↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the futility of countries’ obligations for health rights: realising justice for the global poor

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Understanding the futility of countries’ obligations for health rights: realising justice for the global poor
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12914-016-0090-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Barugahare, Reidar K. Lie

Abstract

Although health is a right of all individuals without any distinction, the realisation of this right has remained very difficult for the marginalised populations of poor countries. Inequitable distribution of health opportunities globally is a major factor in explaining why this is the case. Whereas the Protection, Promotion and Fulfilment of the health rights of poor country citizens are a joint responsibility of both domestic and external governments, most governments flout their obligations. So far disproportionate effort has been dedicated to reaffirming and interpreting these obligations as opposed to investigating the fundamental question regarding why these obligations have nevertheless remained largely unfulfilled. Further the normative question regarding what ought to be done about the shortcomings of current obligations has been largely ignored. We conduct a critical content analysis of existing literature on efforts towards the realisation of the health rights of marginalised populations in our attempt to ascertain their capacity to guarantee basic health opportunities to marginalised populations. In our analysis we treat issues of 'health rights' and 'justice in global health' as having unity of purpose - guaranteeing basic health opportunities to the marginalised populations. We identify two sets of reasons for the failure of present obligations for global distributive justice in general: a set of 'superficial reasons' and a set of 'fundamental reasons' which account for the superficial reasons. In order to overcome these reasons we propose a strategy which consists in specifying a number of minimum and less-demanding obligations for both external and domestic governments to guarantee to all individuals a certain threshold of health goods and services. We argue that these minimum obligations can be freely accepted and fully complied with or enforced with "a thin system of enforcement" without significant threat to national sovereignty and autonomy. The futility of countries' obligations for the health rights of the global poor as is the case with global distributive injustice is because of lack of political will to specify and enforce such obligations. Minimum obligations should be specified and enforced with a "thin system" which is consistent with principles of national sovereignty and autonomy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Researcher 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 10 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 5 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,204,882
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,988
of 17,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,306
of 354,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#111
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
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 354,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.