Health, its Determinants and Ethics - Assignment Example

Health, its Determinants and Ethics Health, its Determinants and Ethics Question One The term health has numerous definitions because different researchers define this word differently. The lack of a clear definition for the word indicates that health is wide; in addition, health may be defined in terms of population or individual health. There are three meanings for individual health; the first meaning of health that it is the state in which a person lacks diseases in the body. This definition is based on biomedical concepts, which also identify disease as the divergence from the norms of biology (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). However, some researchers argue that this definition is inefficient because they believe that some individuals may diverge from biological norms and be alright without being sick. The World Health Organization (WHO) came up with their definition to cover the gap that exists in the biomedical definition. The organization defines health as the status in which a person has completeness in the social, physical, and mental being. WHO formulated this definition of health in 1946 during the development of its constitution. Researchers argue that this definition is superior to the biomedical meaning because it considers the physical, social, and mental conditions of human beings (Gedge, & Waluchow, 2012). This definition also does not ignore the impact of the society on the health of individuals. However, the WHO meaning of health also has a weakness because scientists argue that it is impossible to achieve completeness in the social, physical, and mental being at the same time. The third definition of individual health is that of Health Canada, which states that health is a state in which people familiarize and respond to their daily activities (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). This description of health improves that of WHO because it does not require individuals to achieve completeness in physical, social, and mental condition. The fact that this definition is superior to that of WHO indicates that it is also superior to the biomedical description of health. The word health may also be defined in terms of the wellbeing of the whole population in the society rather than individuals only. The health of the population refers to the wellbeing of all individuals in the society as indicated by physical, social, and economic surroundings, health pointers, health services, and childhood development (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). This means that population health deals with the factors that affect the health of numerous individuals in the society at the same time. This interrelationship between the health of various individuals at the same time leads to the formation of health patterns in the society. The patterns of health that exist in the population enable policy makers to develop strategies that help to improve the overall wellbeing of the society by improving health services. Both population and individual health are influenced by various factors that include nutrition, water supply, education, family and friends, access to health, and the physical environment (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). A study of these factors may help policy makers to formulate strategies that improve the wellbeing of individuals and the society at large. Question Two The above factors that affect the health of the population and that of individuals are also known as the determinants of health. These determinants of health include social, physical, and individual factors. Levin’s and Lopez’s system approach classifies the determinants of health into three groups that include small-scale, large-scale, and medium-scale factors. The small scale determinants of health mainly include human biology and individual factors. Large-scale factors, on the other hand, include social and physical determinants of health; while medium-scale determinants are those that deal with the family and the community (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). This classification of determinants of health indicates that factors are grouped as either small or large-scale depending on their size. This is because the small scale factors deal only with individuals while the large-scale ones deal with the social and physical environments, which are larger than individuals. Levin’s and Lopez argue that the most essential determinants of health are individual and social factors (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). This is because these factors are produced and spread by the society. I agree that social or large-scale factors are the most significant determinants of health because they are more widespread than the other factors. The wide spread of these factors indicate that they determine the health of the society more than that of individuals. This is because when an individual, for example, suffers from a disease, the interaction between this individual with family and friends leads to the spread of the disease to these groups. These family members and friends, on the other hand, spread the disease to others who did not interact with the sick person. This in the end leads to a pattern in the health of the whole society, and the disease becomes a major concern to policy makers. Social factors are also the most essential because they are the ones that help policy makers to develop strategies that improve the health of the society (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). Social factors include the effect of family members and the society at large. For example, when an individual suffers from a disease, this may not capture the attention of researchers. However, when a disease becomes common in a society, researchers become interested in finding out its causes, symptoms, and cures. The research then leads to new policies that help to reduce the disease and improve the wellbeing of the society. Although social factors are the most essential, other factors should not be overlooked by researchers and policy makers when they are forming new regulations. For example, social factors would not be available if individual factors did not exist because the health of the society begins from the wellbeing of different individuals. The physical environment factors are also essential because human beings do not live in an environment that also affects their wellbeing. Even though health is determined by the above factors, another aspect of this field that may affect the health of individuals and the society is ethics, which refer to the conduct of health specialist that is considered to be acceptable. Question Three Ethical conduct in health is explained by different theories that include Aristotelian, utilitarian, Kantian, and feminist. The principle of utilitarianism is divided into two sub-theories that include act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism argues that the right actions are those that produce more positive than negative consequences on all the individuals who are affected by the proceeds (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). The positive consequences in this theory refer to the utility that individuals derive from actions. The strength of this theory is that it considers the consequences of actions to all affected parties. The limitation is that it is impossible to identify all the consequences that result from an act, and it is also hard to identify all the individuals who are affected by the act. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, argues that acceptable acts are those that are accepted universally and those that follow general rules and regulations. The limitation of this principle is that it may not lead to maximum utility because actions may follow rules, but not all individuals concur with those rules (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). Some individuals may not accept the rules that exist because they prefer different opinions from those of the law. The second theory that is known as deontological theory that was developed by Kant’s who argues that actions are moral depending on the reason why individuals undertake them. According to Kant’s, there are three groups of acts that include permissible, forbidden, and those that are required by duty. Kant’s argues that the moral acts that include the permissible and those required by duty are those that may become universally accepted, and they treat human beings as an end (Gedge, & Waluchow, 2012). The limitation of Kant’s theory is that it ignores the non-human environment, and it is rigid such that it does not allow lies even when they involve promises. The third theory that is the principle of virtue ethics that was developed by Aristotle argues that human beings should aim at becoming virtuous so that they can perform virtuous activities that are considered to be moral. The theorist believes that individuals become virtuous through learning and gaining experience through practice (Gedge, & Waluchow, 2012). The virtue characteristic is achieved by balancing feelings and emotions, and choosing actions that are in the middle of becoming deficient and excess. The limitation of this principle is that it does not clearly determine actions that are ethically right. The last theory that is the principle of feminism argues that moral acts are those that are friendly and caring. Feminists argue that the context in which actions take place is essential in determining whether it is ethical. This theory also argues that it is essential to be just when performing certain acts. The limitation of this principle is that actions may be unethical even when context is considered, and the theory is not clear as to what individuals ought to do in various situations for their actions to remain ethical (Gedge, & Wacluchow, 2012). Reference Gedge, E. A., & Waluchow, W. J. (2012). Readings in health care ethics. Peterborough: Broadview Press. Read More