BackgroundThe "right to health," including access to basic healthcare, has been recognized as a universal human right through a number of international agreements. Attempts to protect this ideal, however, have relied on states as the guarantor of rights and have subsequently ignored stateless individuals, or those lacking legal nationality in any nation-state. While a legal nationality alone is not sufficient to guarantee that a right to healthcare is accessible, an absence of any legal nationality is almost certainly an obstacle in most cases. There are millions of so-called stateless individuals around the globe who are, in effect, denied medical citizenship in their countries of residence. A central motivating factor for this essay is the fact that statelessness as a concept is largely absent from the medical literature. The goal for this discussion, therefore, is primarily to illustrate the need for further monitoring of health access issues by the medical community, and for a great deal more research into the effects of statelessness upon access to healthcare. This is important both as a theoretical issue, in light of the recognition by many of healthcare as a universal right, as well as an empirical fact that requires further exploration and amelioration.DiscussionMost discussions of the human right to health assume that every human being has legal nationality, but in reality there are at least 11 to 12 million stateless individuals worldwide who are often unable to access basic healthcare. The examples of the Roma in Europe, the hill tribes of Thailand, and many Palestinians in Israel highlight the negative health impacts associated with statelessness.SummaryStateless individuals often face an inability to access the most basic healthcare, much less the "highest attainable standard of health" outlined by international agreements. Rather than presuming nationality, statelessness must be recognized by the medical community. Additionally, it is imperative that stateless populations be recognized, the health of these populations be tracked, and more research conducted to further elaborate upon the connection between statelessness and access to healthcare services, and hence a universal right to health.

International law defines genocide in terms of violence committed "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group," yet this approach fails to acknowledge the full impacts of cultural destruction. There is insufficient international discussion of "cultural genocide," which is a particular threat to the world's indigenous minorities. Despite the recent adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which acknowledges the rights to culture, diversity, and self-determination, claims of cultural genocide are often derided, and their indicators dismissed as benign effects of modernity and indigenous cultural diffusion. This article considers the destruction of indigenous cultures and the forced assimilation of indigenous peoples through the analytical lens of genocide. Two case studies-the federally unrecognized Winnemem Wintu tribe in northern California and the Inuit of northern Canada-are highlighted as illustrative examples of groups facing these challenges.Ultimately, this article seeks to prompt serious discussion of cultural rights violations, which often do not involve direct physical killing or violence, and consideration of the concept "cultural genocide" as a tool for human rights promotion and protection.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundThe Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are 8 international development goals voluntarily adopted by 189 nations. The goals included health related aims to reduce the under-five child mortality rate by two-thirds (MDG4), and to reduce the maternal mortality ratio by three-quarters (MDG5). To assess the relationship between the healthcare workforce and MDGs 4–5, we examined the physician workforces of countries around the globe, in terms of the Physician Density Level (PDL, or number of physicians per 1000 population), and compared this rate across a number of years to several indicator variables specified as markers of progress towards MDG4 and MDG5.MethodsData for each variable of interest were obtained from the World Bank’s Millennium Development Goals and World Development Indicators databases for 208 countries and territories from 2004 to 2014, representing a ten-year period for which the most information is available. We analyzed the relationships between MDG outcomes and PDL, controlling for national income levels and other covariates, using linear mixed model regression. Dependent variables were logarithmically transformed to meet assumptions necessary for multivariate analysis.ResultsIn unadjusted models, an increase of every one physician per 1000 population (one unit change in PDL) lowered the risk of not being vaccinated for measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) to 29.3% (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 22.2%–38.7%) and for not receiving diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTaP) vaccination rate decreased to 38.5% (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 28.7% - 51.7%). Maternal mortality rate decreased to 76.6% (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 74.3% - 79.0%), neonatal mortality decreased to 58.8% (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 54.8% - 63.2%) and under-5 mortality rate decreased to 52.1% (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 48.0% - 56.4%), with every one-unit change in PDL. Adjusted models tended to reflect unadjusted risk assessments.ConclusionThe maintenance and improvement of the health workforce is a vital consideration when assessing how to achieve global development goals related to health outcomes.