositions in an account of social justice. They might be regarded as symptoms of social ills, but they are not, according to my mind, as such unjust. Injustice in social conditions needs to be established in its own right, not mainly via its impact on health dispositions in specific populations. In the final section I hint towards an alternative, a noncomparative theory of social justice, which aims at enabling citizens to make healthy choices, but is not per se interested in comparative differences between people.Date
2018Type
info:eu-repo/semantics/articleIdentifier
oai:raco.cat:article/338154https://www.raco.cat/index.php/rljae/article/view/338154
2229-578X
Copyright/License
El Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics es publica en accés obert 6 mesos després de la publicació en paper (Editorial Herder). El Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics es publica en accés obert sota la llicència Creative Commons Reconeixement-NoComercial-CompartirIgual (by-nc-sa): No es permet un ús comercial de l’obra original ni de les possibles obres derivades, la distribució de les quals s’ha de fer amb una llicència igual a la que regula l’obra original.© Càtedra Ethos - URL i Herder.Collections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Good Practices in Health Financing : Lessons from Reforms in Low and Middle-Income CountriesWaters, Hugh R.; Schieber, George J.; Gottret, Pablo (Washington, DC : World Bank, 2012-05-25)This volume focuses on nine countries that have completed, or are well along in the process of carrying out, major health financing reforms. These countries have significantly expanded their people's health care coverage or maintained such coverage after prolonged political or economic shocks. In doing so, this report seeks to expand the evidence base on good performance in health financing reforms in low- and middle-income countries. The countries chosen for the study were Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Estonia, the Kyrgyz Republic, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, and Vietnam. With health at the center of global development policy on humanitarian as well as economic and health security grounds, the international community and developing countries are closely focused on scaling up health systems to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), improving financial protection, and ensuring long-term financing to sustain these gains. With the scaling up of aid, both donors and countries have come to realize that money alone cannot buy health gains or prevent impoverishment due to catastrophic medical bills. This realization has sent policy makers looking for reliable evidence about what works and what does not, but they have found little to guide their search.
-
Better Outcomes through Health Reforms in the Russian Federation : The Challenge in 2008 and BeyondMarquez, Patricio V. (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008-02)The purpose of this discussion paper is
 to discuss selected health challenges in the Russian
 Federation, focusing on outcomes, expenditures and options
 for policy and institutional reforms in the health care
 system. The areas covered in the paper draw on recent
 studies and reports, and take into account lessons derived
 from the implementation of the World Bank-funded Health
 Reform Implementation Project (HRIP) at the federal level
 and in the Chuvash Republic and the Voronezh Oblast-the
 pilot regions of the project, over the 2005-2007 period.
-
Who pays? Out-of-Pocket Health Spending and Equity Implications in the Middle East and North AfricaElgazzar, Heba; Arfa, Chokri; Salti, Nisreen; Majbouri, Mehdi; Salehi-Isfahani, Djavad; Raad, Firas; Chaaban, Jad; Fesharaki, Sanaz; Mataria, Awad (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-05-29)Ensuring affordable, effective health care and financial protection against the adverse effects of household out-of-pocket (OOP) health expenditures represents an important policy objective in most countries, yet relatively little evidence exists regarding patterns and implications of household health expenditures in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. This paper examines the scope of out-of-pocket expenditures and their implications on living standards and policy reforms in six MENA countries including Yemen, the West Bank and Gaza, Egypt, Iran, Tunisia, and Lebanon. Results show that OOP payments represent a relatively high share of total national health care financing at 49 percent on average in the MENA region as of 2006. Households pay an average of 6 percent of their total household expenditure on health. Most of this OOP is spent on medications, doctor visits and diagnostic services. Lower-income and rural households generally face greater financial risk; yet this is reversed where private health services are utilized and paid for more frequently by higher-income groups. 7 to 13 percent of households face particularly high OOP payments, or catastrophic expenditures equal to at least 10 percent of household spending. Poverty rates tend to increase by up to 20 percent after health care spending is accounted for. Results are discussed in light of ongoing policy efforts to strengthen social protection for health care.