The pitfalls of personalization rhetoric in time of health crisis: COVID-19 pandemic and cracks on neoliberal ideologies

Abstract

Summary The rise of the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the incongruity of individualization ideologies that position individuals at the centre of health care, by contributing, making informed decisions and exercising choice regarding their health options and lifestyle considerations. When confronted with a global health threat, government across the world, have understood that the rhetoric of individualization, personal responsibility and personal choice would only led to disastrous national health consequences. In other words, individual choice offers a poor criterion to guide the health and wellbeing of a population. This reality has forced many advanced economies around the world to suspend their pledges to ‘small government’, individual responsibility and individual freedom, opting instead for a more rebalanced approach to economic and health outcomes with an increasing role for institutions and mutualization. For many marginalized communities, individualization ideologies and personalization approaches have never worked. On the contrary, they have exacerbated social and health inequalities by benefiting affluent individuals who possess the educational, cultural and economic resources required to exercise ‘responsibility’, avert risks and adopt health protecting behaviours. The individualization of the management of risk has also further stigmatized the poor by shifting the blame for poor health outcomes from government to individuals. This paper will explore how the COVID-19 pandemic exposes the cracks of neoliberal rhetoric on personalization and opens new opportunities to approach the health of a nation as socially, economically and politically determined requiring ‘upstream’ interventions on key areas of health including housing, employment, education and access to health care.

Examining the role of government in shaping disability inclusiveness around COVID-19: a framework analysis of Australian guidelines

“…Neoliberal policies in the health and welfare sector in Australia [ 42 ] and elsewhere [ 43 ] have led to an individualisation of the responsibility to remain healthy and a reliance on people as autonomous and independent consumers. People are being blamed, and sometimes penalised, for poor health outcomes with little or no consideration of structural factors.…”

“…People are being blamed, and sometimes penalised, for poor health outcomes with little or no consideration of structural factors. This personalisation rhetoric [ 42 ] transforms disabled people into liabilities who use up limited resources, and they are directly or indirectly excluded from the healthcare system, as examples from countries that have a long history in implementing neoliberal policies demonstrate [ 44 ]. Yet, there are strategies available to promote greater inclusion – and thus health equity – for all structurally vulnerable peoples.…”

Ética, salud mental y COVID-19

“…Condición previa para lograr éxito en la lucha contra ésta es que nuestras conciencias individuales se conjuguen en conciencia colectiva nacional, aglutinando los esfuerzos estatales y poblacionales en un solo objetivo para vencer al enemigo [6] . En tal propósito, debe entenderse que el Perú, como sistema, es la sumatoria de dos subsistemas: El Estado (representado por el gobierno de turno) y la Sociedad.…”

A Macromarketing Prescription for Covid-19: Solidarity and Care Ethics

“…However, disentangling this complexity across levels requires intervention deconstructions beyond this essay’s scope. Instead, we examine the implications of the current pandemic on the “type of society and social order that should emerge once the restrictions are eased” (Cardona 2020, p.1) and provide a retrospective analysis to inform preferred pandemic preparedness policies.…”