The Inverse Response Law: Theory and Relevance to the Aftermath of Disasters

Abstract

The Inverse Care Law is principally concerned with the effect of market forces on health care which create inequities in access to health services through privileging individuals who possess the forms of social capital that are valued within health care settings. The fields of disaster risk reduction need to consider the ways in which inequities, driven by economic and social policy as well as institutional decision-making, create vulnerabilities prior to a disaster, which are then magnified post disaster through entrenched structural differences in access to resources. Drawing on key principles within the Inverse Care Law, the Inverse Response Law refers to the idea that people in lower socio-economic groups are more likely to be impacted and to experience disparities in service provision during the disaster response and recovery phase. In a market model of recovery, vulnerable groups struggle to compete for necessary services creating inequities in adaptive capacity as well as in social and wellbeing outcomes over time. Both the Inverse Care Law and the Inverse Response Law focus on the structural organisation of services at a macro level. In this article, the Inverse Care Law is outlined, its application to medical treatment following disasters considered and an explanation of the Inverse Response Law provided. Case studies from recent disasters, in London, New Zealand, Puerto Rico and Mexico City are examined in order to illustrate themes at work relating to the Inverse Response Law.

Reorganization of Substance Use Treatment and Harm Reduction Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Survey

“…During the COVID-19 pandemic, marginalized people including PWSUDs are at greater risk of increased morbidity and mortality (Dorahy et al, 2015). These syndemically disadvantaged populations may be more likely to experience disparate, possibly substandard, service provision in systems prioritizing resource needs around a pandemic response (Inverse Response Law and Inverse Care Law) (Phibbs, Kenney, Rivera-Munoz, & Huggins, 2018). Such inequities may present at macro levels around effective and appropriate policymaking at national, organizational, and local levels (Phibbs et al, 2018; Watt, 2002) and at micro levels around areas of access to resources, social services, public health benefits of medical treatments, pharmacies, health care facilities and provision of medical equipment (Davis, Wilson, Brock-Martin, Glover, & Svendsen, 2010; Runkle, Brock-Martin, Karmaus, & Svendsen, 2012; Watt, 2002).…”

Theorizing disaster communitas

“…The systems that disburse prejudice and privilege are remarkably resilient (Tierney, 2014, p.237). Victimology records this: the isolated, weak, minorities and the less wealthy consistently fare worse in disaster situations (Matthewman, 2015, pp.20-21; see also Phibbs et al, 2018).…”

A global survey on changes in the supply, price and use of illicit drugs and alcohol, and related complications during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic

“…For instance, as healthcare facilities become more difficult to access during lockdowns, people with SUDs may experience more difficulties relating to poor access to treatment centers. Socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds and diminished availability of public transportation may exacerbate such concerns (4, 5, 11), especially for individuals receiving daily prescriptions of opioid substitution therapy (4). Professional authorities and health policy makers are expected to proactively address such emerging needs.…”