How you think about the causes of a problem affects the
solutions you can see to it. As you well know, this program strongly emphasizes
a systems thinking and social determinants of health approach to public
health rather than an individual health promotion/behavior change one.
So the question is,
what utility can the health behavior theories you just spent a term learning
about have within a SDOH/context approach?
FORMAT:
Introduction: Introduce the health topic you’ve
chosen, basic information about annual incidence and/or prevalence and/or
mortality/morbidity, demographics of who it affects, risk factors, etc.
Body: Use 2 theories of health behavior from your
textbook (one individual and one group or multi-level) as frameworks for
encouraging health behavior change related to that topic and make 1-2
recommendations for addressing the issue that arises out of using that
framework
[E.g. how would the theory of planned behavior conceptualize
helping people stay safe in heat emergencies? If that’s your framework on this
topic, what does that mean a public health org should do to prevent heat
deaths?].
Then do the same for a social determinants approach: what
are some key social determinants related to this issue and what would you
recommend to promote health/prevent disease related to this issue from a social
determinants lens? (If you’re doing heat Klinenberg article can provide a
starting point about what SDOH to look into, but you should also do a little of
your own research to confirm with more updated sources).
Each theory/approach should be its own section (so 3 sections total) and you
should propose the recommendations that arise from that approach within that
section.
Conclusion: Health behaviors are “key mediating
mechanisms between more distal structural and ideological environments and
individual health outcomes.” (Short et al 2015). Using that framework,
conclude your paper by either proposing a final recommendation that combines
the perspectives you’ve written about into a comprehensive proposal OR describe
some of the circumstances under which each approach would be appropriate.
*References should be cited in APA format and you should
have a works cited page at the end (not included in page count).
https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/443213in.html
the link’s story summary:
The Chicagoans’ heat wave in the summer of 1995. Chicago experienced a
devastating heat wave, with temperatures soaring above 100 degrees Fahrenheit
for days on end. The extreme heat created a crisis, leading to a significant
number of deaths and revealing deep social vulnerabilities within the city (Klingenberg,
1995).
During the heat wave, temperatures reached unprecedented
levels, causing discomfort and health risks for residents. Many homes lacked
adequate cooling systems, and even those with air conditioning struggled to
cope with the intense heat. The strain on the city’s power grids resulted in
widespread power outages, exacerbating the already dire situation. The heat
also caused infrastructure damage, such as buckling roads and warped train
rails, further disrupting daily life.
The most tragic aspect of the heat wave was the loss of
life. Hundreds of Chicagoans, particularly the elderly and those living alone,
succumbed to heat-related illnesses. The overwhelmed emergency response system
struggled to cope with the influx of calls, and hospitals reached capacity,
unable to accommodate all those in need of care. The Cook County Medical
Examiner’s Office was inundated with bodies, exceeding its capacity and
requiring additional refrigerated trucks for storage.
The aftermath of the heat wave sparked debate and scrutiny.
Official records initially downplayed the extent of the disaster, leading to
skepticism and controversy over the reported number of heat-related deaths.
However, subsequent analysis and studies confirmed that the death toll was
indeed substantial, with hundreds of excess deaths during the heat wave week.
Social factors played a significant role in determining
vulnerability to the heat wave. Those living alone, lacking access to
transportation, or residing in impoverished neighborhoods faced heightened
risks. Surprisingly, men were more susceptible to heat-related deaths than
women, and there were notable differences in mortality rates among racial and
ethnic groups.
The response from city officials was criticized for its
inadequacy and delayed action. Emergency plans were not fully implemented, and
resources were not effectively deployed to assist those in need. However,
lessons were learned from the tragedy, and subsequent heat waves prompted
improved preparedness measures, including better communication, the
establishment of cooling centers, and targeted outreach to vulnerable
populations.
Ultimately, the heat wave served as a stark reminder of the
interconnectedness between natural disasters and social vulnerabilities.
Addressing underlying issues such as isolation, poverty, and inadequate
infrastructure is crucial to mitigating the impact of future heat waves and
ensuring the safety and well-being of all residents.
Here is a summary of the key points from the journal article
“Denaturalizing Disaster” by Elaine Kleinenberg: Introduction:
The
article examines how disasters are socially constructed rather than purely
natural events. It critiques the dominant narrative that portrays
disasters as exceptional disruptions to an otherwise stable order.
Theoretical Framework:
Drawing
on critical disaster studies, the article argues that disasters reveal the
underlying vulnerabilities and inequalities inherent in society.
It
adopts a “disaster risk reduction” approach that focuses on
addressing the root causes of vulnerability rather than just responding to
events.
Case Study: Hurricane Katrina
The
article analyzes Hurricane Katrina in 2005 as a case study to illustrate
how disasters disproportionately impact marginalized communities.
It
highlights how long-standing racial and economic inequalities in New
Orleans exacerbated the impacts of the hurricane and hampered recovery
efforts.
The
slow and inadequate government response further compounded the suffering
of low-income and minority residents.
Disaster Capitalism:
The
article critiques how disasters are often exploited for private profit
through “disaster capitalism” practices like privatization of
public services.
In New
Orleans, this included school privatization, gentrification of
neighborhoods, and corporate incentives that benefited the wealthy at the
expense of displaced residents.
Conclusion:
The
article calls for a shift away from the dominant technocratic, militarized
approach to disasters towards a model centered on addressing root
vulnerabilities.
It
advocates for disaster policies and practices that prioritize human
rights, equity, community resilience and grassroots participation in
recovery efforts.
In summary, the article makes a compelling case for
understanding disasters not as natural aberrations, but as events that expose
and exacerbate pre-existing social inequalities. It provides a critical
analysis of the political, economic and racial dynamics that shape disaster
vulnerability, impacts and recovery.
