A framework for medical power in two case studies of health policymaking in India and Niger

Sarah L. Dalglish, Veena Sriram, Kerry Scott, Daniela C. Rodríguez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Medical professionals influence health policymaking but the power they exercise is not well understood in low- and middle-income countries. We explore medical power in national health policymaking for child survival in Niger (late 1990s–2012) and emergency medicine specialisation in India (early 1990s–2015). Both case studies used document review, in-depth interviews and non-participant observation; combined analysis traced policy processes and established theoretical categories around power to build a conceptual framework of medical power in health policymaking. Medical doctors, mainly specialists, utilised their power to shape policy differently in each case. In Niger, a small, connected group of paediatricians pursued a policy of task-shifting after a powerful non-medical actor, the country’s president, shifted the debate by enacting broad health systems improvements. In India, a more fragmented group of specialists prioritised tertiary-level healthcare policies likely to benefit only a small subset of the population. Compared to high-income settings, medical power in these cases was channelled and expressed with greater variability in the profession’s ability to organise and influence policymaking. Taken together, both cases provide evidence that a concentration of medical power in health policymaking can result in the medicalisation of public health issues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-13
Number of pages13
JournalGlobal Public Health
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Apr 3 2018

Fingerprint

Niger
India
Health
Medicalization
Emergency Medicine
Policy Making
Tertiary Healthcare
Public Health
Observation
Interviews
Exercise
Population

Keywords

  • equity
  • health policy
  • LMICs
  • medicalisation
  • Power

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

A framework for medical power in two case studies of health policymaking in India and Niger. / Dalglish, Sarah L.; Sriram, Veena; Scott, Kerry; Rodríguez, Daniela C.

In: Global Public Health, 03.04.2018, p. 1-13.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7210b4148fd14d47babe00578cd90412,
title = "A framework for medical power in two case studies of health policymaking in India and Niger",
abstract = "Medical professionals influence health policymaking but the power they exercise is not well understood in low- and middle-income countries. We explore medical power in national health policymaking for child survival in Niger (late 1990s–2012) and emergency medicine specialisation in India (early 1990s–2015). Both case studies used document review, in-depth interviews and non-participant observation; combined analysis traced policy processes and established theoretical categories around power to build a conceptual framework of medical power in health policymaking. Medical doctors, mainly specialists, utilised their power to shape policy differently in each case. In Niger, a small, connected group of paediatricians pursued a policy of task-shifting after a powerful non-medical actor, the country’s president, shifted the debate by enacting broad health systems improvements. In India, a more fragmented group of specialists prioritised tertiary-level healthcare policies likely to benefit only a small subset of the population. Compared to high-income settings, medical power in these cases was channelled and expressed with greater variability in the profession’s ability to organise and influence policymaking. Taken together, both cases provide evidence that a concentration of medical power in health policymaking can result in the medicalisation of public health issues.",
keywords = "equity, health policy, LMICs, medicalisation, Power",
author = "Dalglish, {Sarah L.} and Veena Sriram and Kerry Scott and Rodr{\'i}guez, {Daniela C.}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/17441692.2018.1457705",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--13",
journal = "Global Public Health",
issn = "1744-1692",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A framework for medical power in two case studies of health policymaking in India and Niger

AU - Dalglish, Sarah L.

AU - Sriram, Veena

AU - Scott, Kerry

AU - Rodríguez, Daniela C.

PY - 2018/4/3

Y1 - 2018/4/3

N2 - Medical professionals influence health policymaking but the power they exercise is not well understood in low- and middle-income countries. We explore medical power in national health policymaking for child survival in Niger (late 1990s–2012) and emergency medicine specialisation in India (early 1990s–2015). Both case studies used document review, in-depth interviews and non-participant observation; combined analysis traced policy processes and established theoretical categories around power to build a conceptual framework of medical power in health policymaking. Medical doctors, mainly specialists, utilised their power to shape policy differently in each case. In Niger, a small, connected group of paediatricians pursued a policy of task-shifting after a powerful non-medical actor, the country’s president, shifted the debate by enacting broad health systems improvements. In India, a more fragmented group of specialists prioritised tertiary-level healthcare policies likely to benefit only a small subset of the population. Compared to high-income settings, medical power in these cases was channelled and expressed with greater variability in the profession’s ability to organise and influence policymaking. Taken together, both cases provide evidence that a concentration of medical power in health policymaking can result in the medicalisation of public health issues.

AB - Medical professionals influence health policymaking but the power they exercise is not well understood in low- and middle-income countries. We explore medical power in national health policymaking for child survival in Niger (late 1990s–2012) and emergency medicine specialisation in India (early 1990s–2015). Both case studies used document review, in-depth interviews and non-participant observation; combined analysis traced policy processes and established theoretical categories around power to build a conceptual framework of medical power in health policymaking. Medical doctors, mainly specialists, utilised their power to shape policy differently in each case. In Niger, a small, connected group of paediatricians pursued a policy of task-shifting after a powerful non-medical actor, the country’s president, shifted the debate by enacting broad health systems improvements. In India, a more fragmented group of specialists prioritised tertiary-level healthcare policies likely to benefit only a small subset of the population. Compared to high-income settings, medical power in these cases was channelled and expressed with greater variability in the profession’s ability to organise and influence policymaking. Taken together, both cases provide evidence that a concentration of medical power in health policymaking can result in the medicalisation of public health issues.

KW - equity

KW - health policy

KW - LMICs

KW - medicalisation

KW - Power

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044973306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044973306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/17441692.2018.1457705

DO - 10.1080/17441692.2018.1457705

M3 - Article

C2 - 29616876

AN - SCOPUS:85044973306

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Global Public Health

JF - Global Public Health

SN - 1744-1692

ER -