Immigration Debate and Health Care: How Private Practices Can Respond –

Immigration Debate and Health Care: How Private Practices Can Respond

The immigration reform and healthcare debates continue with heated games of blame. Facts are nitpicked. Facts are pulled apart for agendas, and some false facts metastasize from either side of the argument. We are becoming too dependent on these fast and loose”facts”. We must now pinpoint the truth.

The truth is simple. We have a doubling population in the US. We have a problem in which the increased population thus increases the normal general liabilities of health care.

A practical response is in order. It evidently cannot come from the legislature. It must come from the healthcare providers and their communities themselves.

Many healthcare providers will feel overwhelmed. With so many hospitals struggling to keep the lights on, can an influx in population be serviced? What about offering private services to these state-owned facilities? Would a private involvement reverse a public problem?

With so many different variables, you must develop a pragmatic plan of educating yourself and your staff. The following endeavors to showcase the facts, associated risks of the facts, and solutions to these politicized immigration healthcare debates.

Fact: Sanitation crisis is a no-fault, all-party responsibility issue

There is a heated debate on Capitol Hill right now about this. Some argue that the legislature must do more to provide for those relocated in CBP centers. Others argue that these provisions are not a government-protected right. The argument has become petty. Things like soap and toothbrushes are held up as items of debate. This should not be the case. The legislature’s argument is self-defeating. Both the detainee and the Border Patrol officer are falling prey to healthcare lapses. All efforts to control rumored or actualized infections should be extended. Which means, basic sanitation materials, such as soap and toothpaste, should be provided as a means of preventing liability risk to general population health.

This is because the sanitation crisis is a no-fault and all-party responsibility issue. Sanitation crises can emerge from issues like the national floods of 2019. Because pathogens and infection-carrying insects incubate in water climates, floods can cause an increase in disease factors. When there is an increase in population, there is an increased ratio of the public risk by any generic disease.

Associated risk: failure to respond increases vulnerability

The pettiness will not be stalled by our analysis. Unfortunately, there is not enough time to encourage political actors to reach a compromise. Risks to healthcare are real-time risks. For every moment wasted in the debate, the vulnerability of population health increases. This means that even if there was no previous associated risk to healthcare_the lack of response to preventive health measures has created one.

This answers some of our above questions. Some hospitals that have the means could provide direct assistance to these facilities. Yet, there is now an associated health care risk to doctors, volunteers, the detainees themselves, officers and facility staff, military personnel and more. This risk should be calculated before a private endeavor is proposed. Bringing people in from the outside might disrupt the quarantine and the agitated immune system responses of those inside the walls. Likewise, there can be a long wait list to seek formal permissions to grant such a venture.

Yet we see that all hospitals have the power to educate one another, their existing patient body, and those who are released from state detention in these CBP facilities.

Solution: Adopt a buddy-system of constant health risk learning/provisions drives

The solution for all healthcare business models is to develop a buddy-system of health risk learning. This means that the staff of any private hospital must procure its own health council materials for public education. There may be some legislative policy and HIPPA regulations on the actual curriculum used. However, social media, public advertisement, and public broadcast are generally safe and free bets.

Using your social handles to partner in strategy with community-built NGOs can be a way to spread education content and likewise raise those materials denied by the legislature. You can see the Donation Acceptance program at CBP to learn more about those entities you can donate to who have acted or will act as product mediation.

For education materials, you can see this WHO publication on immigration and healthcare basic issues. This research was based in Europe and may vary based on North American climate factors.

The following are some basic facts regarding immigrant health conditions/corresponding public interests:

Many immigrants, especially children, are prone to a higher prevalence of respiratory conditions.
Respiratory conditions are typically communicable but may be prevented in part by cough etiquette.
A higher-risk of vector-borne diseases increases within refugee populations, due to poor healthcare in the country of origin/varying species of insects that carry these diseases. Observed vector-borne reintroductions included diseases like malaria and leishmaniasis. Malaria is now diagnosed at about 1,700 US cases per year but could grow without public health education in heavy-impact vector-borne risk populations-such as immigrant communities. Malaria is typically preventable with mosquito and biting-insect protection.
More information repositories about vector-borne disease can be found at the Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Center for Disease Control.

About the Author: Thomas Roberts

I am a freelance writer and have a true passion for sports. I love baseball, basketball, football, soccer, hockey, tennis, horse racing, and golf.