Author:
Orr Zvika,Jackson Levi,Alpert Evan Avraham,Fleming Mark D.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Medical neutrality is a normative arrangement that differentiates a zone of medical treatment disconnected from the field of politics. While medical neutrality aims to ensure impartial healthcare for all and to shield the healthcare personnel from political demands, it can also divert attention away from conflicts and their effects on health inequity. This article analyzes how healthcare professionals understand and negotiate the depoliticized space of the emergency department (ED) through their views on neutrality. It also examines how medical staff use depoliticized concepts of culture to account for differences in the health status of patients from disadvantaged groups. These questions are examined in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Methods
Twenty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare personnel in a Jerusalem hospital’s ED. All but one of the participants were Jewish. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and Grounded Theory.
Results
The ED staff endorsed the perspective of medical neutrality as a nondiscriminatory approach to care. At the same time, some medical staff recognized the limits of medical neutrality in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and negotiated and challenged this concept. While participants identified unique health risks for Arab patients, they usually did not associate these risks with the effects of conflict and instead explained them in depoliticized terms of cultural and behavioral differences. Culture served as a non-controversial way of acknowledging and managing problems that have their roots in politics.
Conclusions
The normative demand for neutrality works to exclude discussion of the conflict from clinical spaces. The normative exclusion of politics is a vital but under-appreciated aspect of how political conflict operates as a structural determinant of health. Healthcare personnel, especially in the ED, should be trained in structural competency. This training may challenge the neglect of issues that need to be solved at the political level and enhance health equity, social justice, and solidarity.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy
Reference72 articles.
1. Redfield P. Clinic in crisis response: imagined immunities. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2016;40(2):263–7.
2. Orr Z, Unger S. Structural competency in conflict zones: challenging depoliticization in Israel. Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2020;21(4):202–12.
3. Redfield P. The impossible problem of neutrality. In: Bornstein E, Redfield P, editors. Forces of compassion: humanitarianism between ethics and politics. Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press; 2011. p. 53–70.
4. Gordon DR. Tenacious assumptions in Western medicine. In: Lock M, Gordon D, editors. Biomedicine examined. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1988. p. 19–56.
5. Clarke AE, Shim JK, Mamo L, Fosket JR, Fishman JR. Biomedicalization: technoscientific transformations of health, illness, and U.S. biomedicine. Am Sociol Rev. 2003;68(2):161–94.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献