The Comparison of Canterbury and Thanet's Health Profiles - Case Study Example

Health Inequalities in Canterbury and Thanet The difference between the facilities and distribution of health between different populations groups refer as health inequalities between them. They are said to be inequitably when the facilities are not fair or might be avoidable. It is necessary for the people to analyse the available health status of different areas to ensure the health services and to live a happy life (Lenard et al., 2012). There are two options available for the newly married couple. Two options available to them are Canterbury or Thanet. They have to choose one of them while focusing on the matter that they both along with the unborn children could live a happy health and good life. For the selection it is necessary to analyse the health profile of both the areas so that a clear picture appears in the mind before the selection. Summary on Canterbury Health Profile The health of the people of Canterbury is good on an average. The population of the area is 153,000 in 2012. 17.7% of the children are poor but the estimated life for men is higher than England. In most underprivileged areas the expectation of the life for men is below 7 years and 6.5 years for women. The stay in hospitals for under 18 because of alcohol was 57.8%. The use of smoking and breastfeeding are not better as compared to the average of England (apho.org.uk, 2013). Life expectancy for men and women could be determined with the help of the chart. Above chart shows the life expectancy of men and women for the period 2010-2012. Both of the charts are categorized in most deprived and least deprived area. The slope of the charts shows that the gap of life expectancy in the local area is 7 years for men and 6.5 years for women. If the basic facilities would be fully provided to the people the line would be horizontal. On the representation of the chart it could be conclude that the life expectancy with respect to deprivation is good at an average for men and women (apho.org.uk, 2013). The deaths in Canterbury could be explained through the following charts. Mortality could be analysed through the charts below: The charts show the changes in the death rates of the people having an age below 75 years. The data is on the basis of midpoint such as 3004 represents the range of 2003-2005. The causes of the death are different and the chart represents all the causes of death. Men and women causes and changes in rate are different so the charts are drawn separately. Mortality of men and women could be analysed through the charts (apho.org.uk, 2013). The causes of early death for men and women are different. Men cause to death because of heart disease and strokes. The deaths cause of women is due to cancer. The deaths causes are common in men and women respectively. Through the data a picture is cleared about the health profile of Canterbury. Now there is a need to observe the profile of Thanet. Summary on Thanet Health Profile The health of people living in Thanet is not good as compared to the average of England. Scarcity is higher in the area than the average. 27.4% people children are poor. Life expectancy is lower in the area. The expectation of life is 9.4 years for men and 7.5 years for women in most of the underprivileged areas of Thanet. At the time of delivery smoking and breastfeeding are worst than the average of England (apho.org.uk, 2013). The gap of Life expectancy for men living in deprived areas is 9.4 years. The gap of life expectancy of women is 7.5 years. This shows that the life expectancy is not good in Thanet. The gap of expectancy could be expressed through mortality in that area as shown in the charts below: The chart represents the early deaths of men and women in Thanet. Two charts represent the early death ratio of men and women respectively. The data is representing the early deaths in Thanet that caused due to different reasons (apho.org.uk, 2013). Early deaths may occur due to different reasons. Common reason for the early death of men is the heart disease and stroke. The cause of early death of women is due to cancer. Recommendation The life expectancy in both areas is not high but on comparison it could be observed that Canterbury is the better place from Thanet. The deaths occurred in Canterbury during 2010-2012 are lower than in Thanet with respect to its population (Yates, 2001). The life expectancy is longer in Canterbury as compared to Thanet. The causes for the death of men and women are similar in both the areas but on comparison Canterbury has more control over these diseases (Edgecombe & Bowden, 2013; Mitchell & Karr, 2014). Mortality statistics shows that the deaths are lower in Canterbury as compared to Thanet. It could be concluded that the Canterbury is much better place to live as compared to Thanet. The article proved that neo-liberal social and educational policies are affecting the people of Thanet. There is something wrong with the policies that the people could not derive benefits from it. The policies are not good for the underprivileged areas. It is further observed that the policies affect the secondary schools in the district. The position of Thanet is not good for the children as it does not provide basic necessities of health and education to them. Inequality emerges out from the writings that new policies of health and education are creating discrimination of groups. Deprived groups are in the disadvantageous position due to inequality and social injustice. There is need of fair system of social justice that reflects the concept of equality in sense. There should be policies that are beneficial for all the people living in the society (Parsons & Welsh, 2006). The writing of author has supported the option that Thanet is not a good place for healthy and happy family. Furthermore, the education policies are not equal for all the groups. The observation could be made if someone visits to the consultants and review health facilities over there. There are the people who are engaged in providing best health facilities to the people living in the society. There is a need to focus on them (Haber, 2014). Objectives and performance could be judge when the health care centres facilities are fully analysed by the people living in that society. There is a requirement that everyone should go to the medical health care centres in order to seek out the things that they are liable to do. The work is to be done by the health authorities and they should improve the health system of different areas (Hyman, 1982). There is a strong relationship between income inequality and health facilities. It is observed that people belonging to high class enjoy health facilities more than the lower class people. There should be a system that is available and equitable to all (Weston, 2008). The children of rich people study in good schools but the poor children go to ordinary schools. The discrimination should be eliminated in order to make the equality for all. Unfortunately, the task is difficult and it is observed in the past that the policies give more advantages for the people who belong to high-class society (Anderson, 1862). The incomes of middle class people do not allow them to live a happy life with their families. They are unable to enjoy the facilities of healthcare and education that other children have. Canterbury is the place that eliminates the difference regarding the health and education of the children. Health related all the groups at high level enjoy policies. Health system of the Canterbury is one of the best systems all over UK (Higgs et al., 2014). Health system of Canterbury provides facilities to the aged people as well. Since it has the policies that are crucial for the aged people so it covers the area of old age people. The place is also beneficial for the people having age above fifty years. The authorities of the place make different plans and strategies in order to encourage old age people to live a happy life. It provides plans of old age benefits with the facilities of health. The statistics in the health profile explains the importance for the old age people at this place (Dening & Milne, 2011; Milligan & Conradson, 2011). Ethnicity and health have relationship with each other. The writing in the article reflects the association. The writer has focus on the fact that elimination of health disparities are depending on ethnicity and race. Authorities are engaged in eliminating the ethnicity while focusing on the health of the people in the particular society. The health program should be beneficial for all the persons living in the society. The discrimination of ethnicity is not good for the society. Health system should be favourable to all the groups of people living in the society (Eisenhower et al., 2014). Conclusion Canterbury is the best place for living a happy and healthy life. The facilities are available for children and aged people. Life expectancy is good enough. There is a need of improvement in some areas but overall Canterbury has various facilities of health and education (Maeder & Martin-Sanchez, 2012). Future expectations could be derived on selecting Canterbury. In comparison with Thanet there is a need of much improvement in the health department. Thanet has more deprived areas that need to develop the precautions to avoid different diseases. For a family the place that has more disease is more dangerous. The choice is made on the statistics of conditions of both the areas so to make a viable decision on the facts. List of References Anderson, W., 1862. The Scottish Nation: Or, The Surnames, Families, Literature, Honours, and Biographical History of the People of Scotland, Part 4. New York: A. Fullarton & Company. apho.org.uk, 2013. Public Health England. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 5 February 2015]. Dening, T. & Milne, A., 2011. Mental Health and Care Homes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edgecombe, K. & Bowden, M., 2013. Clinical Learning and Teaching Innovations in Nursing: Dedicated Education Units Building a Better Future. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media. Eisenhower, A., Suyemoto, K., Lucchese, F. & Canenguez, K., 2014. 'Which Box Should I Check?': Examining Standard Check Box Approaches to Measuring Race and Ethnicity. Health Services Research, 49(3), pp.1034-55. Haber, D., 2014. Health Care for an Aging Society: Cost-Conscious Community Care and Self-Care Approaches. London: Taylor & Francis. Higgs, J. et al., 2014. Health Practice Relationships. New York: Springer. Hyman, H.H., 1982. Health Planning: A Systematic Approach. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Lenard, Tamara, P. & Straehle, C., 2012. Health Inequalities and Global Justice. illustrated ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Maeder, A.J. & Martin-Sanchez, F.J., 2012. Health Informatics: Building a Healthcare Future Through Trusted Information: Selected Papers from the 20th Australian National Health Informatics Conference (HIC 2012). Amsterdam: IOS Press. Milligan, C. & Conradson, D., 2011. Landscapes of Voluntarism: New Spaces of Health, Welfare and Governance. New York: Policy Press. Mitchell, D. & Karr, V., 2014. Crises, Conflict and Disability: Ensuring Equality. New York: Routledge. Parsons, C. & Welsh, P.J., 2006. Public sector policies and practice, neo‐liberal consumerism and freedom of choice in secondary education: a case study of one area in Kent. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), pp.237-56. Weston, D., 2008. Infection Prevention and Control: Theory and Practice for Healthcare Professionals. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Yates, N., 2001. Kent in the Twentieth Century. Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer. Read More