American Funding Cutback to East Jerusalem Hospitals: A Blow to the Health of the City

Clarfield, A. Mark; Skorecki, Karl; Paltiel, Ora; Glick, Shimon; Beyar, Rafi; Yehuda, Dina Ben; Carmi, Rivka; Gil, Ziv; Billan, Salem; Azzam, Zaher S.; Basis, Fuad; Levy‐Lahad, Ephrat; Lahad, Amnon; Izraeli, Shai; Turner, Dan; Halevy, Yonatan

doi:10.2105/ajph.2018.304792

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, the Israeli Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) pay these hospitals much less than they pay Israeli hospitals for health services provided to their insured patients [ 36 , 37 , 39 ]. These hospitals rely on international financial support and are subject to funding cutbacks due to political decisions [ 40 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutrality, conflict, and structural determinants of health in a Jerusalem emergency department

Orr

Jackson

Alpert

et al. 2022

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Medical neutrality is a normative arrangement that differentiates a zone of medical treatment disconnected from the field of politics. While medical neutrality aims to ensure impartial healthcare for all and to shield the healthcare personnel from political demands, it can also divert attention away from conflicts and their effects on health inequity. This article analyzes how healthcare professionals understand and negotiate the depoliticized space of the emergency department (ED) through their views on neutrality. It also examines how medical staff use depoliticized concepts of culture to account for differences in the health status of patients from disadvantaged groups. These questions are examined in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Methods Twenty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare personnel in a Jerusalem hospital’s ED. All but one of the participants were Jewish. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and Grounded Theory. Results The ED staff endorsed the perspective of medical neutrality as a nondiscriminatory approach to care. At the same time, some medical staff recognized the limits of medical neutrality in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and negotiated and challenged this concept. While participants identified unique health risks for Arab patients, they usually did not associate these risks with the effects of conflict and instead explained them in depoliticized terms of cultural and behavioral differences. Culture served as a non-controversial way of acknowledging and managing problems that have their roots in politics. Conclusions The normative demand for neutrality works to exclude discussion of the conflict from clinical spaces. The normative exclusion of politics is a vital but under-appreciated aspect of how political conflict operates as a structural determinant of health. Healthcare personnel, especially in the ED, should be trained in structural competency. This training may challenge the neglect of issues that need to be solved at the political level and enhance health equity, social justice, and solidarity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%