Health Inequality in the UK and Uganda - Dissertation Example

Comparison of Health inequality in UK and Uganda Introduction Health inequality is a phenomenon that has a universal linkage but the severity is relative to different countries. The differences are normally within different social economic, political, ethnic and cultural stratification (Graham, 2009). Similarly, there is evidence that the higher the socio economic inequality among a group, the higher the health inequality. There are different causes for the inequalities and there is a distinction of problems by both developing and developed countries. In the same respect, the causes in Uganda and UK may differ. There is universal access to personal health among many nations of the world but there seems to be a link between the levels of income to the access to healthcare. The differentiations in both countries come in form of age, ethnicity, religion and the surrounding community (Tumushabe, 2006)). Further, many analysts argue that the low social and economic demographics in Africa, where Uganda falls explains the high level of inequality in that part of the world. In that regard, it is wise to argue that poverty stricken areas that have higher inequalities that boil down to the impact of HIV in Britain and Uganda and further explaining why the scourge is worse in Uganda than in Britain. One thing is evident; a fact that would be corroborated in the paper, that Uganda has a higher level of inequality in social, economic and political inequalities than Britain and the same is evidenced in manifestation of the scourge of not only HIV but also other diseases. HIV background The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a slowly reproducing retrovirus that is responsible for AIDS (Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome), a medical condition that threatens human immune system and leaves it vulnerable for all manner of opportunistic diseases. The virus is caused by transfer of blood from a sick person or exchange of semen, vaginal fluids and other bodily fluids involved during sexual intercourse (Stolley & Glass, 2009). One of the major pandemics of the 21st century, HIV has robbed the world of valuable human resource and left millions of orphans around the world, especially in developing nations. The burden caused by this pandemic has gone beyond affected nations to other countries with relatively low prevalence rates by having huge resources committed to fighting the disease abroad. One such program has been the Global Fund initiated by the United Nations where rich nations contribute into a common pool for a worldwide campaign on HIV-AIDS. Different countries have diverse tactics for fighting this virus with The UK choosing preventive measures by virtue of their advanced health system that allows for early detection. Uganda and other developing countries are more into curative measures because of their inferior systems and this is where The Global Fund comes in handy at subsidizing antiretroviral drugs among the infected population (Gilbert & Wright, 2003). HIV Overview HIV pandemic that has left pundits concerned with approaches that can be used to tackle it. It is estimated that there are 39 million people living with HIV. Sub-Saharan part of Africa is the most affected. 2 out of three of the people living with HIV come from that part of the world and that goes hand in with the poverty and of social economic position of that area. 2005 was the worst year with regard to the scourge since 2.8 million people died in that year (Adler, 2009). However, since then impact of the virus increased the subsequent years saw a steady stabilization of the effect of the virus globally. Despite the tremendous achievement that have been brought in that front, there is still some worrying trend among many pundits there is a strong correlation between the health of people and their socio economic status all over the world. In Britain, there is a steady increase in the life expectancy of people coupled with an increase in the improvement of the life of people; the improvement has been in regard to many great diseases like HIV/ AIDS, cancers and other minor diseases (Moatti, 2012). Experts have argued that for both Britain and Uganda there is a myriad of ways of gauging the existent inequalities in the life. Prevalence rates Approximately 7.2% of the Uganda population lives with HIV. Among that number children constitute 190,000. Worse still, 1.1 million children have faced the adverse task of being orphans due to AIDS. United Kingdom on the other hand has a lower number of 98,000 and a further 6,360 new cases were diagnosed in 2011 Between 1990 and 1998 the challenge of HIV prevalence rose and took a further rise after 1999 until 2005 that marked its peak at7, 824. However since that the end of that year, the rate fell but that preference to date has never fell short of what was encountered in 2001 (Hood, 2011). The introduction of antiretroviral in UK, like in other countries, reduced the deaths that occurred due to HIV/AIDS. Since 1998, the number of deaths has been steady a rate of between 400 and 600. Uganda on the other hand faced its lowest preference in 2006 at6.4%. However, new infections those stand at 150,000 annually. Children stand at 20,600 of the new infections reported. Life expectancy has risen to 55 years from 46 in 2000. The resultant impact has been out of quality access due to government initiative in fighting HIV/AIDS. The Ugandan government has steered its efforts towards abstinence. It is estimated that 39% of people living with HIV in Uganda fall between 15 to 24 years of age and have some facts about HIV. The same number has education but new infections still continuous to affect the population. There is an ocular indication that the sex education in Uganda is low. On the same note, women stand at a higher need to access sex education. The rate stands at 5.4% compared to 2.4%. Further, it is argued that Ugandan women tend to have early marriages due to their early experiences in engaging in early sex and that is early than the male counterpart (Tumushabe, 2006). On the same note, the females normally involve with older partners, compared to males. Women stand venerable due to effects of pressure, associated to poverty and low social integrations. There is a high level of stigma and discrimination. The discrimination and stigma is perpetuated from different corners; government, locals and family members. For example, Ugandan parliament recently passed laws that inhibit homosexuality and that has an adverse effect on the fight against HIV among the homosexuals, who might continue to engage in sexual activities despite the ban. In UK 35-49 years of age accounts for the highest number of those infected by HIV. The 25-34 age brackets followed. It is evident that in both Uganda and UK, the most affected age group, seemly corresponds. Nonetheless, discrimination and stigma is lower in UK. On the contrary, UK seems to have a higher percentage of people who have sex education on sexuality; something that is directly proportional to education aces in both countries. The level of access to sex education seems to correlate with the use of condom in both countries. For example, just as education level is higher in UK, so is the use of condoms which beats the Ugandan side; In Uganda, only13.7% reported to have used condoms. The trend is worrying, particularly because many men have more than sexual partners. Similarly, 43% of the new infections reported in 2012- 2013 arose from heterosexually married couples. In 2013 cognizant of the imminent danger the government encouraged use of condoms among those who have more than one partners but the reception encountered cultural rebuff. To many, the ideology propagated cheating in relationships. Stratification All over the world, persons that have higher social comic status seem to enjoy higher health status as well. In Britain and Uganda the same philosophy reigns and explains the reason why the inequalities between the two countries correlate to the health status of the people living in those countries (Bhopal, 2007). In England, for example has a higher access to health care compared to Uganda. The focus of this paper is interrogate the differentials that exist within these two countries with regard to social economic factors and compare the same with health status inequalities with a bias in HIV. Wealth is found to be a big player in attainment of healthy living but there appears to be other factors that come into play and subsequently affect the distribution of wealth in other countries. Access to proper health is directly proportional to income levels which are also affected by inequalities caused by other factors in the world. Many researchers who have dealt on the topic have found out that inferior health is a subject of other players like income levels, education levels, and occupation and is reflected in mortality rates al over the world. The analysis, done in comparison of population of both countries as well as within individual countries can attest to the argument presented above. On the same note, the correlation is also evident in inequality levels in the country. Literature that have delved on that subject underscore that upbringing of people have an impact in future physical and intellectual achievement of individuals and that has a role in health and is largely influenced by income levels of those people. On the same note, education can also be used to explain the same phenomenon. It is, for example argued that populations with higher education standards stand higher chance of making right decisions with regard to behavioral factors and that explain why they stand better chance of making better informed decisions with regard to diet, smoking, seeking medical attention a, health care, lifestyle, exercise and exercise; all which have a huge impact on health of people (Tumushabe, 2006). One thing that explains why there is lower inequality in health in England compared to Uganda is the universal health insurance that was introduced in the country following world war in 1948. Uganda on the other hand, there is not universal health insurance and that explains why the poor who cannot afford medical treatment and cover have more inequality in health care provision. In both countries-Uganda and United Kingdom, like it is the practice all over the world- there are numerous determinants of health care. Social structure, individual positions, intermediary factors and health outcomes are linked to both education system and labor. On the same note, individual scale positions are determined by sexuality, ethnicity, race, social economic position and gender. Intermediary factors play significant role and underpinned to the environment, behavior and health and social care. The ultimate outcome of the entire process rests in the health and the well being of the people. Despite numerous factors playing different roles, there is ocular disparity within counties and among different countries (Bhopal, 2007); something that is evident in both Uganda and United Kingdom. Health Inequality brings the link between poverty and ill health. It deviants the health among the best off and the worst off in the society. Further it draws line between the rich and the poor in any given society. The disparity is clearly ocular among different classes in society. In UK, for example black people are discriminated against more than the white and the same figure stands for health inequality as well as the prevalence rate in HIV and that pinpoints the direct and strong relationship. Mapping inequality has been the focus of many researchers in health matters in the recent times. Research works have drawn from data that reflect on the relationship of social economic inequalities in societies and the impact that it brings to the health sector; particularly access to proper medical attention. As it stand out today, empirical evidence suggest that Uganda, compared to UK, has more tendencies of discrimination that has reflected on quality of health care in that country, if what is experienced in the fight HIV/AIDS, is anything to go by. It is evidenced that socially excluded persons in the society have higher risks and have a difficult time in accessing timely and efficient health care. Numerous research works have dwelt on social position as the critical cause of healthy status. The argument is founded on the principal that the social status underscores the positioning of an individual in health matters and by extension access to the same (Moatti, 2012). The social status in this regard relate to different determinants that have a multidimensional effect. The resultant effect is that different variables in individuals are affected, for example: way of life, exposure to risk factors, diet and living conditions. Contemporary science calls for use of medicine to manage HIV and, by extension, AIDS. However, to tackle the challenges associated with HIV, there is need to have resources. The resource mobilization is directly related to socio economic positioning. It thus goes without saying that countries with higher social economic and political inequalities stand lower chances of tackling the HIV scourge. That fact is evident in the comparison of Uganda and UK. The social economic discrimination is higher in Uganda than it is in UK and that has a spiral effect in access to different tools that could keep HIV at bay. Early data indicated that the scourge is more prevalent in Uganda than in UK and that can be attributed to the higher inequality levels in Uganda. There is correlation among social structure, health and the well being of persons. Education impacts on people’s health, for example. Proper education stands out as being pivotal in preventing new HIV infections and managing the existing cases. Good economic status enables access to healthcare, something critical in fight ageing HIV. For both education and economic status, UK is above Uganda and that has an influence in the preference rates and new infections in both countries (Bhopal, 2007). There is cultural discrimination in Uganda and women are the big victims. The culture in Uganda is repressive to the women and that has taken a toll in the prevalence arte amongst women, who stand at higher risks. It is for example evident that Ugandan women are 78% vulnerable to contact HIV compared to 22% in UK. The above figure can be attributed to repressive culture and inequalities in the society that have a direct influence in health care access. Similarly women in Uganda have lower economic status and that has delivered a higher number of them to prostitution; an avenue for contacting HIV. In UK there has been a steady decline in inequalities with regard to socioeconomic positioning and that has a direct relationship to the decline in the rate of HIV prevalence (Moatti, 2012). In developing countries like Uganda, for example, the accelerated access to heath care explains the improvement to health and that does not fully depend on improved income levels. Poverty that arises from high inequalities increases the likelihood of exposure to negative influences. For example, that may increase the likelihood of increase to infectious disease agents, poor sanitation and housing, lack of shelter, challenge in dealing with agents that exposure to infectious diseases and other illnesses, among other things. Further, there is proof that obesity, underweight, smoking, high blood pressure and sexual behavior play a role in morbidity and mortality. The existence of such inequalities underscores the differential experiences that may be experienced in different parts and indeed between UK and Uganda. In UK health inequality comes in form of socio economic factors while in Uganda inequalities reflect the inability of the health systems to enable services reach the poor at the lower cadre. Despite Uganda having communicable diseases as being the main disease burden, rate of other non communicable diseases like cancer and heart problems is increasing with time. Uganda has a 435 out of 1000,000 mortality rate. Conclusion Uganda as a country further elaborates the essence of health inequality and its association to other structural inequalities in the society. In Northern part of the country the Human poverty index stood at 45.7 in 2012, whereas the country as a whole had an index of 39. Similarly, the scourge of HIV stood higher in the discriminated area. In conclusion, it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that a higher health inequality is directly proportional to other structural inequities in society; case between United Kingdom and Uganda has clearly shown that. Bibliography Adler, N. E. (2009). Socioeconomic status and health in industrial nations: social, psychological, and biological pathways. New York: New York Academy of Science. Bhopal, R. S. (2007). Ethnicity, race, and health in multicultural societies: foundations for better epidemiology, public health and health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Birn, A., & Pillay, Y. (2009). Textbook of international health global health in a dynamic world (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. GILBERT, D. J., & WRIGHT, E. M. (2003). African American women and HIV/AIDS: critical responses. Westport, Conn, Praeger. Graham, H. (2007). Unequal lives health and socioeconomic inequalities. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Graham, H. (2009). Understanding health inequalities (2nd ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill :. Hood, J. (2011). HIV. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis. Moatti, J. (2012). AIDS in Europe new challenges for the social sciences. London: Routledge. STOLLEY, K. S., & GLASS, J. E. (2009). HIV/AIDS. Santa Barbara, Calif, Greenwood Press. Tumushabe, J. (2006). The politics of HIV / AIDS in Uganda. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. ESSAY PLAN In completing this essay, there was need to properly understand how HIV affects the human system before proceeding to understand how Uganda and the UK are separately tackling the pandemic. So I began by reviewing the various literatures on HIV and its effects on the human system to gain a scientific insight before placing these effects in the context of the two countries. The following is therefore an outline of how I planned this essay: Introduce the concept and it it in perspective by discussing HIV in the context of the two countries (UK and Uganda). Do a background analysis of HIV, its causes, infection process and burden on the global economy. Look at the Prevalence rates in the two counties Discus HIV’ stratification and put this in context Conclude after looking at all the above areas to draw clear parallels between HIV in the UK and Uganda. Read More