↓ Skip to main content

Experiencing ‘pathologized presence and normalized absence’; understanding health related experiences and access to health care among Iraqi and Somali asylum seekers, refugees and persons without…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
279 Mendeley
Title
Experiencing ‘pathologized presence and normalized absence’; understanding health related experiences and access to health care among Iraqi and Somali asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2279-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mei Lan Fang, Judith Sixsmith, Rebecca Lawthom, Ilana Mountian, Afifa Shahrin

Abstract

Asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status have been reported to experience a range of difficulties when accessing public services and supports in the UK. While research has identified health care barriers to equitable access such as language difficulties, it has not considered the broader social contexts of marginalization experienced through the dynamics of 'othering'. The current study explores health and health care experiences of Somali and Iraqi asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status, highlighting 'minoritization' processes and the 'pathologization' of difference as analytical lenses to understand the multiple layers of oppression that contribute to health inequities. For the study, qualitative methods were used to document the lived experiences of asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status. Thirty-five in-depth interviews and five focus groups were used to explore personal accounts, reveal shared understandings and enable social, cognitive and emotional understandings of on-going health problems and challenges when seeking treatment and care. A participatory framework was undertaken which inspired collaborative workings with local organizations that worked directly with asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status. The analysis revealed four key themes: 1) pre-departure histories and post-arrival challenges; 2) legal status; 3) health knowledges and procedural barriers as well as 4) language and cultural competence. Confidentiality, trust, wait times and short doctor-patient consultations were emphasized as being insufficient for culturally specific communications and often translating into inadequate treatment and care. Barriers to accessing health care was associated with social disadvantage and restrictions of the broader welfare system suggesting that a re-evaluation of the asylum seeking process is required to improve the situation. Macro- and micro-level intersections of accustomed societal beliefs, practices and norms, broad-levellegislation and policy decisions, and health care and social services delivery methods have affected the health and health care experiences of forced migrants that reside in the UK. Research highlights how 'minoritization processes,' influencing the intersections between social identities, can hinder access to and delivery of health and social services to vulnerable groups. Similar findings were reported here; and the most influential mechanism directly impacting health and access to health and social services was legal status. Equitable health care provision requires systemic change that incorporate understandings of marginalization, 'othering' processes and the intersections between the past histories and everyday realities of asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
Unknown 277 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 20%
Researcher 27 10%
Student > Bachelor 26 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 6%
Other 52 19%
Unknown 77 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 19%
Social Sciences 38 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 12%
Psychology 32 11%
Unspecified 10 4%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 82 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,814,057
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,138
of 15,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,114
of 274,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#247
of 288 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 288 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.