scholarly journals Digital Disenfranchisement and COVID-19: Broadband Internet Access as a Social Determinant of Health

2021 ◽  
pp. 152483992110144
Author(s):  
Jody Early ◽  
Alyssa Hernandez
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Digital Divide ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
Broadband Internet ◽  
Digital Equity ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Racial Injustice ◽  
Equity And Inclusion ◽  
Negative Health Outcomes ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

According to the Pew Research Center, approximately one quarter of American adults do not have access to broadband internet. This number does not account for the millions of people who are underconnected or lacking a stable internet connection. Although digital disparity in America is not new, the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic has increased our societal dependence on the internet and widened the digital divide. Access to broadband internet has become a basic need in this connected society, linking people to vital resources, such as jobs, education, health care, food, and information. However, it is still an overlooked and understudied issue in public health. In this article, we highlight five key points for why advocating for the expansion of affordable and accessible internet for all should be a priority issue for public health and health promotion. Recent studies offer evidence that digital disenfranchisement contributes to negative health outcomes, economic oppression, and racial injustice. Now more than ever, health advocacy to promote digital equity and inclusion is critical to our meaningful progress toward health equity.

scholarly journals Conceptual causal models of socioeconomic status, family structure, family functioning and their role in public health

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederik Booysen ◽  
Ferdi Botha ◽  
Edwin Wouters
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Family Functioning ◽  
Family Structure ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
Causal Models ◽  
Family Socioeconomic Status ◽  
The Family ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

AbstractSocial determinants of health frameworks are standard tools in public health. These frameworks for the most part omit a crucial factor: the family. Socioeconomic status moreover is a prominent social determinant of health. Insofar as family functioning is poorer in poor families and family structure and functioning are linked to health, it is critical to consider the pathways between these four constructs. In this correspondence, we reflect on how empirical studies of this conceptual nexus mirror two causal models. We conclude by reflecting on future directions for research in this field.

scholarly journals Digital Divide Magnified for Older Veterans Living Off the Grid

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 119-120
Author(s):  
Kathryn Nearing ◽  
Camilla Pimentel ◽  
Eileen Dryden ◽  
Laura Kernan ◽  
Lauren Moo
Keyword(s):  
Digital Divide ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Moral Imperative ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Digital Divides ◽  
Unmet Healthcare Needs ◽  
Past Experiences ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

Abstract Compared to urban Veterans, rural Veterans are more likely to be older (55-74), not employed, have less education, more service-related disabilities and unmet healthcare needs. Interviews with a national sample of community-based outpatient clinic providers described highly-rural Veterans who are “off the grid.” These Veterans, by choice and/or circumstance, do not have access to reliable internet, associated devices or knowledge/skills. Providers described the difficulties of connecting with these Veterans even by phone. The healthcare shift to virtual telehealth modalities in response to COVID-19 highlights the digital divide as a social determinant of health. For “off-the-grid” Veterans, past experiences and present-day circumstances converge to perpetuate and exacerbate inequalities in accessing healthcare. Their situation underscores that telehealth is not a panacea for increasing access to care and confronts us with the moral imperative to reach those with whom it may be most difficult to connect to span social, geographic and digital divides.

Borderline: The Ethics of Fat Stigma in Public Health

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 510-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cat Pausé
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
Health Campaigns ◽  
Health Seeking ◽  
Health Seeking Behaviors ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Public Health Campaigns ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health ◽  
Fat Stigma

This article argues that public health campaigns have an ethical obligation to combat fat stigma, not mobilize it in the “war on obesity.” Fat stigma is conceptualized, and a review is undertaken of how pervasive fat stigma is across the world and across the lifespan. By reviewing the negative impacts of fat stigma on physical health, mental health, and health seeking behaviors, fat stigma is clearly identified as a social determinant of health. Considering the role of fat stigma in public health, and the arguments made for using stigmatisation in public health campaigns to promote population health, it is concluded that it is a violation of public health ethics to use stigma as a tool in combatting fatness. The article concludes by making recommendations of how public health in New Zealand can combat, rather than reinforce, fat stigma.

scholarly journals Public Health in the Information Age: Recognizing the Infosphere as a Social Determinant of Health (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Morley ◽  
Josh Cowls ◽  
Mariarosaria Taddeo ◽  
Luciano Floridi
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Mobile Apps ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
State Control ◽  
Ethical Concerns ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

UNSTRUCTURED Since 2016, social media companies and news providers have come under pressure to tackle the spread of political mis- and disinformation (MDI) online. However, despite evidence that online health MDI (on the web, on social media, and within mobile apps) also has negative real-world effects, there has been a lack of comparable action by either online service providers or state-sponsored public health bodies. We argue that this is problematic and seek to answer three questions: why has so little been done to control the flow of, and exposure to, health MDI online; how might more robust action be justified; and what specific, newly justified actions are needed to curb the flow of, and exposure to, online health MDI? In answering these questions, we show that four ethical concerns—related to paternalism, autonomy, freedom of speech, and pluralism—are partly responsible for the lack of intervention. We then suggest that these concerns can be overcome by relying on four arguments: (1) education is necessary but insufficient to curb the circulation of health MDI, (2) there is precedent for state control of internet content in other domains, (3) network dynamics adversely affect the spread of accurate health information, and (4) justice is best served by protecting those susceptible to inaccurate health information. These arguments provide a strong case for classifying the quality of the infosphere as a social determinant of health, thus making its protection a public health responsibility. In addition, they offer a strong justification for working to overcome the ethical concerns associated with state-led intervention in the infosphere to protect public health.

scholarly journals Broadband Internet Access Is a Social Determinant of Health!

2020 ◽  
Vol 110 (8) ◽  
pp. 1123-1125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie C. Benda ◽  
Tiffany C. Veinot ◽  
Cynthia J. Sieck ◽  
Jessica S. Ancker
Keyword(s):  
Internet Access ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
Broadband Internet ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

scholarly journals Public Health in the Information Age: Recognizing the Infosphere as a Social Determinant of Health

10.2196/19311 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. e19311
Author(s):  
Jessica Morley ◽  
Josh Cowls ◽  
Mariarosaria Taddeo ◽  
Luciano Floridi
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Mobile Apps ◽  
Social Determinant ◽  
State Control ◽  
Ethical Concerns ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
Social Determinant Of Health

Since 2016, social media companies and news providers have come under pressure to tackle the spread of political mis- and disinformation (MDI) online. However, despite evidence that online health MDI (on the web, on social media, and within mobile apps) also has negative real-world effects, there has been a lack of comparable action by either online service providers or state-sponsored public health bodies. We argue that this is problematic and seek to answer three questions: why has so little been done to control the flow of, and exposure to, health MDI online; how might more robust action be justified; and what specific, newly justified actions are needed to curb the flow of, and exposure to, online health MDI? In answering these questions, we show that four ethical concerns—related to paternalism, autonomy, freedom of speech, and pluralism—are partly responsible for the lack of intervention. We then suggest that these concerns can be overcome by relying on four arguments: (1) education is necessary but insufficient to curb the circulation of health MDI, (2) there is precedent for state control of internet content in other domains, (3) network dynamics adversely affect the spread of accurate health information, and (4) justice is best served by protecting those susceptible to inaccurate health information. These arguments provide a strong case for classifying the quality of the infosphere as a social determinant of health, thus making its protection a public health responsibility. In addition, they offer a strong justification for working to overcome the ethical concerns associated with state-led intervention in the infosphere to protect public health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document