It is sad to say that families in Philippines (especially the poor) have been subjected to limited access of prenatal care, safe pregnant delivery, family planning and pregnant vaccinations. Thus, post great threat to the quality of care, standard of living and the life expectancy of Filipinos. Citizens lack modern clinical infrastructures due to absence of assets investments in health facility improvement. One of the finest roles of policymakers is to clarify the important of societal values while making suitable health decisions, using those values in relative to the facts.
The healthcare system of Philippines seemed to have many ‘whys and wherefores.’ The Philippines’s health industry faces startling challenges from emergent new communicable diseases such as increasing threat of HIV epidemic to the influenza endemic. Economic, social, and environmental influences are influential but essential determinants of health in Philippines. There is wide range of issues, which represented present decision-makers with great efforts as myriad, if not greater than the adjacent bases of diseases. While many can be addressed within social and public determinants of health, many others tune for inter-sectorial (i.e. inter-sectors response) action.
One of the major feebleness of health system, nonetheless, is the inability to address and fix the large inequalities in health outcomes between “the haves and the have- nots”, resulting from financial and environmental barricades to general health services. For instance, the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) region and of comparable geographic regions have continuously poorer health outcome than the richer areas around the metropolis. This inequality in care of services can be drawn to a historic trend of deprived basic health services, at primary and subordinate stage of care.
There are many social causes of health in Philippines, such as food production and security, alcohol and tobacco use, diet and physical activity, gender and health, education and health, and sexual behavior and health (Commission on Higher Education, 2009). One of the reasons why we need to address some of these determinants is because of the public health issues we encounter in health literacy and cultural awareness of Philippines.
According to World Health Organization (WHO), The Western Pacific Region (n.d.), education is one of the social factors of health sustainability in Philippines, and perhaps the most central basic determinant of health at both individual and community levels. Education is power, which increases health literacy (i.e. a social issue that needs to be tackled in improving public health outcome), decreases poverty via improved employment opportunity, and provides required skills for accomplishing better health outcomes. As a public health issue in Philippines and a social factor, limited education brings about women’s’ inability to make better decision in contraceptive measures. York (2012) described correlative issue of contraception with its cultural awareness in Philippines. According to York (2012), in a country that acquired one of the highest birthrates in South East Asia, government proposal to provide free contraceptive measures may sound keen, but knocks up against culture and religious beliefs. Filipinos take culture and religion very seriously. Therefore, these elements should be taken into account when upholding family planning and government needs to emphasize on issues of cultural literacy, impacting women’s’ health.
Gender and health are related social determinants through multiple trails. The roles of gender in Philippines with its cultural influences, and the gender-based separation of labor interrelate with education, income, household status, age, social environment, employment position, and cultural standing. Gender inequality is a robust social determinant of health. Men and women have dissimilar experiences of risk effects, and also different entrance to health figures and use of health services. These bring about uneven health consequences, which may have dissimilar social and economic outcomes for women and men.
Being poor or being a female is frequently the reason for being categorized alongside, and may result in exploitation, abandonment and unfortunate health treatment. The increasing feminization of poverty is a social problem of Philippines and has been increasingly noted (Reich, 2005). The cultural attitude or awareness of Filipinos is said to limit women’s responsibilities in many aspects of environmental capacity. For example, most women in Philippines are stay-home moms, limiting themselves to health literacy. In the Asia Pacific Region, intra-household distribution of capitals and separation of accountabilities between boys and girls, men and women differ with social standing and economic situations. Gender in health, consequently, needs to be analyzed within wider framework of poverty, health literacy, and public inequality. In reducing health inequalities, the current effort should be to improve gender equality in many phases of social and economic conditions. These may provide less exposure to risk factors for women; improve access to health information and use of health services for women.
Maternal mortality rates (MMR) is another public health concern that reflects the inequalities between wealthy and poor Filipinos more than any other measure of health. As a needle of disparity, Tolentino (2004) reflected women’s position in the society as owning inferior place, with respect to household policymaking power, admittance to social sustenance, economic prospects and health care.
Homelessness is another social determinant of health in Philippines. This is for the reason that even according to Reagan (2015); Manila, Philippines has the highest homelessness rate in the world. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) reports that this city has 70,000 dispossessed people on its streets.
The rate for Life expectancy at birth, total (years) in Philippines was 68.71 as of 2013. According to the article by Index Mundi (n.d.), over the past 53 years, the graph of their indicator reached a maximum value of 68.71 in 2013 and a minimum value of 57.81 in 1960. The shift of policy attention was drawn from the knowledge that health patterns are always to the disadvantage of poor—they die earlier, have higher levels of mortality and lower life expectancy rate. As a result, inequality remains to be the focal health delinquent of a health subdivision, which poor health effects persevere for the deprived income crowds and topographical regions. This is the basic and related case of inequality and life expectancy in Philippines. Many Filipinos who experienced lower life expectancy are those of the under-privileged, and minority groups such as women and less-privileged individuals. Therefore, it is important to understand that in order to face the problematic of inequality; health reforms in many parts of the Philippines health system are requisite in order to achieve universal health care (WHO, n.d.).
Another current effort used to reduce health inequalities is the careful application of primary health care in 1979. This effort was resulted in some enhancements in basic health services for the underprivileged and poor but did not change the structural system of secondary and tertiary care services that continued to value only those population sections, which could afford to pay for services (WHO, n.d). The inability to concentrate and restructure health services to local government in the early 1990s worsened the uneven distribution of health services between high income regions and poor vicinities.
Quality of care in the Philippines health system is one of the prevalent aspects affecting the health and well-being of Filipinos. In turn, the performance of its health system including provider and practitioner quality are resolute in part, which it is managed, financed, and designed to provide greatest overhaul in quality. Implementing quality health policies in Philippines could result in fundamental measures of health outcomes. The healthcare outputs can involve the supplies and demand of health services; supplies and technology; accessibility of much needed drugs; and the accessibility of health manpower.
The 3 fundamental goals of developing health policy so that it gets to the support of Philippines are the question of how to improve total health of the general Filipinos?
Some current public health policies of Philippines have not set a stage to recognize that at the end of each verdict on health guiding principle, there is an individual. Therefore, refusing to personalize health policy is the key to effective policy verdict. The Philippines health systems need to adopt the idea of the declaration of Alma Ata (USSR, 1978). This is because part of this declaration is for a primary health care to be culturally and communally acceptable for the citizens. As a fundamental right of all citizens, health care inequality should find no place in Philippines. Additionally, Philippines constitution of 1987 states that the state shall provide protection and promotion to the right of citizens’ health, and inculcates health awareness among them. An important health policy emphasis is the priority for the needs of the under-privileged, disabled, children, women, sick and elderly.
Another social factor for consideration is the concept of disease management systems. Those health services and public interventional policies intended to improve health outcomes of the people of Philippines who have certain disease or a collection of diseases. The outcomes of these diseases are important to consider so they won’t spread around the region. The advantage of focusing on specific disease or diseases of individual or group of individuals to facilitate the process of group analysis or population assessment. A social intervention is an alternative type of interventional policy for the improvement of health through organized efforts of society. This health intervention includes disease screening programs, environmental protection, and immunization programs.
To get the support of Philippines, we ought to review healthcare finances. Majority of Philippines cannot afford health services, either from private or public health providers. The best healthcare system of a country should not only be alarmed with improving citizens’ health, but likewise with keeping them against financial liability of sickness (i.e. by sinking their out-of-pocket costs). According to the 2010 Philippine National Health Accounts (n.d.), private out-of-pocket is the highest pay for the cost of health care with 52.7%, 11.2% for national government, 15.3% for local government, 8.9% for Philippines health, and 7.1% for private insurance and HMOs.
An additional route to developing effective health policy so that it gets the support of Philippines is the effective implementation of universal coverage that allows every Filipino family to receive quality health services capable of satisfying their principal health essentials, and with the ability to receive and accept other needed services that may otherwise not be easily accessible. A self-governing and leading private health segment, the disengagement between federal and local government in health systems administration, and the absenteeism of a unified medicinal and defensive net together have had an adverse social impact on financial and environmental access, excellence and competence of health facilities in Philippines. To accomplish these elements, public health facilities must be improved and there should be creation of health provider networks with enough deployment of health providers. These health providers will expand the capacity of services provider. As an added effort to reduce health inequalities, each poor Filipino family shall receive full coverage by the National Health Insurance Programme. The expansion of local government facilities to manage and provide local health system must be emphasized, including education and training of health practitioners to rally medical treatments. Additionally, local administration in collaboration with federal government could attempt to engage and expand private sector in communities and local health service delivery.
As a hypothetical member of DOH (Philippine Department of Health), effective public health policies must be assigned with active strategies to safeguard the value of health services delivered at all heights of care, and to pull its assets to accomplish healthier health upshots. I believed the government shall adopt a cohesive and all-inclusive approach to health improvement, which shall attempt to expand health services across all areas and to all people. In conclusion, there is a need for an institutional platform to guide the reform of Philippines health care. The platform of reform is something that proved an increased complexity in Philippines. Other problems include staff capacities and budget constraint affecting full implementation of health reform. This institutional platform should assist in monitoring, evaluating, implementing, and designing Universal Healthcare Initiatives (UHI.
Work Cited
Commission on Higher Education. (2009). Statistics Index. Retrieved August 5, 2015 from http:// www.ched.gov.ph/statistics/index.html
Index Mundi. (n.d.) Philippines – Life expectancy at birth. Retrieved August 1, 2015 from http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/philippines/life-expectancy-at-birth
Reich, M. (2005). The politics of health reform in developing countries: three cases of pharmaceutical policy. Health Policy; 32:47-77
Reagan, M. (March, 2015). The 15 Most Homeless Cities in the World. TheRichest. Retrieved July 28, 2015 from http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/poorest-list/the-15-most-homeless-cities-in-the-world/15/
Tolentino, H. (2004). Community Health Tracking Information System. Retrieved August 2, 2015 from http://www.chits.ph
World Health Organization ( Western Pacific Region). (n.d.). Social determinants of health. Retrieved August 1, 2015 from http://www.wpro.who.int/health_research/documents/dhs_hr_health_in_asia_and_the_pacific_07_chapter_2_social_determinants_of_health.pdf?ua=1
WHO. (n.d.).The Philippines Health System Review. Retrieved July 25, 2015 from http://www.wpro.who.int/asia_pacific_observatory/Philippines_Health_System_Review.pdf
York, S. (January, 2012). The Philippines: Balancing Culture & Contraceptives. Retrieved August 5, 2015 from http://populationgrowth.org/the-philippines-balancing-culture-contraceptives/
