Health Disparities Driven by Socioeconomic Status
Socioeconomic status underscores major pointers to health, which include; healthcare, health behavior and exposure to the environment. Further chronic levels of stress linked to low socioeconomic status are likely to lead to an increase in both mortality and morbidity. A reduction in the socioeconomic status disparities in health demands strategies that specifically address the constituents of what is defined as the socioeconomic status, and these include the following; income, occupation and education. Further, there is a need to address the routes through which the constituent affect health.
According to current literature, socioeconomic status, irrespective of been borne out of education, income or occupation is associated with a broad range of health problems, and the problems are not limited to cancer, hypertension, diabetes, arthritis, cardiovascular disease and birth weight. Moreover, lower socioeconomic status is linked to high mortality, and the great disparities have been reported in middle adulthood. According to Thomas (2003), the actual death catalysts in the United States are diet, the lack of activity, toxic chemicals, and tobacco, and through his insightful analysis, he asserts that there is actually a disparity between allocation of death resources and the importance of the factors. Further, such resources were only allocated in treating diseases, but comparatively fewer resources diverted in altering the predisposing factors. To alter such risk factors, a person must modify their perceptions and look upstream and take into consideration their real determinants. Socioeconomic status is an important fundamental factor that drives health disparities and this paper seeks to identify the current knowledge on the manner in which diversity in socioeconomic is measures, and the different health predictors.
Rectifying the basic economic and social inequality is a not a walk in the park. Very many policy initiatives are always contentious such as redistribution of resources using taxes and public spending. Intrusion in the private sector through regulation of occupation and income conditions is very difficult and can be repelled by the far-left liberal private sector. Policies that promote educational opportunity can be less divisive, although such moves may still be met with some discordant voices (Connolly, 2013). In England, Acheson Commission was tasked with reducing the health disparities in the country, and they gave more weight to policies that would foster the health of children and women of childbearing age, and this was to reduce the effect of inequality for the young people. Indeed, this is a policy initiative that can be borrowed and be implemented in other areas, and form part of the goal of combating the problem. Policies that aid early childhood goals have been supported largely with the focus on social results, for instance achievement in school and reducing delinquency levels, showing that health advantages of such initiatives complement their aid. Elimination of health disparities demands the concentration on all of the constituents of socioeconomic status, and the routes through which they affect health. America has concentrated more on health care and the challenges of the people that are not in the health insurance bracket, and before the current administration, the progress was discouraging. The Obamacare has been hailed as a proper policy instrument that is specifically geared towards eliminating the problem, and such an initiative together with a focus of early shall be good steps in surmounting the problem. However, patterns of disease and injury that trail the socioeconomic slope in the presence of disease, irrespective of a universal coverage.
Thomas, R. K. (2003). Society and health: Sociology for health professionals. New York:
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Connolly, W.E. (2013 April 17). Radical Democracy Conference 2013 - Keynote Talk by
William E. Connolly. [Video file]. Retrieved from