scholarly journals Social Inequities Highlighted by the Prolonged Pandemic: Expanding Sick Leave

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-163
Author(s):  
Beth Rauhaus ◽  
Andrew Johnson

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of federal responses have been enacted in the United States to address the public health crisis, as well as the economic fallout and inequalities caused by the pandemic. A key feature globally in fighting the pandemic has been paid sick leave, as other nations have been successful in flattening the curve of infections by enacting emergency paid sick leave. This work explores best practices globally of paid sick leave used during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the theoretical framework of punctuated equilibrium, this work spotlights the increased need to address paid sick leave in the United States. This work contributes further to understanding how policymaking in a federal system of government occurs during times of crisis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veerajalandhar Allareddy ◽  
Sankeerth Rampa ◽  
Veerasathpurush Allareddy

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Balidemaj

Abstract Background The opioid epidemic in the United States is a national public health crisis. Driven by an increase in availability of pharmaceutical opioids and by an increase in their consumption, specifically, for pain treatment, more so in the past twenty years, it has led to an economic cost of prescription opioid abuse, overdose, and dependence in the United States estimated to be 78.5 billion USD. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and evaluate public health strategies that contribute towards combatting the opioid crisis. Methods Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, a search was conducted of the PubMed database for articles in English language that analyzed the most effective ways to regulate health markets to decrease the opioid crisis in the United States. Results The initial search yielded 2397 titles, of which 15 full-text articles were ultimately selected for inclusion in this systematic review. The review identified four categories in overcoming this epidemic nationwide, including required improvement in patient utilization of and access to safe and effective treatment options for opioid abuse and overdose, addressing the stigma correlated with opioid use, considering appropriate use of abuse deterrent formulations (ADF) along with patient education, and improving prescribing practices via utilization of drug monitoring programs, CDC opioid prescribing guidelines and provider continuing education. Conclusions Attempts to combat the opioid epidemic have been made, and the state and federal governments have only recently started to understand the magnitude of the seriousness of this public health crisis. While the methods with promising improvement of the situation have been identified, implementing them has shown to be a challenge. Continued application is needed, while considering possible new steps that could help reinforce their utilization further. Key messages Attempts to combat the opioid epidemic have been made, and the state and federal governments have only recently started to understand the magnitude of the seriousness of this public health crisis. The methods with promising improvement of the opioid crisis situation have been identified, however utilizing and implementing the existing public health strategies has shown to be a challenge.


2021 ◽  
pp. e1-e7
Author(s):  
William Riley ◽  
Kailey Love ◽  
Jeffrey McCullough

The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated an acute blood shortage for medical transfusions, exacerbating an already tenuous blood supply system in the United States, contributing to the public health crisis, and raising deeper questions regarding emergency preparedness planning for ensuring blood availability. However, these issues around blood availability during the pandemic are related primarily to the decline in supply caused by reduced donations during the pandemic rather than increased demand for transfusion of patients with COVID-19. The challenges to ensure a safe blood supply during the pandemic will continue until a vaccine is developed, effective treatments are available, or the virus goes away. If this virus or a similar virus were capable of transmission through blood, it would have a catastrophic impact on the health care system, causing a future public health emergency that would jeopardize the national blood supply. In this article, we identify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood supply adequacy, discuss the public health implications, propose recovery strategies, and present recommendations for preparing for the next disruption in blood supply driven by a public health emergency. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print March 18, 2021: e1–e7. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306157 )


Author(s):  
Hannah Walker ◽  
Loren Collingwood ◽  
Tehama Lopez Bunyasi

Abstract In the United States, Blacks overwhelmingly bear the brunt of gun violence. While Blacks are more likely to favor gun restrictions than are Whites, the influence of Black gun death on Whites’ attitudes about gun control has not been investigated. We advance a theory to explain White response to Black firearm fatalities: Black gun death is explicitly and implicitly racialized in the public discourse and imagination. The roots of the gun control debate are themselves likewise racialized, and portrayals of Black gun death has the potential to tap latent racial biases among Whites. As a consequence, exposure to routinized Black gun death either fails to move White opinion, or moves Whites to greater support for gun rights. The influence of race on White public opinion is particularly concerning in an era when health officials consider gun death a public health crisis. First, we evaluate this theory with a regression discontinuity (RDD) analysis of the effects of a highly salient gun death of a young Black boy in Chicago on Whites’ opinions about gun control. Relative to White people interviewed before the death, White people interviewed after the death record greater opposition to gun control. Second, we fielded a survey experiment, exposing respondents to the reported gun homicide of either Black or White thirteen-year-old boys. Relative to a control, respondents in the Black death condition are unmoved, whereas respondents in the White death condition report greater levels of support for gun control. Implications are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilliann Paine ◽  
Patanjali de la Rocha ◽  
Antonia P. Eyssallenne ◽  
Courtni Alexis Andrews ◽  
Leanne Loo ◽  
...  

Declaring racism a public health crisis has the potential to shepherd meaningful anti-racism policy forward and bridge long standing divisions between policy-makers, community organizers, healers, and public health practitioners. At their best, the declarations are a first step to address long standing inaction in the face of need. At their worst, the declarations poison or sedate grassroots momentum toward anti-racism structural change by delivering politicians unearned publicity and slowing progress on health equity. Declaring racism as a public health crisis is a tool that must be used with clarity and caution in order to maximize impact. Key to holding public institutions accountable for creating declarations is the direct involvement of Black and Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) led groups and organizers. Sharing power, centering their voices and working in tandem, these collaborations ensure that declarations push for change from the lens of those most impacted and authentically engage with the demands of communities and their legacies. Superficial diversity and inclusion efforts that bring BIPOC people and organizers into the conversation and then fail to implement their ideas repeat historical patterns of harm, stall momentum for structural change at best, and poison the strategy at worst. In this paper we will examine three declarations in the United States and analyze them utilizing evaluative criteria aligned with health equity and anti-racism practices. Finally, we offer recommendations to inform anti-racist public health work for meaningful systematic change toward decentralization and empowerment of communities in their health futures.


2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Guevremont ◽  
Mark Barnes ◽  
Claudia E. Haupt

The scope and severity of the opioid epidemic in the United States has prompted significant legislative intrusion into the patient-physician relationship. These proscriptive regulatory regimes mirror earlier legislation in other politically-charged domains like abortion and gun regulation. We draw on lessons from those contexts to argue that states should consider integrating their responses to the epidemic with existing medical regulatory structures, making physicians partners rather than adversaries in addressing this public health crisis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 239920261984763
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Fudin ◽  
Amelia L Persico ◽  
Jeffrey J Bettinger ◽  
Erica L Wegrzyn

Over the past decade, opioid use has been at the forefront of a public health crisis throughout the United States. In response to the tremendous negative societal, personal, and economic impacts that the growing opioid crisis has caused, several governmental agencies began to respond. These efforts include declaration of a nationwide public health emergency, increased public health surveillance of the epidemic, research support for pain and addiction, and increased access to overdose-reversing drugs such as naloxone. Naloxone access, in particular, has become a priority. In the United States, pharmacists have had the opportunity to play a crucial role in promoting access to naloxone. Since initial approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1971 as an antidote to opioid agonist overdose, naloxone access has evolved significantly. Today many states have authorized standing orders for naloxone, allowing it to be dispensed by pharmacists without a patient-specific prescription, and all 50 states and the District of Columbia allow medical providers to prescribe take-home naloxone to at-risk patients. While the opioid epidemic itself remains a contentious topic of political, ethical, and medical debate, it is widely acknowledged that mitigation strategies that could lessen morbidity and mortality are essential. Improved access to naloxone is one such strategy which remains at the forefront during this public health crisis.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1269473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Szymon Jarosławski ◽  
Chiraz Azaiez ◽  
Daria Korchagina ◽  
Mondher Toumi

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document