Journal of health politics, policy and law
-
J Health Polit Policy Law · Oct 2017
Cautious Citizenship: The Deterring Effect of Immigration Issue Salience on Health Care Use and Bureaucratic Interactions among Latino US Citizens.
Research shows that health care use among Latino immigrants is adversely affected by restrictive immigration policy. A core concern is that immigrants shy away from sharing personal information in response to policies that expand bureaucratic monitoring of citizenship status across service-providing organizations. This investigation addresses the concern that immigration politics also negatively influences health care utilization among Latino US citizens. ⋯ Results indicate that Latino US citizens are less likely to make an appointment to see a health care provider when the issue of immigration is mentioned. Additionally, Latino US citizens who know someone who has been deported are more inclined to perceive that information shared with health care providers is not secure. We discuss how cautious citizenship, or risk-avoidance behaviors toward public institutions in order to avoid scrutiny of citizenship status, informs debates about reducing health care inequities.
-
J Health Polit Policy Law · Oct 2017
How the ACA Addressed Health Equity and What Repeal Would Mean.
This commentary reviews the many different ways the Affordable Care Act (ACA) explicitly and implicitly attempted to improve health equity, and then assesses how the Republican proposal to repeal and replace the ACA (the proposed American Health Care Act) would impact efforts to improve health equity. Although the American health care system still had a long way to go to achieve health equity, it may be argued that the ACA was a major step forward in creating new programs and regulations that had the potential to improve health equity. In stark contrast, Trumpcare makes no mention of health equity as a goal and-if passed-would result in an increase in health inequity. It would shamefully represent the first time in modern US history that a major federal health reform bill would actually move us further away from creating more equal access to health care coverage and toward reduced health equity.
-
J Health Polit Policy Law · Oct 2017
Cancer and Race: What They Tell Us about the Emerging Focus of Health Equity.
This article examines the history of concepts and frames (such as "equity" or "disparities") and how these frames have guided public policies and explanations about differences in health across the population. Considering the emblematic case of cancer, which has stimulated long and heated debate over social, economic, and biological causes, the article argues that the vocabularies of health reform are both semantic and also deeply political-framing different reform agendas. ⋯ Through this analysis, the article explains how and why equity concerns have figured (sometimes implicitly, sometimes explicitly) in health reform discussions, often in tension with other frames. It examines how Americans have used these frameworks to justify different kinds of action and inaction, concluding with a discussion of how these frameworks of "disparities" and "equity" should be understood today in scientific, political, and policy discourse.1.
-
United States' courts have played a limited, yet key, role in shaping health equity in three areas of law: racial discrimination, disability discrimination, and constitutional rights. Executive and administrative action has been much more instrumental than judicial decisions in advancing racial equality in health care. Courts have been reluctant to intervene on racial justice because overt discrimination has largely disappeared, and the Supreme Court has interpreted civil rights laws in a fashion that restricts judicial authority to address more subtle or diffused forms of disparate impact. ⋯ Finally, regarding constitutional rights, courts have had limited opportunity to intervene because, outside of specially protected arenas such as reproduction, constitutional law gives government wide discretion to define health and safety goals and methods. Thus, courts have had only a limited role in shaping health equity in the United States. It remains to be seen whether this will change under the Affordable Care Act or whatever health reform measure might replace it.
-
Donald Trump's rhetoric and leadership are destroying the "culture of community" necessary for progress on health equity. His one-line promises to provide "quality health care at a fraction of the cost" smack of neoliberal nostrums that shifted ever more costs onto patients, thereby preventing many people from getting care. The dangers of Trump go far beyond health policy, however; Trump's presidency threatens the political and cultural institutions that make any good policy possible.