A growing body of empirical research examines the effects of the so-called “social determinants of health” on health and health inequalities. Several high-profile publications have issued policy recommendations to reduce health inequalities based on a specific interpretation of this empirical research as well as a set of normative assumptions. This article questions the framework defined by these assumptions by focusing on two issues: first, the normative judgments about the fairness of particular health inequalities; (...) and second, the policy recommendations issued on this basis. We argue that the normative underpinnings of the approach are insufficiently supported and that the policy recommendations do not necessarily follow from the arguments provided. Furthermore, while many of the policies recommended—such as improving people's living conditions and reducing inequalities in wealth and power—are justified in their own right, the way these recommendations are tied to health is problematic. (shrink)

The question of whether problems with the social determinants of health that might impact decision-making justify denying eligibility for assisted dying has recently come to the fore in debates about the legalisation of assisted dying. For example, it was central to critiques of the 2021 amendments made to Canada’s assisted dying law. The question of whether changes to a country’s assisted dying legislation lead to descents down slippery slopes has also come to the fore—as it does any (...) time a jurisdiction changes its laws. We explore these two questions through the lens of Canada’s experience both to inform Canada’s ongoing discussions and because other countries will confront the same questions if they contemplate changing their assisted dying law. Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying law has evolved through a journey from the courts to Parliament, back to the courts, and then back to Parliament. Along this journey the eligibility criteria, the procedural safeguards, and the monitoring regime have changed. In this article, we focus on the eligibility criteria. First, we explain the evolution of the law and what the eligibility criteria were at the various stops along the way. We then explore the ethical justifications for Canada’s new criteria by looking at two elements of the often-corrosive debate. First, we ask whether problems with the social determinants of health that might impact decision-making justify denying eligibility for assisted dying of decisionally capable people with mental illnesses and people with disabilities as their sole underlying medical conditions. Second, we ask whether Canada’s journey supports slippery slope arguments against permitting assisted dying. All data relevant to the study are included in the article. (shrink)

Political theorists generally defend the moral importance of health care by appealing to its purported importance in promoting good health and saving lives. Recent research on the social determinants of health demonstrates, however, that health care actually does relatively little to promote good health or save lives in comparison with other social and environmental factors. This article assesses the implications of the social determinants of health literature for existing theories (...) of health care justice, and outlines a new approach that can justify publicly subsidized comprehensive health care despite its limited contribution to good health. Even if health care plays a relatively limited role in promoting good health, it remains morally important because of the care it provides to individuals. As such, it can be justified in terms of care ethics. When health care is justified primarily in terms of care rather than health, however, the goals of a just health-care system shift. The measure of a just health-care system is no longer strictly its ability to generate good health outcomes but also its ability to provide individuals with accessible, good quality daily care. This different focus has important consequences for the way we think about the institutions of a just health-care system as well as for the delivery and allocation of medical goods and services. (shrink)

To provide effective care physicians must attend, not just to medical issues, but also to the social determinants of health — racial factors, food insecurity, housing instability, transportation barriers and beyond. Social determinants also include a largely underrecognized dimension: legal vulnerabilities such as rental evictions and debt adjudications. Yet rarely do medical trainees have an opportunity to witness legal vulnerabilities, firsthand.

Amidst the climate of crisis surrounding the rise in opioid-related overdose in the USA, early in 2019, Google and Deloitte launched ‘Opioid360’. Here came a platform combining browser histories, credit, insurance, social media, and traditional survey data to sell the service of risk calculation in population health. Opioid360's approach to automating risk calculation not only promised to identify persons ‘at risk’ of opioid dependence, but also paved the way for broader applications anticipating common chronic diseases and coordinating logistical (...) operations involved in pandemic response. Beginning with this experimental platform, this paper develops an analysis of the Big Data mode of risk calculation - an epistemological and political shift that involves technology companies, investors, insurers, governments, and public health institutions. The analysis focuses on the re-emergence of ‘social determinants of health’ in the rhetoric accompanying novel analytic platforms that estimate, calculate, and compute individual health risks. While the treatment of SDOH has always been a site of political contestation within the discipline of public health, powerful interests are crystallising around the concept and instrumentalising it in platforms that sell algorithmic prediction. Silicon Valley's breed of asset-oriented technoscience appears not only to be amplifying the behaviouralist elements of public health. Among the stakes of the Big Data mode is the paradoxical retreat from changing social conditions that contribute to the prevalence of health and illness in populations; and instead, the promotion of an apparatus for pricing and exchanging individual risk or excluding from services those who bear risk most acutely. (shrink)

Although the federal government and several state governments have recognized that structural discrimination limits less privileged groups’ ability to be healthy, the measures adopted to eliminate health disparities do not address structural discrimination. Historical and modern-day structural discrimination in employment has limited racial and ethnic minority individuals’ economic conditions by segregating them to low wage jobs that lack benefits, which has been associated with health disparities. Health justice provides a community-driven approach to transform the government’s efforts to (...) eliminate health disparities, by acknowledging the problem of structural discrimination; empowering less privileged groups to create and implement structural change; and providing support to redress harm. (shrink)

It is natural to think that there is a tight connection between whether someone is responsible for some outcome and whether it is appropriate to hold her accountable for that outcome. And this natural thought naturally extends to health: if someone is responsible for her health, then, all else being equal, she is accountable for it. Given this, some have thought that responsibility for health has an important role to play in distributing the benefits and burdens of (...) healthcare. But there is a reason for caution. That health is influenced by social, economic, and environmental factors is a matter of consensus. And some have argued that in light of these social determinants of health, individuals are not typically responsible for their health, rendering inappropriate policies that employ a responsibility‐for‐health criterion. This debate implicates a number of overlapping concepts and questions that are often difficult to pull apart. And I worry that those who maintain that social determinants undermine responsibility for health have latched on to the wrong target. The social determinants of health are relevant to such policies, but, I argue, not by globally undermining responsibility. Rather, social determinants are sometimes responsibility‐undermining, sometimes responsibility‐preserving, and often relevant to whether we should hold individuals accountable for their health regardless of their responsibility. This calls for a more nuanced appraisal of the ways in which the social determinants of health are relevant to such policies. And here I attempt to provide one. (shrink)

Introducción: se presenta un ensayo cuyo objetivo es fijar posiciones frente al resumen del Informe de la Comisión sobre Determinantes Sociales de la Salud (CDSS) proponer las acciones políticas que los movimientos sociales en salud deben emprender. Análisis: las recomendaciones de la CDSS no enfocan el problema en toda su compleja naturaleza y en especial desconoce la influencia decisiva de la formación económica social sobre la situación crítica de la salud en el mundo. Acción: se propone la unidad de (...) los movimientos sociales que actúan en el campo de salud para luchar contra los efectos de las políticas económicas y sociales dominantes en el mundo: reducción del papel del estado, privatización de servicios, desregulación laboral, privatización de la seguridad social, políticas migratorias y otras. Denunciemos toda política neoliberal en relación con la salud, practiquemos la solidaridad con los que luchan contra esas políticas, derrotemos el monopolio mediático neoliberal, enfocar el problema de los DSS como asunto político social, no técnico y defendamos el papel protagónico del estado, único capaz de asegurar servicios de salud al alcance de todos. Conclusión: "Nuestro deber es luchar", como nos advirtió Fidel Castro. Introduction: An essay is presented in order to set positions against the Report´s summary of the Commission on social determinants of public health (CSDPH) that suggests the political actions to be undertaken by Health social movements. Analysis: The CSDPH recommendations do not focus the problem in all its complex nature and do not recognize the decisive influence of the social economic formation on the critical situation of Health in the world. Action: unity of social movements acting in the field of health to fight against the effects of the dominant economic and social policies of today´s world: reduction of the role of the State, privatization of services, labour deregulation, privatization of social security, migratory policies and others. We denounce any neo-liberal policy in relation to Health. Let´s support those who struggle against those policies; let´s defeat the neoliberal media monopoly, let´s focus on the problem of social determinants as a sociopolitical issue , not as a technical one; let´s defend the leading role of the State, the only one capable to ensure health services to everyone. Conclusion: As Fidel Castro expressed: "Our duty is to fight. (shrink)

The pervasive effects of early childhood experiences on health at older ages, documented with methods from life course epidemiology, have served to refocus many public health efforts towards understanding the impact of both cumulative disadvantage and what are known as "sensitive periods" and "critical periods" in shaping health trajectories. While the impact of early childhood experiences has been well-studied, much less attention has been focused on other periods of the life course that might also serve as critical (...) junctures in shaping exposures and risks, periods that may also influence biological pathways leading to poor health in late life. This is especially important as we examine social and economic... (shrink)

In their article, Cho and Martinez-Martin (2023) argue that developers and users of digital simulacra for modelling health and disease should involve a continued focus on causality of health states...

In 2005, the relative risk of death was 30% higher for African Americans than White Americans, with differences in cardiovascular mortality accounting for the largest portion of this disparity (Cen...

The paper describes a project in which the thesis of the social determinants of health is used in order to help identify groups that will be among the least advantaged members of society, when disadvantage is understood in terms of lack of genuine opportunity for secure functioning. The analysis is derived from the author's work with Avner de-Shalit in Disadvantage (Oxford University Press, 2007).

In this article, we suggest that the evidence regarding the social determinants of health calls for a deep re‐thinking of our understanding of distributive justice. Focusing on John Rawls's theory of distributive justice in particular, we argue that a full reckoning with the social determinants of health requires a re‐working of Rawls's principles of justice. We argue first that the social bases of health – a Rawlsian conception of the social (...) class='Hi'>determinants of health – should be considered a social primary good. We argue second that including the social bases of health as a social primary good would lead the parties to the original position to choose an additional principle of justice and assign it lexical priority over Rawls's second principle. According to this principle, inequalities in people's share of the social bases of health are to be arranged so as to improve the health status of those least advantaged on the social health gradient. -/- . (shrink)

The final report of the WHO's Commission on the Social Determinants of Health is the first to apply social epidemiological analysis to global health.

The WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health revealed that there is a 28-year disparity between the life expectancy in the poorest postcode and the richest postcode of Glasgow (CSDH, 2008). There are two sets of questions that it is important to ask about health inequalities like these: first, epidemiological questions about the mechanisms that cause inequalities in health and the measures that are effective in reducing them. Second, normative questions about which inequalities in (...) health are wrong and why they are wrong. The papers in this symposium result from the inaugural conference of UCL's Centre for Philosophy, Justice and Health (CPJH) and focus on the relationship between these epidemiological and normative questions. (shrink)

There are a number of important links and similarities between public health and safety. In this extended essay, Gregg D. Caruso defends and expands his public health-quarantine model, which is a non-retributive alternative for addressing criminal behavior that draws on the public health framework and prioritizes prevention and social justice. In developing his account, he explores the relationship between public health and safety, focusing on how social inequalities and systemic injustices affect health outcomes (...) and crime rates, how poverty affects brain development, how offenders often have pre-existing medical conditions (especially mental health issues), how involvement in the criminal justice system itself can lead to or worsen health and cognitive problems, how treatment and rehabilitation methods can best be employed to reduce recidivism and reintegrate offenders back into society, and how a public health approach could be successfully applied within the criminal justice system. Caruso's approach draws on research from the health sciences, social sciences, public policy, law, psychiatry, medical ethics, neuroscience, and philosophy, and he delivers a set of ethically defensible and practically workable proposals for implementing the public health-quarantine model. The essay begins by discussing recent empirical findings in psychology, neuroscience, and the social sciences that provide us with an increased understanding of the social and neurological determinants of health and criminal behavior. It then turns to Caruso's public health-quarantine model and argues that the model provides the most justified, humane, and effective approach for addressing criminal behavior. Caruso concludes by proposing a capability approach to social justice grounded in six key features of human well-being. He argues that we cannot successfully address concerns over public health and safety without simultaneously addressing issues of social justice—including the social determinants of health (SDH) and the social determinants of criminal behavior (SDCB)—and he recommends eight general policy proposals consistent with his model. (shrink)

Recent epidemiological research on the social determinants of health has been used to attack an important framework, associated with Norman Daniels, that depicts healthcare as special. My aim is to rescue the idea that healthcare has special importance in society, although specialness will turn out to be mainly limited to clinical care. I build upon the link between Daniels's theory and the work of John Rawls to develop a conception of public justification liberalism that is suitable to (...) the field of justice and health. I argue that, from the perspective of public justification liberalism, (clinical) healthcare deserves special status. (shrink)

Recent frameworks, models, and reports highlight the critical need to address social determinants of health for achieving health equity in the United States and around the globe. In the United States, data play an important role in better understanding community‐level and population‐level disparities particularly for local health departments. However, data‐driven decision‐making—the use of data for public health activities such as program implementation, policy development, and resource allocation—is often presented theoretically or through case studies in (...) the literature. We sought to develop a preliminary model that identifies the factors that contribute to data‐driven decision‐making in US local health departments and describe relationships between them. Guided by implementation science literature, we examined organizational‐level capacity and individual‐level factors contributing to using data for decision‐making related to social determinants of health and the reduction of county‐level disparities. This model has the potential to improve implementation of public health interventions and programs aimed at upstream structural factors, by elucidating the factors critical to incorporating data in decision‐making. (shrink)

The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 5, Page 38-39, May 2012.

Variability in the symptom experience in patients diagnosed with chronic conditions may be related to social determinants of health (SDoH). The purpose of this critical review was to (1) summarize the existing literature on SDoH and symptom clusters (i.e., multiple, co‐occurring symptoms) in patients diagnosed with common chronic conditions, (2) evaluate current variables and measures used to represent SDoH, (3) identify gaps in the evidence base, and (4) provide recommendations for the incorporation of SDoH into future symptom (...) cluster research. We identified 118 articles including information on SDoH in chronic condition symptom cluster research. Articles primarily focused on cancer populations. Few articles had the explicit purpose of investigating relationships between SDoH and symptom clusters, and the inclusion of SDoH was often limited to variables used to describe samples. Future studies should be designed to “move beyond Table 1” in their utilization of SDoH as variables and examine relationships between SDoH and symptom clusters. Attention should be paid to the appropriateness of measures being used to collect information on SDoH, and analysis methods that estimate causal connections between variables should be considered. Research regarding the relationship of SDoH with symptom clusters in patients with chronic conditions has the potential to reveal mechanisms of symptom disparities and guide changes to alleviate these disparities. (shrink)

Social determinants of health are a subject of growing interest, yet criticisms have emerged about the way determinants are conceptualized in nursing. A tendency to focus on readily observable living conditions and measurable demographic characteristics can divert attention, it has been said, from the less visible underlying processes which shape social life and health. To illustrate how the analytic perspective determines what becomes visible or invisible as a “determinant” in health, this paper presents (...) a case exemplar. Drawing from news reports and research in real estate economics and urban policy analysis, it explores a single local infectious illness outbreak through a series of progressively more abstract units of inquiry, considering mechanisms of lending and debt financing, housing supply, property valuation, tax policy, change in the structure of the financial industry, and international patterns of migration and capital flow, among other factors, which contributed in various ways to creating unsafe living conditions. An analytic exercise calling attention to dynamism and complexity in social processes, the paper offers a political‐economy‐based approach that serves as a cautionary note against oversimplification in discussions of health causality. (shrink)

Scientific advances in health care have been disproportionately distributed across social strata. Disease burden is also disproportionately distributed, with marginalized groups having the highest risk of poor health outcomes. Social determinants are thought to influence health care delivery and the management of chronic diseases among marginalized groups, but the current conceptualization of social determinants lacks a critical focus on the experiences of people within their environment. The purpose of this article was to (...) integrate the literature on marginalization and situate the concept in the framework of social determinants of health. We demonstrate that social position links marginalization and social determinants of health. This perspective provides a critical lens to assess the societal power dynamics that influence the construction of the socio‐environmental factors affecting health. Linking marginalization with social determinants of health can improve our understanding of the inequities in health care delivery and the disparities in chronic disease burden among vulnerable groups. (shrink)

Volume 19, Issue 10, October 2019, Page 52-54.

The government recognizes that social factors cause racial inequalities in access to resources and opportunities that result in racial health disparities. However, this recognition fails to acknowledge the root cause of these racial inequalities: structural racism. As a result, racial health disparities persist.

The present article identifies how social determinants of health raise two categories of philosophical problems that also fall within the smaller domain of ethics; one set pertains to the philosophy of epidemiology, and the second set pertains to the philosophy of health and social justice. After reviewing these two categories of ethical concerns, the limited conclusion made is that identifying and responding to social determinants of health requires inter-disciplinary reasoning across epidemiology and (...) philosophy. For the reasoning used in epidemiology to be sound, for its scope and (moral) purpose as a science to be clarified as well as for social justice theory to be relevant and coherent, epidemiology and philosophy need to forge a meaningful exchange of ideas that happens in both directions. (shrink)

Globalization, a process characterized by the growing interdependence of the world's people, impacts health systems and the social determinants of health in ways that are detrimental to health equity. In a world in which there are few countervailing normative and policy approaches to the dominant neoliberal regime underpinning globalization, the human rights paradigm constitutes a widely shared foundation for challenging globalization's effects. The substantive rights enumerated in human rights instruments include the right to the highest (...) attainable level of physical and mental health and others that are relevant to the determinants of health. The rights stipulated in these documents impose extensive legal obligations on states that have ratified these documents and confer health entitlements on their residents. Human rights norms have also inspired civil society efforts to improve access to essential medicines and medical services, particularly for HIV/AIDS. Nevertheless, many factors reduce the potential counterweight human rights might exert, including and specifically the nature of the human rights approach, weak political commitments to promoting and protecting health rights on the part of some states and their lack of institutional and economic resources to do so. Global economic markets and the relative power of global economic institutions are also shrinking national policy space. This article reviews the potential contributions and limitations of human rights to achieving greater equity in shaping the social determinants of health. (shrink)

Philosophy of epidemiology has recently emerged as a distinct branch of philosophy. The field will surely benefit from pluralism, reflected in the broad range of topics and perspectives in this special issue. Here, I argue that a healthy pluralistic field of philosophy of epidemiology has social responsibilities that require the field as a whole to engage actively with research on social determinants of health and health disparities. Practicing epidemiologists and the broader community of public (...) class='Hi'>health scientists have gradually acknowledged that much of their attention ought to be paid to these, i.e. inequitable between-population health variations that largely reflect the world’s inequitable distribution of resources and social conditions. The paper illustrates how and why health disparities and social determinants of health, through no ill will, become de facto secondary concerns in Alex Broadbent’s field-defining Philosophy of Epidemiology, showing the ease with which these topics can be incidentally sidelined. As means for philosophy of epidemiology to meet its social responsibility obligations, I suggest philosophy of epidemiology expand its attention to two particular lines research. First, the paper discusses Geoffrey Rose’s concept of “causes of incidence”—causes of disparities between populations—and argues for the importance of engaging with these causes. Second, the paper argues for the value of engaging with Bruce Link and Jo Phelan’s “fundamental causes” model of how flexible social resources serve as buffers from harms, generating a plethora of shifting and locally-contingent health effects. (shrink)

This article provides a critical analysis of ‘the legal’ in the legal determinants of health, with reference to the Lancet–O’Neill report on that topic. The analysis shows how law is framed as a fluid and porous concept, with legal measures and instruments being conceived as sociopolitical phenomena. I argue that the way that laws are grounded practically as part of a broader concept of politics and evaluated normatively for their instrumental value has important implications for the study of (...) law itself. This, in turn, has implications for how we approach the transdisciplinary ambitions that form a key part of the report’s recommendations to enhance law’s capacity to promote better, more equitable population health at local, national, international and global levels. (shrink)

We thank the open peer commentators for their thoughtful responses to our article, "The Social Determinants of Health: Why Should We Care?" (Preda and Voigt 2015). Since space constraints prevent us from responding in detail to all the comments raised, we focus on two areas of concern that emerged from the commentaries. The first is our claim that avoidability is neither necessary nor sufficient for defining unjust or unfair health inequalities. The second area relates to the (...) reasons we might give for treating health inequalities as morally problematic. (shrink)

The article discusses two areas at the intersection of social determinants of health research and social justice theory. The first section examines the affinity between social epidemiology and the capabilities approach. The second section examines how social epidemiology's expansion of the scope of the causal chain and determinants raises questions about epistemology and ontology in epidemiology as well as the field's link to the moral concern for human health.

In May 2009 the World Health Assembly passed a resolution on reducing health inequities through action on the social determinants of health, based on the work of the global Commission on Social Determinants of Health, 2005–2008. The Commission's genesis and findings raise some important questions for global health governance. We draw out some of the essential elements, themes, and mechanisms that shaped the Commission. We start by examining the evolving nature of (...) global health and the Commission's foundational inspiration – the universal pattern of health inequity and the imperative, driven by a sense of social justice, to make better and more equal health a global goal. We look at how the Commission was established, how it was structured internally, and how it developed external relationships – with the World Health Organization, with global networks of academics and practitioners, with country governments eager to spearhead action on health equity, and with civil society. We outline the Commission's recommendations as they relate to the architecture of global health governance. Finally, we look at how the Commission is catalyzing a movement to bring social determinants of health to the forefront of international and national policy discourse. (shrink)

On August 28, 2008, Michael Marmot, Chair of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health, formally handed over the Commission’s Final Report to Margaret Chan, the Director-General of the World Health Organization, at the Palais des Nations in Geneva. It was a significant moment. Dr. Chan addressed a hall packed with representatives of the world’s communications media in a speech that was remarkably direct. Dr. Chan reiterated the Commission’s position that to improve health and (...) class='Hi'>health equity action needs to be taken not just across the health sector but across all social and economic policy areas, and stated, “Social deprivation is not a matter of fate. It is a marker of policy failure.” This was a bold statement from one of the world’s leading diplomats. Policy failure! The phrase echoes the Commission’s assertion that “a toxic combination of poor social policies, unfair economic arrangements and bad politics is killing people on a grand scale.” The Commission’s messages are far reaching. (shrink)

In The legal determinants of health: Harnessing the power of law for global health and sustainable development, Gostin et al. provide a sustained account of how law can and should be used as an instrument of health promotion. We pick up on the themes of this report with a specific focus of the importance of abortion for women’s sexual and reproductive health and the impact that particular ways of framing abortion in law can have on (...) the lives of women and girls. In this short comment, we wish to emphasize that abortion regulations need to move beyond frameworks based on narrow understandings of harm towards more progressive agendas that take into account the social determinants of health in order to reduce barriers to care. This contribution is particularly relevant to the Commission’s criticism that those ‘[l]aws that stigmatise or discriminate against marginalized populations are especially harmful and exacerbate health disparities’. (shrink)

ABSTRACT In spite of vast global improvements in living standards, health, and well‐being, the persistence of absolute poverty and its attendant maladies remains an unsettling fact of life for billions around the world and constitutes the primary cause for the failure of developing states to improve the health of their peoples. While economic development in developing countries is necessary to provide for underlying determinants of health – most prominently, poverty reduction and the building of comprehensive primary (...) health systems – inequalities in power within the international economic order and the spread of neoliberal development policy limit the ability of developing states to develop economically and realize public goods for health. With neoliberal development policies impacting entire societies, the collective right to development, as compared with an individual rights‐based approach to development, offers a framework by which to restructure this system to realize social determinants of health. The right to development, working through a vector of rights, can address social determinants of health, obligating states and the international community to support public health systems while reducing inequities in health through poverty‐reducing economic growth. At an international level, where the ability of states to develop economically and to realize public goods through public health systems is constrained by international financial institutions, the implementation of the right to development enables a restructuring of international institutions and foreign‐aid programs, allowing states to enter development debates with a right to cooperation from other states, not simply a cry for charity. (shrink)

Through qualitative surveys, a team of law students, law professors, physicians, and residents explored the perceptions of neurology residents towards referral to appropriate legal resources in an academic training program. Respondents reported feeling uncomfortable screening their patients for health-harming legal needs, which many attributed to a lack of training in this area. These findings indicate that neurology residents would benefit from training on screening for social factors that may be impacting their patients’ health.

This paper is the second of two in a series. In our first paper, we presented a social justice framework emerging from an extensive literature review and incorporating core social determinants specific to mental health in the age of COVID-19 and illustrated specific social determinants impacting mental health (SDIMH) of our resettled Bhutanese refugee population during the pandemic. This second paper details specific barriers to the SDIMH detrimental to the basic human rights and (...) social justice of this population during this pandemic. The SDIMH, as described, further informs the need for social justice measures and cultural humility in mental healthcare, public health, law, and community engagement. This work concludes with a proposed call to action toward mental health improvement and fair treatment for refugee populations in three core areas: communication and education, social stigma and discrimination, and accessibility and availability of resources. (shrink)

Both gender and the law are significant determinants of health and well-being. Here, we put forward evidence to unpack the relationship between gender and outcomes in health and well-being, and explore how legal determinants interact and intersect with gender norms to amplify or reduce health inequities across populations. The paper explores the similarities between legal and health systems in their response to gender—both systems portray gender neutrality but would be better described as gender-blind. We (...) conclude with a set of recommendations to address both law and gender in implementing the work of the Lancet Commission on the legal determinants of health to improve health outcomes for all, irrespective of gender. (shrink)

Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up in the box at the top right corner of the article..

ABSTRACT:What more can be said about COVID-19 and the social determinants of health? This article describes neglected perspectives that derive from the history of social epidemiology, a field that identifies the social etiology of disease and variations in disease incidence among people differentially located in the social structure. The "discovery" of social determinants of diseases like COVID-19 is nothing new for epidemiology: debate over how to analyze structural determinants versus individual-level risk (...) factors persisted throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. By the late 20th century, research had highlighted fundamental causes of health disparities, such as social conditions and structural racism; these are structural factors, embedded in the social fabric of life. Measurement of structured inequalities within systems faces complex and challenging problems, as research aims to better account for these lived realities at different levels of analysis and as multiple factors merge to influence outcomes (revealed in intersectionality theory). At each of these intersections, there are opportunities for bioethicists to consider their ethical implications. It is imperative to understand the social and ethical roots of our present conversations about health inequalities, in order to partner intelligently with researchers on the forefront of advocating for change. (shrink)

Just health: meeting health needs fairly is an ambitious book, in which Norman Daniels attempts to bring together in a single framework all his work on health and justice from the past 25 years. One major aim is to reconcile his earlier work on the special moral importance of healthcare with his later work on the social determinants of health. In his earlier work, Daniels argued that healthcare is of special moral importance because it (...) protects opportunity. In this later work, Daniels argues that the social determinants of health (which in fact tend to have a larger effect on health outcomes than healthcare does) should also be considered special. This paper argues that it is a mistake to base a theory of justice for health on the claim that health (or the social determinants of health) are "special", for three reasons. First, once we realise that health is to a large part socially determined by features such as distribution of income, which are also of independent importance for justice, we cannot talk about a theory of justice for health in isolation from an overall theory of justice. Second, when we are trying to work out the place of health in a general theory of justice, being told that health (or the social determinants of health) is special is unhelpful. The relevant starting point should rather be whether health matters in a fundamental way for justice, or whether it matters merely for the effects it has on those goods which are of fundamental importance for justice. Third, treating the social determinants of health as special would in fact be counterproductive in terms of the broad approach to justice Daniels favours. (shrink)

Herbert, Dilinie This article reviews Exploring the Connections: Catholic social teaching and the social determinants of health, edited by Martin Laverty and Liz Callaghan. The social determinants of health are "those conditions in which we live, grow and age, that can affect our health and well-being." Catholic social teaching is "the Church's teaching about the ordering of life in society and about the attainment of individual and social justice." "It comprises (...) theological and philosophical traditions from biblical and ancient sources taken up and developed throughout the Christian era." This book draws on both concepts to fashion a health care resource that will add to our knowledge and understanding of the lived experiences of disadvantaged people, and - more importantly - our appreciation of ways in which this disadvantage can be overcome. (shrink)

Despite evidence that social factors can result in poor health outcomes, and the emergence of payment models that encourage the use non-medical interventions to improve health, many health care providers do not identify the social determinants of health within patient populations through routine screening. This Article explores the possible reasons for this inconsistency by considering screening practices in medical-legal partnerships, the health care approach most concerned with identifying and treating the social (...) determinants of health. Through an analysis of the results of a national survey and qualitative interviews with MLPs, we discovered that screening is not operationalized or consistent within many MLPs. We conclude that although health care providers may recognize the value of screening, they are not yet embracing the practice, perhaps because of an unspoken fear that fulsome screening identifies so many unmet social and legal needs that community-based resources cannot satisfy demand. This fear is unfounded. Approaches such as MLP demonstrate that social and legal needs can be efficiently treated through collaboration with other professionals, often within the health care setting. Nevertheless, providers must first operationalize screening to truly understand the scope of the need in their patient populations and collaborate to address those needs. (shrink)