Role of Politics in Public Health
Politics is an integral component of the health care sector whose role is irreplaceable given the contribution it has in this area. Such is the case due to the various politically formulated policies that guide medical decisions. Consistent with this subject, Elizabeth Pisani brings to our attention an interesting opinion about the role of politics in public health through her message on sex, drugs, and HIV. She identifies the irrational political decisions that medical institutions have to put up with because of the ignorance exhibited by political leaders. Personally, I concur with her notion regarding this subject since the health policies show the irrationality of political leaders championing them. Thus, the central to this discussion is shedding more light on this issue through supportive ideologies to back Pisani’s assertions.
Firstly, government institutions are irrational for failing to invest more in preventive strategies than therapeutic strategies. A case in point is the focus on treating an illness instead of seeking channels that will prevent its transmission in the first place. Curative strategies are nothing but expensive in comparison to the preventive strategies (CDC, 2016). Therefore, concentrating on therapeutic strategies depicts the absence of logic in decisions settled by governments.
Furthermore, the existence of poorly thought out health care policies is a befitting example of the unhealthy contribution of politics to public health. For instance, political institution’s failure to utilize evidence-based practices that show a massive potential of eliminating life-threatening conditions because of their morality justifies this sentiment. As noted by Pisani, most leaders do not acknowledge the profit that syringe exchange programs have in preventing HIV spread. Such is the case since they push for the arrest of individuals found with syringes instead of legalizing the distribution of sterile syringes to this section of the population (CDC, 2016). The consequence of this political sensitivity on the means instead of the outcome is the high prevalence rates of HIV, which could have remained low if such programs are under consideration.
Last but not the least, current evidence regarding utilization of reproductive health education and contraceptives adequately refute the political concern of increasing promiscuity. A viewpoint of this kind is backward since it has no scientifically proven backing (Alford, 2016). Thus, rationality is of the essence once more, if institutionalization of effective programs is a priority for the formulated health policies.
In closure, it is indeed clear that the role played by political agencies in public health is unquestionable. Of the interest, however, is the positivity of their contribution to public health. Thus, governments must change their approach to handling health issues if a success rate of their interventions is to become undoubted.
References
Alford, S. (2016). Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs: Ineffective, Unethical, and Poor Public Health. Advocatesforyouth.org. Retrieved 27 October 2016, from http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/597
CDC.,(2016). Injection Drug Use | HIV Risk and Prevention | HIV/AIDS | CDC. Cdc.gov. Retrieved 27 October 2016, from http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/idu.html
