No abstract

While the health of and healthcare use by migrants has received significant scholarly and policy attention in Australia, current debates highlight that a critical examination of the theoretical underpinnings of these inquiries and responses is needed. We conducted a systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) to critically examine how the policy and scholarly literature conceptualises migrants’ interactions with and experiences of the Australian health system. Guided by PRISMA, we searched for literature without imposing any limits. We also searched key State and Federal Government websites for relevant policy documents. Our initially broad inclusion criteria became refined as the CIS progressed. We prioritised the likely relevance and theoretical contribution of the papers to our inquiry over methodological quality. The CIS of 104 papers revealed that the Australian scholarly literature and policy documents consistently homogenise and reduce migrants according to an assumed, (1) cultural identity, (2) linguistic affiliation, and/or (3) broad geographic origin. Based on these three critiques and drawing on the theoretical literature, we propose a synthesising argument on how the Australian literature could better conceptualise migrants’ experiences of the Australian health system. We contend that both research and policy should explicitly recognise and engage with the multifaceted and shifting ways that migrants define themselves, generally, and during their encounters with destination country health systems. Engagement with this notion is necessary for also understanding how aspects of migrants’ identities are dynamically co-constructed during their interactions with the health system. These understandings have implications for improving the design and implementation of policies and programs directed at improving the responsiveness of Australia’s health system to the needs and expectations of migrant communities specifically, and destination countries broadly.

In 2007, the WHO proposed the Building Blocks Framework and articulated ‘responsiveness’ as one of the four goals for health systems. While researchers have studied and measured health systems responsiveness since, several aspects of the concept remain unexamined, including, understanding the notion of ‘legitimate expectations’—a notion central to the definition of responsiveness. We begin this analysis by providing a conceptual overview of how ‘legitimacy’ is understood in key social science disciplines. Drawing on insights from this overview, we examine how ‘legitimacy’ is understood in the literature on health systems responsiveness and reveal that there is currently little critical engagement with this notion of the ‘legitimacy’ of expectations. In response, we unpack the concept of ‘legitimate’ expectations and propose approaches and areas for reflection, research, and action. We conclude that contestation, and ongoing negotiation of entrenched health system processes and norms which establish citizens’ ‘legitimate’ expectations of health systems, is needed—through processes that ensure equitable and wide participation. We also call on researchers, in their capacity as key health policy actors, to trigger and initiate processes and help create equitable spaces for citizens to participate in establishing ‘legitimate’ expectations of health systems.