Access to intervene. An ethnographic study of public health practices targeting health inequalities.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Health Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1177/13634593211032869
Mette Terp Høybye, Ditte Herring Holt, Morten Hulvej Rod
{"title":"Access to intervene. An ethnographic study of public health practices targeting health inequalities.","authors":"Mette Terp Høybye,&nbsp;Ditte Herring Holt,&nbsp;Morten Hulvej Rod","doi":"10.1177/13634593211032869","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Much public health research has devoted attention to the question of how interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities can access so-called \"hard-to-reach\" populations. This work has generally reflected an instrumentalist approach, which implies the preexistence of particular target groups characterized by specific public health problems. The key research interests are to find ways to effectively alleviate health inequalities and to identify the best ways to intervene to address disparate health problems among certain groups of people. Based on ethnographic research with public health officers in four Danish municipalities, this article turns the issue on its head by examining how public health officers gain access to intervene in practice and, as part of this process, define and delineate target groups and public health problems. Through detailed descriptions of two ethnographic cases, we develop the argument that public health interventions carry with them moral differentiations that may contradict the overall intention of reducing health inequalities. We adopt a theoretical perspective developed by Lakoff and Collier, suggesting that public health interventions can be understood as \"regimes of living.\" This leads us to the conclusion that the practices of gaining access result in the production of unforeseen target groups and new moral configurations where the value of health becomes linked to other types of value, most importantly economic value. For public health officers, the complicated issue of gaining access to intervene is not simply a matter of finding practical solutions; it also defines and delineates the scope of public health itself.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":"27 3","pages":"362-377"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/13634593211032869","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593211032869","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Much public health research has devoted attention to the question of how interventions aimed at reducing health inequalities can access so-called "hard-to-reach" populations. This work has generally reflected an instrumentalist approach, which implies the preexistence of particular target groups characterized by specific public health problems. The key research interests are to find ways to effectively alleviate health inequalities and to identify the best ways to intervene to address disparate health problems among certain groups of people. Based on ethnographic research with public health officers in four Danish municipalities, this article turns the issue on its head by examining how public health officers gain access to intervene in practice and, as part of this process, define and delineate target groups and public health problems. Through detailed descriptions of two ethnographic cases, we develop the argument that public health interventions carry with them moral differentiations that may contradict the overall intention of reducing health inequalities. We adopt a theoretical perspective developed by Lakoff and Collier, suggesting that public health interventions can be understood as "regimes of living." This leads us to the conclusion that the practices of gaining access result in the production of unforeseen target groups and new moral configurations where the value of health becomes linked to other types of value, most importantly economic value. For public health officers, the complicated issue of gaining access to intervene is not simply a matter of finding practical solutions; it also defines and delineates the scope of public health itself.

可以进行干预。针对卫生不平等问题的公共卫生实践的人种学研究。
许多公共卫生研究都把注意力集中在旨在减少卫生不平等的干预措施如何能够接触到所谓“难以接触到”的人口这一问题上。这项工作一般反映了一种工具主义的做法,这意味着预先存在以特定公共卫生问题为特征的特定目标群体。关键的研究兴趣是寻找有效减轻健康不平等的方法,并确定干预的最佳方法,以解决某些人群中不同的健康问题。根据对丹麦四个城市的公共卫生官员进行的人种学研究,本文通过审查公共卫生官员如何在实践中进行干预,并作为这一过程的一部分,确定和描述目标群体和公共卫生问题,从而扭转了这一问题。通过对两个人种学案例的详细描述,我们提出了这样的论点:公共卫生干预带有道德差异,这可能与减少健康不平等的总体意图相矛盾。我们采用Lakoff和Collier提出的理论观点,认为公共卫生干预可以被理解为“生活制度”。这使我们得出结论,获取医疗服务的做法产生了无法预见的目标群体和新的道德格局,在这些群体中,健康价值与其他类型的价值,最重要的是经济价值联系在一起。对于公共卫生官员来说,获得干预机会的复杂问题不仅仅是找到实际解决办法的问题;它还界定和描绘了公共卫生本身的范围。
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
Health
Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.
×
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