Social inequality and healthy public policy.

R Labonté
{"title":"Social inequality and healthy public policy.","authors":"R Labonté","doi":"10.1093/heapro/1.3.341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For decades, health education programmes have been based on the assumption that individual behaviours (for example smoking, drug use, eating patterns) are the major risk-factors in contemporary illness. This assumption often led to interventions that subtly \"blamed the victim\" for his or her ill-health. In recent years the broader social conceptualization of health and illness has directed many health educators' attention towards socio-economic and environmental factors which condition and constrain lifestyle choices, and which may be directly associated with increased disease risks. While it is becoming common for government health departments and agencies to acknowledge poverty, unemployment and other forms of social inequality as potent health hazards, programmes to ameliorate such conditions are rare. Since 1983, the Toronto health department has developed programmes based upon a socio-environmental model of disease which specifically targets social systems rather than individual behaviour for change. Elements of this approach include extensive media reports on the health implications of such issues as welfare benefits, poverty, unemployment and housing; health education programmes to stimulate a critical understanding of the causes and structure of social inequality; health advocacy initiatives to influence political and legislative reforms; and a community development orientation which involves the department in broad-based coalitions working towards healthy social change. Most recently, the department has become a resource to groups attempting to create employment and service community needs through cooperative forms of economic development. Several examples of the department's programmes in each of these areas are provided. To meet the challenge of the World Health Organization's Alma Ata Declaration, health educators must examine their own potential to act as social-change agents, and must become more sophisticated in the political analysis of their practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":79940,"journal":{"name":"Health promotion (Oxford, England)","volume":"1 3","pages":"341-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1986-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/heapro/1.3.341","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health promotion (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/1.3.341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

For decades, health education programmes have been based on the assumption that individual behaviours (for example smoking, drug use, eating patterns) are the major risk-factors in contemporary illness. This assumption often led to interventions that subtly "blamed the victim" for his or her ill-health. In recent years the broader social conceptualization of health and illness has directed many health educators' attention towards socio-economic and environmental factors which condition and constrain lifestyle choices, and which may be directly associated with increased disease risks. While it is becoming common for government health departments and agencies to acknowledge poverty, unemployment and other forms of social inequality as potent health hazards, programmes to ameliorate such conditions are rare. Since 1983, the Toronto health department has developed programmes based upon a socio-environmental model of disease which specifically targets social systems rather than individual behaviour for change. Elements of this approach include extensive media reports on the health implications of such issues as welfare benefits, poverty, unemployment and housing; health education programmes to stimulate a critical understanding of the causes and structure of social inequality; health advocacy initiatives to influence political and legislative reforms; and a community development orientation which involves the department in broad-based coalitions working towards healthy social change. Most recently, the department has become a resource to groups attempting to create employment and service community needs through cooperative forms of economic development. Several examples of the department's programmes in each of these areas are provided. To meet the challenge of the World Health Organization's Alma Ata Declaration, health educators must examine their own potential to act as social-change agents, and must become more sophisticated in the political analysis of their practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会不平等和健康的公共政策。
几十年来,健康教育方案一直基于这样一种假设,即个人行为(例如吸烟、吸毒、饮食模式)是当代疾病的主要风险因素。这种假设往往导致干预,巧妙地“指责受害者”他或她的健康状况不佳。近年来,健康和疾病的更广泛的社会概念化使许多健康教育工作者把注意力转向社会经济和环境因素,这些因素制约和限制生活方式的选择,并可能与疾病风险增加直接相关。虽然政府卫生部门和机构普遍承认贫穷、失业和其他形式的社会不平等是严重的健康危害,但改善这种状况的方案却很少。自1983年以来,多伦多卫生部根据疾病的社会环境模型制定了方案,具体针对社会系统而不是个人行为进行改变。这种做法的内容包括媒体广泛报道福利、贫穷、失业和住房等问题对健康的影响;促进对社会不平等的原因和结构的批判性理解的卫生教育方案;影响政治和立法改革的卫生宣传行动;以社区发展为导向,使该部参与基础广泛的联盟,努力实现健康的社会变革。最近,该部门已成为试图通过合作形式的经济发展创造就业和服务社区需求的团体的资源。文中列举了该部在这些领域的几个方案实例。为了迎接世界卫生组织《阿拉木图宣言》的挑战,卫生教育工作者必须审视自己作为社会变革推动者的潜力,并且必须在对其实践进行政治分析方面变得更加老练。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Some social and health policy requirements for the prevention of AIDS. Health promotion policy in Sweden: means and methods in intersectoral action. The Arjeplog project: comprehensive health promotion in a community. Crossing the health divide--mortality attributable to social inequality in Great Britain. Dutch obstetric care: home or hospital, midwife or gynaecologist?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1