Infant mortality inequities for Māori in New Zealand: a tale of three policies.
Culturally Competent Care
/ economics
Female
Health Policy
/ economics
Healthcare Disparities
/ economics
Humans
Indigenous Peoples
/ statistics & numerical data
Infant
Infant Mortality
Infant, Newborn
Male
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
/ statistics & numerical data
New Zealand
Social Class
Differential risk
Equity
Health/healthcare
Inequity
Infant mortality
Māori
New Zealand
Policy
Race
Journal
International journal for equity in health
ISSN: 1475-9276
Titre abrégé: Int J Equity Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147692
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 01 2021
06 01 2021
Historique:
received:
12
08
2020
accepted:
30
11
2020
entrez:
7
1
2021
pubmed:
8
1
2021
medline:
6
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The history of infant mortality inequities among Māori in New Zealand provides a remarkable case study for understanding the shortcomings of policy which fails to consider the differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups. Specifically, the failure of the initial 1991 reform in addressing Māori infant health, followed by the relative success of post-1994 policy, demonstrate that disadvantaged populations carry differential social risks which require adjusting policy accordingly. Literature on these policies show that differential risks may include disparities in representation, access to resources, socioeconomic status, and racism. The consideration of differential risks is important in analyzing the underlying causes of inequities and social policy deficiencies. To describe and illustrate the need for policy addressing inequities to consider the differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups through an analysis of New Zealand's Māori infant mortality policy progression. The article is a commentary on a series of policies aimed at reducing infant mortality in New Zealand. It analyses three policies and how their differences are linked to the corresponding trends in equity between Māori and non-Māori populations. The progression of Māori infant mortality policy clearly demonstrates that equitable social policy must be culturally sensitive and inclusive towards disadvantaged groups, as well as willing to adapt to changing circumstances and shortcomings of current policy. Prior to 1994, health policy which did not account for the differential risks of Māori populations caused inequities in infant mortality to increase, despite infant mortality decreasing on a national level. After policy was adjusted to account for Māori-specific risks in 1994, infant mortality inequities significantly declined. A comprehensive analysis of these policies shows that the consideration of differential risks is highly related to a decrease in corresponding inequities. As New Zealand, and other countries facing inequities such as the United States and Australia, move forward in constructing policy, they would do well to consider the lessons of how New Zealand policy changed the frequency of infant mortality in Māori populations. The study shows that the consideration of differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups is necessary for policy to successfully address inequities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The history of infant mortality inequities among Māori in New Zealand provides a remarkable case study for understanding the shortcomings of policy which fails to consider the differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups. Specifically, the failure of the initial 1991 reform in addressing Māori infant health, followed by the relative success of post-1994 policy, demonstrate that disadvantaged populations carry differential social risks which require adjusting policy accordingly. Literature on these policies show that differential risks may include disparities in representation, access to resources, socioeconomic status, and racism. The consideration of differential risks is important in analyzing the underlying causes of inequities and social policy deficiencies.
AIM
To describe and illustrate the need for policy addressing inequities to consider the differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups through an analysis of New Zealand's Māori infant mortality policy progression.
METHODS
The article is a commentary on a series of policies aimed at reducing infant mortality in New Zealand. It analyses three policies and how their differences are linked to the corresponding trends in equity between Māori and non-Māori populations.
FINDINGS
The progression of Māori infant mortality policy clearly demonstrates that equitable social policy must be culturally sensitive and inclusive towards disadvantaged groups, as well as willing to adapt to changing circumstances and shortcomings of current policy. Prior to 1994, health policy which did not account for the differential risks of Māori populations caused inequities in infant mortality to increase, despite infant mortality decreasing on a national level. After policy was adjusted to account for Māori-specific risks in 1994, infant mortality inequities significantly declined. A comprehensive analysis of these policies shows that the consideration of differential risks is highly related to a decrease in corresponding inequities.
CONCLUSIONS
As New Zealand, and other countries facing inequities such as the United States and Australia, move forward in constructing policy, they would do well to consider the lessons of how New Zealand policy changed the frequency of infant mortality in Māori populations. The study shows that the consideration of differential risks associated with disadvantaged groups is necessary for policy to successfully address inequities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33407531
doi: 10.1186/s12939-020-01340-y
pii: 10.1186/s12939-020-01340-y
pmc: PMC7789261
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
10Références
Lancet. 2006 Jun 17;367(9527):2005-9
pubmed: 16782491
N Z Med J. 2006 Dec 15;119(1247):U2365
pubmed: 17195858
N Z Med J. 2010 Nov 26;123(1326):88-96
pubmed: 21326403
N Z Med J. 2013 Aug 02;126(1379):86-94
pubmed: 24045355
Int J Equity Health. 2017 Aug 8;16(1):141
pubmed: 28789649
Public Health. 2019 Jul;172:119-124
pubmed: 31171363
Am J Public Health. 2005 Nov;95(11):1976-81
pubmed: 16254231
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Feb;199:132-139
pubmed: 28602358
Int J Equity Health. 2015 Sep 15;14:81
pubmed: 26369339
N Z Med J. 2014 Aug 29;127(1401):10-22
pubmed: 25225754