Reducing or reproducing inequalities in health? An intersectional policy analysis of how health inequalities are represented in a Swedish bill on alcohol, drugs, tobacco and gambling.

BACKGROUND: According to post-structural policy analyses, policies and interventions aiming at reducing social inequalities have been found to be part in producing and reifying such inequalities themselves. Given the central role of health inequalities on the public health policy agenda globally it seems important to examine the way policy on health inequalities may potentially counteract the goal of health equity. The aim of this intersectional policy analysis, was to critically analyze the representation of health inequalities in a government bill proposing a national strategy on alcohol, drugs, tobacco and gambling, to examine its performative power, and to outline alternative representations. METHOD: A post-structural approach to policy analysis was combined with an intersectional framework. The material was analyzed through an interrogating process guided by the six questions of the "What's the problem represented to be?" (WPR) approach. Thus, the underlying assumptions of the problem representation, its potential implications and historical background were explored. In a final step of the analysis we examined our own problem representations. RESULTS: The recommendations found in the gender and equity perspective of the bill represented the problem of health inequalities as a lack of knowledge, with an emphasis on quantitative knowledge about differences in health between population groups. Three underlying assumptions supporting this representation were found: quantification and objectivity, inequalities as unidimensional, and categorization and labelling. The analysis showed how the bill, by opting into these partly overlapping assumptions, is part of enacting a discourse on health inequalities that directs attention to specific subjects (e.g., vulnerable) with special needs (e.g., health care), in certain places (e.g., disadvantaged neighborhoods). It also showed how underlying processes of marginalization are largely neglected in the bill due to its focus on describing differences rather than solutions. Finally, we showed how different intersectional approaches could be used to complement and challenge this, potentially counteractive, problem representation. CONCLUSIONS: The problem representation of health inequalities and its underlying assumptions may have counteractive effects on health equity, and even though some of its strengths are raised, it seems to be profoundly entangled with a system resisting the kind of change that the bill itself advocates for. If carefully used, intersectionality has the potential to support a more comprehensive and inclusive equality-promoting public health policy and practice.

Languishing in the crossroad? A scoping review of intersectional inequalities in mental health.

The concept of intersectionality has gradually been introduced to health inequality research, adding depth and breadth to the way inequalities in health are approached. We conducted a scoping review with the purpose to systematically map, describe and analyze the literature about intersectional inequalities in mental health. For eligibility, the study had to analyze and report inequality defined by combinations of socioeconomic position, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion. The mental health outcome had to be measured as self-reported symptoms assessed through validated scales, or disorders assessed through diagnostic interviews. The search strategy was applied in two databases and the screening process yielded 20 studies. The interaction of intersectional positions showed no consistent patterns in mental health across studies, but both synergistic and antagonistic effects were observed. In most studies an absolute measure of inequality was used and few studies analyzed factors potentially explaining the intersectional inequalities. Taken together, the findings of this review highlight the value of assessing intersectional inequalities across population groups for priority setting and action on mental health inequalities.

Intersectional inequalities in mental health across multiple dimensions of inequality in the Swedish adult population.

Intersectionality has recently gained traction in health inequality research emphasizing multiple intersecting dimensions of inequality as opposed to the traditional unidimensional approaches. In this study inequalities in mental health were estimated across intersections of gender, income, education, occupation, country of birth, and sexual orientation. The outcomes and inequalities of intersectional strata were disentangled analogously to the possibilities described by intersectionality theory; as a result of either of the two inequality dimensions, as a result of the sum the dimensions, or as a unique outcome not equaling the sum. Furthermore the study examined the discriminatory accuracy of the six inequality dimensions as well as the intersectional space comprising 64 strata. The study population (N = 52,743) consists of a yearly random sample of the Swedish population 26-84 years between 2010 and 2015, from The Health on Equal Terms survey. Mental health was measured through a self-administered General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)-12, and sociodemographics through survey and linked register data. Intersectional inequalities in mental health were estimated for all pairwise combinations of inequality dimensions by joint inequalities, excess intersectional inequalities and referent inequalities. The findings of the study found that the sum of dimensions contributed to the overall (joint) inequality in mental health rather than a reinforced adverse effect of multiple disadvantages or the contribution by a single dimension. Nevertheless, the dimension of income was found to be the most important in terms of relative contribution. The discriminatory accuracy was low indicating that policy action targeting mental health should be universal rather than focusing on particular groups. The results highlight the unpredictable inequality patterns revealed by an intersectional approach, even for a single health outcome and within one country, and illustrate the need for empirical investigations into the actual population patterns in health that appear in the intersections of multiple disadvantages.