A Public Health Ethics Framework for Populations with Limited English Proficiency

Chipman, Sidney S.; Meagher, Karen M.; Barwise, Amelia

doi:10.1080/15265161.2023.2224263

Cited by 14 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…RICE’s way of engaging with communities and the ACPHD may provide a useful model of how collecting and reporting disaggregated community data can play a part in raising community voices, involving community members in decision-making, and co-developing interventions that recognize communities’ needs and assets. RICE’s strengths-based model of advocacy and partnership is consistent with Chipman et al’s public health ethics framework for LEP populations ( 38 ) and ultimately highlights the need for public health departments to collect similarly detailed data.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

“…The partners found framing issues around language more effective for LEP communities than focusing solely on racial/ethnic disparities in each community. By tackling language inequity, RICE addressed language itself as a social determinant of health ( 38–40 ) and built bridges across diverse communities. Working as a multiracial, multilingual collaborative also created strength in numbers and proved especially beneficial for RICE’s smallest LEP communities, who often had the least access to public health information in their preferred languages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advocating for language equity: a community-public health partnership

Kurlander,

Lam,

Dawson-Hahn

et al. 2023

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the United States, 21.5% of individuals aged 5 or older speak a language other than English at home and 8.2% have Limited English Proficiency (LEP). LEP individuals experience healthcare disparities, including lower access to healthcare services, poorer health outcomes, and higher levels of uninsurance. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and exacerbated these health disparities and unmet healthcare needs. In Alameda County (CA), where 46% of foreign-born residents speak a language other than English at home, community-based organizations have been crucial in providing translated materials and one-on-one support to ensure LEP residents receive critical COVID-19 updates and services. Refugee and Immigrant Collaborative for Empowerment (RICE) is a multilingual coalition of seven Alameda County community-based organizations led by the Korean Community Center of the East Bay (KCCEB). During the COVID-19 pandemic, RICE expanded its public health role to fill service and information gaps, advocate on behalf of LEP groups, and build a linguistically and culturally responsive public health safety network. This community case study describes a three-part advocacy-focused intervention that RICE undertook from September 2021 to October 2022. It included (1) a community needs survey, (2) a landscape assessment of the Alameda County Health Department’s (ACPHD) communication materials and online platforms, and (3) relationship building with the ACPHD. The community survey revealed differences across LEP subgroups and highlighted the importance of gathering data disaggregated by language preference. The landscape assessment allowed RICE to understand the ACPHD’s decision-making process and develop data-informed advocacy requests on behalf of LEP communities. Effective communication and coordination between RICE and the ACPHD shortened the feedback loop between public health authorities and LEP communities and laid the groundwork for the RICE organizations to be part of the ACPHD’s future decision making. Data disaggregation, language equity-based advocacy, and cross-sector collaboration were critical ingredients in RICE’s intervention. RICE’s partnership and relationship of mutual accountability with the ACPHD may provide a useful model for other community-based organizations and public health departments seeking to form similar partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 55%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%