Impact Of Social, Environmental, And Behavioral Factors On Health In Lower Socioeconomic Groups In Australia

Impact of social, environmental, and behavioral factors on health in lower socioeconomic groups

Discuss about the Social Gradients in Health of Indigenous.

Heart is one of the important organ in the body. It act as a pump and is made of four chambers which are distinguished by values, further divided into two halves. The term used to display the malfunction of heart is often termed as cardiac or heart disease. The major factors which have significant effect on heart disease are lack of physical activity, intake of tobacco, hypertension, high diet food, diabetes and obesity (Baum & Fisher, 2014). This paper will explain the impact of various social, environmental and behavioural factors on health of a particular group. As per the report of Australian Institute of Health and Welfare it is revealed that behavioural risk factors from the emergence of heart disease is more prone to the people of lower socio economic group as they lack both in monetary terms and social well-being.

Towards the end, it addresses the determinants of social gradient of health in the context of various public health intervention such as government, fitness and sporting group etc.

The individuals of lower socioeconomic status living in Australia are at superior risk of cardiovascular disease prevailing in that area. It has been renowned for the factors of mortality from coronary heart disease which prevails both in men and women (Kreatsoulas & Anand, 2018). The average rate of blood pressure has been declining at subsequent level of educational accomplishment.  The survey of behavioural data, blood pressure, physical measurement and lipid determination collected in 1980 states that average blood pressure flows in opposition direction to the level of education achievement (James, Banay, Hart & Laden, 2015). The rate of illness and death is higher in this group because of unhealthy working conditions, cultural influences, social mobility, attitudes and belief’s, knowledge, non-access to health care services and growing interactive risk factors etc.

Social determinants are highlighted as “root cause of causes” i.e. the preliminary determinant which have fundamental influence on overall health determinants.

Some of the risk factors such as behavioural and biomedical are significantly related to status prevailing in socio economic group. The contrary gradient among cardiovascular mortality and socio economic positioning is the outcome of unequal distribution (Berkman, Kawachi & Glymour, 2014). The observation of socio economic differentiation is important for the prevention and development of operational cost and competing strategies. The activities such as smoking, drinking of alcohol and consumption of unhealthy diet have major impact on the heath. Some other social determinants include education, income, employment conditions, power in addition to social support. The former is of immense value because of the relative persuasive and underlying effects.

Social gradient of health and determinants

Nearly about 20% of lower socio economic group living in Australia were having 1.6 times higher sufferings from least two chronic disease in 2014-15 (World Health Organization, 2014).

The life expectancy rate is 3 year less than compared to people with higher socio economic group in 2009-11.

In the event of constant death rate between groups, the overall rate of mortality is anticipated to minimize by 13% (Kaukonen, Bailey, Suzuki, Pilcher & Bellomo, 2014).

30% of women is likely to have lower birth weight of the baby because of lower social economic status.

As per the AIHW analysis of ABS 2012, Survey report states the unemployment rate due to disability is higher up to 26% in lower socioeconomic areas.

In 2012, it was analysed that dependent children were 3.6 times more exposed towards tobacco intake and smoking in slum areas (Massey & Parr, 2012).

However, people proportionally spend less on health and medical care in households of low economic resource, respectively in 2009-10.

The number of unemployed individuals are more inclined to higher degree of illness and risk of death in comparison with the employed ones. The amount of psychological stress have more influence on mental and physical health and well-being. It also indoctrinates the stress of financial problems, as a result loose of morale and confidence shorten. The rate of unemployment is higher in lower socio economic group because of few or nil qualification in addition to skills needed (Clifford, Doran & Tsey, 2013). People suffering from disabilities or binded with responsibilities are also left unemployed which have adverse effect upon health. The key dimension of work for the employed individuals include job control, definite working hours, demands as well as conditions which is not the case with the former. Unemployed individuals are not able to participate in qualitative work which is health protective. Moreover instilling of self-esteem and an optimistic sense of identity is not realised which provides an opportunity for personal development and social interaction.

The evidence suggest that proportion of health and illness is not uniform within Australian population. In each society down the social ladder, shorter is the life expectancy. Health is affected throughout life by the poor economic and social circumstances. The social gradient factor runs around the society in the midst of lower rank staff and office workers. The combination of various psychosocial and material causes contribute to the depth of these differences (Carrington, Jianghong & Zubrick, 2012).  It may include having insecure employment, adolescence poorer education, minimum family asset, poor housing and retirement pension in inadequate manner. Howsoever, welfare policies should not only provide safety nets nevertheless also act as springboards to counterbalance earlier shortcomings. Ahead, good health includes following outcomes on the major basis such as condensed vagueness, improved standards of housing in addition to reduced level of unemployment and education failure.  Societal measures should enable every citizen to play a prominent role in economic, social, and cultural life which leads to minimisation of insecurity, deprivation and exclusion.

Risk factors and their relation to socio-economic status

Higher the rate of unemployment, the more is the degree prevalence of premature death and illness. The health of unemployed individuals are allied to the flow of psychological consequences and the major reflection of debt as financial problem. The anxiety is showcased as detrimental to the health of a person. The insecurity of employment leaves a major impact on mental health specifically depression, anxiety, heart disease and numerous other risk factors. Apparently, every insecure or unsatisfactory job may also be sub categorised under unemployment.  The quality of job also have an authoritative consideration to be valued (Allen, Balfour, Bell, & Marmot, 2014).

The prevailing rate of unemployment among socio economic group have major repercussion on financial sector as well i.e. that is individual’s background is not financially sound proof. In day to day dealings, this group faces a lot of monetary issues and crisis. The source of income are limited in nature and expenditure goes on increasing. Hence, it creates issues in the maintenance of definite proportion between both. In this regard, individuals of the former domain also experiences social excursion and racism. People are not treated in a fair and justified way in cultural economies which inculcates the feelings of left out or deprivation within the group (Collins, 2013).  These practices prevent people from contributing in training or education and in acquisition to various other citizenship activities and services. The damages are socially and psychologically which is material in nature. The variants of social exclusion and poverty increases the risk of separation and divorce, illness, disability, social isolation and addiction materialising vicious circle that excavate the dilemma of people face (Everingham, 2018).

Conclusion and recommendation

As life is of indefinite prominence, the decision makers and actors of public health need to address the social determinants of health which leads to lower life expectancy. The disparity of ill health and shorter lives among lower socio economic group should be eliminated by formulation of policies. The awareness in this context should be raised and timely assessment is required by regulatory authorities. More broadly, the trend needs to provide an informed basis for the development of future policy.

Policies should be laid down to prevent the job insecurity in the mind-set of people regarding unemployment. Exertions on the reduced hardship sufferings from unemployment as well as restoring individuals to the secured jobs. The management should be focused upon the minimization of highs besides lows of business cycle. The working hours should be flexible and limited so that it yield extreme satisfaction. In order to equip people towards employment, attractive retraining and high standards of education should be laid down. Setting a sophisticated share of wages for the unemployed group is likely to reveal the protective effect in long run. Establishment of the credit union may prove as a boon in reduction of financial crisis or debt and increased amount of social network.

References

Allen, J., Balfour, R., Bell, R., & Marmot, M. (2014). Social determinants of mental health. International Review of Psychiatry, 26(4), 392-407.

Baum, F., & Fisher, M. (2014). Why behavioural health promotion endures despite its failure to reduce health inequities. Sociology of health & illness, 36(2), 213-225.

Berkman, L. F., Kawachi, I., & Glymour, M. M. (Eds.). (2014). Social epidemiology. Oxford University Press.

Carrington, C.J., Jianghong, Li. & Zubrick, S.R. (2012). Social Gradients in the Health of Indigenous Australians. Retrieved March 16, 2018 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3490556/

Clifford, A. C., Doran, C. M., & Tsey, K. (2013). A systematic review of suicide prevention interventions targeting indigenous peoples in Australia, United States, Canada and New Zealand. BMC public health, 13(1), 463.

Collins, J. (2013). Multiculturalism and immigrant integration in Australia. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 45(3), 133-149.

Everingham, C. (2018). Social justice and the politics of community. Routledge.

James, P., Banay, R. F., Hart, J. E., & Laden, F. (2015). A review of the health benefits of greenness. Current epidemiology reports, 2(2), 131-142.

Kaukonen, K. M., Bailey, M., Suzuki, S., Pilcher, D., & Bellomo, R. (2014). Mortality related to severe sepsis and septic shock among critically ill patients in Australia and New Zealand, 2000-2012. Jama, 311(13), 1308-1316.

Kreatsoulas, C. & Anand, S. (2018). The impact of social determinants on cardiovascular disease. Retrieved March 16, 2018 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2949987/

Massey, S.L.J. & Parr, N. (2012). The socio-economic status of migrant populations in regional and rural Australia and its implications for future population policy. Retrieved March 16, 2018 from https://www.researchonline.mq.edu.au/vital/access/services/Download/mq:17408/DS01?view=true

World Health Organization, & World Health Organization. Management of Substance Abuse Unit. (2014). Global status report on alcohol and health, 2014. World Health Organization.