Inequality by design: The politics behind forced migrants' access to healthcare.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q1 LAW
Mechthild Roos
{"title":"Inequality by design: The politics behind forced migrants' access to healthcare.","authors":"Mechthild Roos","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwac043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When a system comes under strain, the persons most likely to suffer from the repercussions are those at and beyond its margins, as the age-old rule 'Help yourself before helping others' typically guides crisis management within the system. Similar behavioural patterns on the side of policy-makers have left a distinct mark on the healthcare rights of forced migrants in the context and aftermath of the so-called 'migration crisis' of 2015-2016, as this article demonstrates. Following the crisis, this group of persons, who are traditionally situated at the margins of society already, have been pushed further outside social and healthcare systems through increasingly restrictive incorporation policies across Europe. By analysing recent legislative reforms in four countries (Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the UK) which stood out in various ways during the crisis, this article sheds light on the increasing politicisation and polarisation of the intersection of incorporation and healthcare. It shows that the crisis induced similar responses of legal adaptation in countries with fundamentally different healthcare and incorporation systems, and analyses the dynamics behind such processes of change. The article thereby contributes to a better understanding of healthcare legislation as a reflection of political opposition to or acceptance (if not fuelling) of societal inequalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"30 4","pages":"658-679"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

When a system comes under strain, the persons most likely to suffer from the repercussions are those at and beyond its margins, as the age-old rule 'Help yourself before helping others' typically guides crisis management within the system. Similar behavioural patterns on the side of policy-makers have left a distinct mark on the healthcare rights of forced migrants in the context and aftermath of the so-called 'migration crisis' of 2015-2016, as this article demonstrates. Following the crisis, this group of persons, who are traditionally situated at the margins of society already, have been pushed further outside social and healthcare systems through increasingly restrictive incorporation policies across Europe. By analysing recent legislative reforms in four countries (Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the UK) which stood out in various ways during the crisis, this article sheds light on the increasing politicisation and polarisation of the intersection of incorporation and healthcare. It shows that the crisis induced similar responses of legal adaptation in countries with fundamentally different healthcare and incorporation systems, and analyses the dynamics behind such processes of change. The article thereby contributes to a better understanding of healthcare legislation as a reflection of political opposition to or acceptance (if not fuelling) of societal inequalities.

设计的不平等:强迫移民获得医疗保健背后的政治。
当一个系统面临压力时,最有可能受到影响的人是那些处于边缘或边缘之外的人,因为“在帮助别人之前先帮助自己”这条古老的规则通常指导着系统内的危机管理。正如本文所展示的,在2015-2016年所谓的“移民危机”的背景和后果下,决策者方面类似的行为模式在被迫移民的医疗保健权利上留下了明显的印记。危机之后,这群传统上已经处于社会边缘的人,由于整个欧洲日益严格的合并政策,被进一步推到了社会和医疗体系之外。通过分析在危机期间以各种方式脱颖而出的四个国家(德国、意大利、瑞典和英国)最近的立法改革,本文揭示了公司与医疗保健交叉领域日益增加的政治化和两极分化。它表明,危机在具有根本不同的医疗保健和合并制度的国家引起了类似的法律适应反应,并分析了这种变化过程背后的动态。因此,本文有助于更好地理解医疗保健立法是对社会不平等的政治反对或接受(如果不是助长)的反映。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Law Review
Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信