Suchergebnisse

peer-reviewed ; Background Identifying ethnic inequalities in health requires data with sufficiently 'granular' (fine detailed) classifications of ethnicity to capture sub-group variation in healthcare use, risk factors and health behaviors. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), in the USA, commissioned us to explore granular approaches to ethnicity data collection outside of the USA, commencing with the European Union. Methods We examined official data sources (population censuses/registers) within the EU-28 to determine the granularity of their approach to ethnicity. When ethnic information was not available, related variables were sought (e.g. country of birth). Results Within the EU-28, we found 55% of countries collected data on ethnicity. However, only 26% of these countries (England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Republic of Ireland, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) had a granular approach, with half of these being within the UK. Estonia, Lithuania, Croatia, Bulgaria, Republic of Cyprus and Slovenia collected one to six categories. A 'write-in' option only was found in Latvia, Romania and the Czech Republic. Forty-five percent of countries did not collect ethnicity data but collected other related variables. Conclusions (i) Although there is reasonable attention to the diversity of ethnic groups in data collection, a granular approach does not predominate within EU-28 classifications. (ii) Where ethnicity is collected, it is conceptualized in different ways and diverse terminology is used. (iii) A write-in option provides the most granular approach. (iv) Almost half of the countries did not collect data on ethnicity, but did collect related variables that could be used as a proxy.

Abstract Background The rights of undocumented migrants are frequently overlooked. Denmark has ratified several international conventions recognizing the right to health care for all human beings, but has very scanty legislation and no existing policies for providing health care to undocumented migrants. This study focuses on how health professionals navigate and how they experience providing treatment for undocumented migrants in the Danish health care system. Methods The study was carried out as part of an EU-project on European Best Practices in Access, Quality and Appropriateness of Health Services for Immigrants in Europe (EUGATE). This presentation is based on 12 semi-structured interviews with general practitioners (9) and emergency room physicians (3) in Denmark. Results The emergency room physicians express that treatment of undocumented migrants is no different from the treatment of any other person. However, care may become more complicated due to lack of previous medical records and contact persons. Contrary to this, general practitioners explain that undocumented migrants will encounter formal barriers when trying to obtain treatment. Additional problems in the treatment of undocumented migrants include language issues, financial aspects for general practitioners, concerns about how to handle the situation including possibilities of further referrals, and an uncertainty as to whether to involve the police. Conclusions The health professionals in our study describe that undocumented migrants experience an unequal access to primary care facilities and that great uncertainties exist amongst health professionals as how to respond in such situations. The lack of official policies concerning the right to health care for undocumented migrants continue to pass on the responsibility to health professionals and, thereby, leaves it up to the individual to decide whether treatment can be obtained or not.

Welfare states around the world restrict access to public healthcare for some migrant groups. Formal restrictions on migrants' healthcare access are often justified with economic arguments; for example, as a means to prevent excess costs and safeguard scarce resources. However, existing studies on the economics of migrant health policies suggest that restrictive policies increase rather than decrease costs. This evidence has largely been ignored in migration debates. Amplifying the relationship between welfare state transformations and the production of inequalities, the Covid-19 pandemic may fuel exclusionary rhetoric and politics; or it may serve as an impetus to reconsider the costs that one group's exclusion from health can entail for all members of society. The public health community has a responsibility to promote evidence-informed health policies that are ethically and economically sound, and to counter anti-migrant and racial discrimination (whether overt or masked with economic reasoning). Toward this end, we propose a research agenda which includes 1) the generation of a comprehensive body of evidence on economic aspects of migrant health policies, 2) the clarification of the role of economic arguments in migration debates, 3) (self-)critical reflection on the ethics and politics of the production of economic evidence, 4) the introduction of evidence into migrant health policymaking processes, and 5) the endorsement of inter- and transdisciplinary approaches. With the Covid-19 pandemic and surrounding events rendering the suggested research agenda more topical than ever, we invite individuals and groups to join forces toward a (self-)critical examination of economic arguments in migration and health, and in public health generally.

A new introduction to a timeless dynamic: how the movement of humans affects health everywhere. International migrants compose more than three percent of the world's population, and internal migrants—those migrating within countries—are more than triple that number. Population migration has long been, and remains today, one of the central demographic shifts shaping the world around us. The world's history—and its health—is shaped and colored by stories of migration patterns, the policies and political events that drive these movements, and narratives of individual migrants. Migration and Health offers the most expansive framework to date for understanding and reckoning with human migration's implications for public health and its determinants. It interrogates this complex relationship by considering not only the welfare of migrants, but also that of the source, destination, and ensuing-generation populations. The result is an elevated, interdisciplinary resource for understanding what is known—and the considerable territory of what is not known—at an intersection that promises to grow in importance and influence as the century unfolds