Instructions are included
Reply Post
Your reply post should read 500 to 600 words and should reference at least one citation from the article the other student read for their initial post. To receive the maximum points, your post should include a reference from all of this week’s readings along with an article other students read.
Prompt
Analyze another student’s initial post. Examine their application of an article to the readings and compare it to your own application.
Parameters
· Analyze one student’s initial post. What are one or two major questions you have after reading their post?
· Reread the section(s) of the readings they reference, as well as the article they cited; then, use these sources to address your question(s)
· Your reply post should follow APA guidelines
Peer: Alice
Health equity disparities warrant immediate attention due to their pervasive effects on marginalized communities. The works of Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. (2014), Cole (2009), Hester et al. (2020), and Meyer and Frost (2013) reveal how societal structures, discrimination, and access to care affect health outcomes for different groups. Understanding and dismantling these disparities enables systems to be inclusive and fair. Cole (2009) introduces intersectionality as a framework for understanding how overlapping social categorizations, such as race, gender, and class, create interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage. This framework helps identify that health disparities are not the result of a single identity category, but emerge from interactions between various identities. Crenshaw’s (1991) work further clarifies this concept, illustrating how women of color face compounded discrimination due to the combination of race and gender, which directly affects their access to healthcare. Cole emphasizes that researchers must apply an intersectional lens to understand the compounded health inequities marginalized communities face.
Crenshaw’s work reinforces Cole’s assertion that understanding intersectionality is crucial to unraveling health disparities. Crenshaw (1991) explains how women of color face challenges in accessing healthcare that are compounded by systemic racism and sexism, resulting in healthcare needs often being overlooked. This underscores the importance of understanding intersecting identities and the diverse ways that discrimination operates. Crenshaw’s article strengthens Cole’s (2009) argument that the intersectional framework is vital for understanding health disparities across marginalized groups. Without this perspective, health research risks oversimplifying minority experiences and failing to account for overlapping identities affecting well-being.
Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. (2014) present a health disparities model emphasizing life-course perspectives and social determinants while underemphasizing intersectionality. Instead, they focus on factors affecting the LGBTQ+ community, such as stigma, discrimination, and marginalization. Their health equity promotion model analyzes how stressors affect health outcomes across the LGBTQ+ life course. Although the model is valuable for understanding LGBTQ+ challenges, it could benefit from a more explicit incorporation of intersectionality. For instance, lesbian women of color may face discrimination not just for their sexual orientation, but also their race and gender. This nuance is overlooked in the model, underestimating the compounded effects of intersectional identities within LGBTQ+ health disparities. Thus, the model fails to fully incorporate Crenshaw’s intersectionality concept, which stresses the importance of recognizing overlapping identities.
Meyer and Frost (2013) delve into the concept of minority stress, arguing that marginalized groups face additional health challenges due to discrimination. Their minority stress model shows how sexual minorities experience stressors that, when compounded over time, harm health outcomes. They highlight that discrimination operates externally, through overt prejudice, and internally, as individuals internalize stigma. Intersectional stressors highlighted by Crenshaw align with Meyer and Frost’s model, reinforcing how compounded stressors impact health outcomes. The model complements Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. (2014) by providing a theoretical foundation for understanding how minority stress directly contributes to health disparities. Yet, it similarly could benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of intersecting identities that shape the experience and impact of minority stress.
Hester et al. (2020) provide insight into how stereotypes lead to discriminatory patterns, specifically regarding health outcomes. They illustrate how stereotypes influence perceptions and treatment of marginalized groups, often simplifying individuals’ experiences and ignoring intersecting identities. Their research aligns with Crenshaw’s (1991) and Cole’s (2009) arguments, revealing that stereotypes perpetuate health disparities by denying individuals their unique identities. Deconstructing stereotypes and promoting inclusive practices is crucial for reducing health disparities, as stereotypes result in marginalization and misunderstanding of health needs, contributing to the systemic nature of disparities.
In conclusion, health equity disparities require understanding intersectional challenges marginalized groups face. Crenshaw’s (1991) intersectionality concept provides the framework needed to comprehend health disparities’ complexities. A multidimensional perspective, as outlined by Cole (2009), is crucial for capturing the compounded effects of discrimination. The intersectional perspective should be more explicitly incorporated into models like those presented by Fredriksen-Goldsen et al. (2014) and Meyer and Frost (2013) to understand and address health disparities among diverse populations. Recognizing and addressing intersectional identities helps eliminate systemic barriers and promote equitable health outcomes.
References
Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology.
The American Psychologist, 64(3), 170–80.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color.
Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.
Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., Simoni, J. M., Kim, H.-J., Lehavot, K., Walters, K. L., Yang, J., & Muraco, A. (2014). The health equity promotion model: Reconceptualization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) health disparities.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84(6), 653–663.
Hester, N., Payne, K., Brown-Iannuzzi, J., & Gray, K. (2020). On intersectionality: How complex patterns of discrimination can emerge from simple stereotypes.
Psychological Science, 31(8), 1013–1024.
Meyer, I. H., & Frost, D. M. (2013). Minority stress and the health of sexual minorities. In C. J. Patterson & A. R. D’Augelli (Eds.),
Handbook of psychology and sexual orientation (pp. 252–266). Oxford University Press.
