Healthy People 2010 Personal Critique

HealthyPeople 2010 Personal Critique

HealthyPeople 2010 Personal Critique

HealthyPeople 2010 is a program of the Department of Health and HumanServices meant to improve the health of the entire US population. Itis a broad nationwide health agenda designed to promote healthyliving and prevention of disease in the first ten years of the 21stcentury UnitedStates. (2000). Underthis plan, 955 main objectives were identified for improving thehealth of the state by identifying fundamental values and settingdefinite targets that will be attained by the year 2010. It was animportant guideline for establishing health priorities for the stateand the nation at large.

Oneof fundamental objective of Healthy People 2010 was to increase thequality of life of the whole population (Williamsand Torrens, 2008).Elimination of disparities among the diverse groups constituting theUS population formed a major gateway towards achievement of this goal(UnitedStates, 2006). Whileappropriate measures have been employed to curb diseases and toimprove health, there is no clear agenda on how this plan was goingto eliminate the wide health disparities that are prevalent among thevarious groups making up the US population. In reality, improvementof health of the entire population will have no bearing ineliminating health inequality is the country. Certainly, such aimprovement may actually increase disparities.

Additionally,while the agenda for prevention of diseases and improvement of healthwas well set, the myriad objectives created a major bottlenecktowards attaining the goals of Healthy People 2010. It was verydifficult to measure the benefits realized by the plan due to thescope and depth of the initiative. The cost of collecting data andhealth improvement over time may be very high. Health disparity isthe United States of America is majorly caused by income inequality.Through the initiative of the federal government, it was possible toeliminate the bottlenecks encountered as a result of education, sexand race inequality, but the way to eliminate income inequality whichis the major cause of health disparity remained a conundrum. As suchpolicies maker would find it tricky to allocate the limited resourcesto strategies meant to improve health or measures to stamp out healthdisparity (Centersfor disease control and prevention &amp National center for healthstatistics, 2012).

HealthyPeople 2010 was different from other government initiative in that itwas not only supported by the federal government of US but also byall levels of government. This paved way for the participation ofnon-governmental organization to give their input towards therealization of the goals of the initiative (Keppe,2010).As a result, many professional organizations, agencies andorganizations especially at the state level came in and started toalter Healthy People 2010 original plan to suit local needs andhealth problems. This modifications of objectives and goals to matchlocal health needs and problems affected the initial plan. Each statewas pursuing its own health agenda and the Healthy People 2010 lostit national outlook (Keppe,2010).Leading health indicators constituted to assist in identifying guardmeasures of public health and to persuade individual participation inthe initiative were effective in addressing ethnic and racial healthdisparities to some extent. As more and more local organizationsstarted to play a part in streamlining the plan to cater for the local populations’ health needs (HHS Working Group on Sentinel Objectives &amp United States, 1998).Even with these capabilities there was no way of accessing the realdata of the health issues affecting the populace so as to setmitigating measures (Williamsand Torrens, 2008).

HealthyPeople 2010 stressed the significance of tackling the socialdeterminants of health. This encompassed build up a physicalatmosphere that would support good health for all Americansregardless of origin, race or level of income. This initiative turnedout to be the most comprehensive in providing the US citizens with achance to make a choice that could result to good health. In order toachieve such a goal, advances were required not only in the field ofhealthcare but also in the education, community planning,agriculture, economics, transportation and housing. Making theseadvances would require colossal sums of money and it may pose achallenge to both the local and national government.

References

Centersfor disease control and prevention &amp National center for healthstatistics. (2012). Healthypeople 2010: Final review.Washington (D.C.: Government printing office.

HHSWorking Group on Sentinel Objectives., &amp United States. (1998).Leadingindicators for healthy people 2010: A report from the HHS WorkingGroup on Sentinel Objectives.Bethesda, MD: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office ofDisease Prevention and Health Promotion.

Keppe,k. (2010). Healthy People 2010: Improving Population Health andReducing Health Care Disparities. HealthAffairs.

UnitedStates. (2000). Trackinghealthy people 2010.Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.

UnitedStates. (2006). Healthypeople 2010, midcourse review.Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.

Williams,S. and Torrens, P. (2008). Introductionto Health Services,7th ed.: Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.