US State Polarization, Policymaking Power, and Population Health

Montez, Jennifer Karas

doi:10.1111/1468-0009.12482

Cited by 35 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(126 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the currently predominant model of pain neglects the role of structural inequalities that shape who experiences pain, how they experience it, and how others view their pain, let alone upstream, fundamental driving factors such as public policy, the medical-industrial complex including pharmaceutical and health insurance industries, and socio-political context that underlies all these factors and their interrelationships (Montez, 2020;Wailoo, 2014). To ignore these upstream determinants is to have an incomplete understanding of pain, just as Link and Phelan have warned regarding overall health (Phelan, Link, & Tehranifar, 2010).…”

Section: Historical and Current Pain Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moving 'upstream' from individual characteristics, why do rural areas (Johannes et al, 2010) and states in the South, West, and Appalachia (Case & Deaton, 2020) suffer disproportionately high pain burden? Comparison of US states can highlight the role of socio-political contexts (Montez, 2020): how do state government policies, health care systems, or cultural expectations affect the burden of pain in the US? Sociology has two unique strengths in answering such questions.…”

Section: Causes Of Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Political discourse, pain-related policies, and regulations are also crucial: pain is deeply political, as it is central to debates and framing of suffering, morality, and social welfare in the context of health insurance or disability benefits (Wailoo, 2014). Interdisciplinary research should explore how politics and the corporate pursuit of profits (Montez, 2020) impact pain in the US and elsewhere. Such approaches can illuminate the core beliefs of a country's politics, culture, and society.…”

Section: Institutions Sociopolitical Context and Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sociology of Chronic Pain

Zajacova¹,

Grol-Prokopcyzk²,

Zimmer³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic pain is a common, costly, and consequential health problem. However, despite some important analytic contributions, sociological research on pain has not yet coalesced into a unified subfield. We present three interrelated bodies of evidence, and illustrative new empirical findings using 2010-2018 NHIS data, to argue that pain should have a central role in sociological investigations of health. Specifically, we contend that (1) pain is a sensitive barometer of population health and wellbeing; (2) pain is emblematic of many contested and/or chronic conditions; and (3) pain and pain treatment reflect, and have wide-ranging implications for, public policy. Overall, whether we analyze pain quantitatively or qualitatively—focusing on its distribution in the population, its social causes and consequences, or its subjective meanings for individuals—pain reflects the social conditions, sociopolitical context, and health-related beliefs of a society. Pain is thus an important frontier for future sociological research.

show abstract

Section: Historical and Current Pain Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Causes Of Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Institutions Sociopolitical Context and Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sociology of Chronic Pain

Zajacova¹,

Grol-Prokopcyzk²,

Zimmer³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present study, therefore, uses data from the Current Population Survey (2009–2019) to examine how the association between part-time work and self-rated health varies across state-level institutional contexts in the United States. Social and economic policies vary considerably across states in ways that differentially affect the health and longevity of residents ( Montez, 2017 , 2020 ). That is, some states invest in their citizens’ health by implementing policies that promote access to medical care, improve economic well-being, discourage risky health behaviors, and protect civil rights, whereas other states lack generous social policies, and their citizens consequently experience worse health and live shorter lives ( Montez et al, 2020 ; Montez & Farina, 2021 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, some states invest in their citizens’ health by implementing policies that promote access to medical care, improve economic well-being, discourage risky health behaviors, and protect civil rights, whereas other states lack generous social policies, and their citizens consequently experience worse health and live shorter lives ( Montez et al, 2020 ; Montez & Farina, 2021 ). Guided by the stress process model ( Pearlin et al, 1981 ; Pearlin, Schieman, Fazio, & Meersman, 2005 ) and a socioecological framework of health ( Montez, 2020 ), we suggest that state policies and contexts can ameliorate the adverse health outcomes of part-time work. We ask two specific research questions: 1) Do disparities in self-rated health by part-time work status vary across states?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Part-time work and health in the United States: The role of state policies

Donnelly

Schoenbachler

2021

SSM - Population Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part-time work is a common work arrangement in the United States that can be precarious, insecure, and lacking opportunities for advancement. In turn, part-time work, especially involuntary part-time work, tends to be associated with worse health outcomes. Although prior research documents heterogeneity in the health consequences of precarious work across countries, we do not know whether state-level institutional contexts shape the association between part-time work and self-rated health in the United States. Using data from the Current Population Survey (2009–2019; n = 813,077), the present study examined whether linkages between part-time work and self-rated health are moderated by state-level social policies and contexts. At the population level, we document differences in the prevalence of fair/poor health among part-time workers across states. For instance, 21% of involuntary part-time workers reported fair/poor health in West Virginia compared to 7% of involuntary part-time workers in Massachusetts. Findings also provide evidence that voluntary (β =.51) and involuntary (β=.57) part-time work is associated with greater odds of fair/poor health among individuals. Moreover, the association between voluntary part-time work and self-rated health is weaker for individuals living in states with higher amounts for maximum unemployment insurance, higher minimum wage, and lower income inequality. State-level policies did not moderate the association between involuntary part-time work and health. The present study points to the need to mitigate the health consequences of part-time work with social policies that enhance the health of workers.

show abstract

Introduction: Before E-Cigarettes—The Pre-history of Public Health, Tobacco and Nicotine in the UK, Australia and the US

Berridge

Fairchild

Morphett

et al. 2023

E-Cigarettes and the Comparative Politics of Harm Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The comparative study arose from our curiosity about why policies towards e-cigarettes were so different in the UK and Australia, two countries with a shared public health history. The US was added as a case study to see how its unique history of tobacco activism and anti-tobacco activism prefigured and influenced its e-cigarette policy. We outline the history of tobacco policy in the context of public health in each country, showing that a major change occurred after World War II, when tobacco became a key issue of public health concern. All the countries developed stances hostile to tobacco smoking and to the tobacco industry, but differences in the way this was done helped to inform their policies towards e-cigarettes, which cover a spectrum of tolerance. An important source of divergence between the three countries was a history of policy in the UK favouring a harm reduction approach to nicotine. In the US and Australia, while nicotine was used as individual therapy, it was in pursuit of a cession-only strategy.

show abstract

US State Polarization, Policymaking Power, and Population Health

Cited by 35 publications

References 49 publications

Sociology of Chronic Pain

Sociology of Chronic Pain

Part-time work and health in the United States: The role of state policies

Introduction: Before E-Cigarettes—The Pre-history of Public Health, Tobacco and Nicotine in the UK, Australia and the US

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About