30.12.2014 Views

Director of Public Health Annual Report 2012 [pdf] - Stoke-on-Trent ...

Director of Public Health Annual Report 2012 [pdf] - Stoke-on-Trent ...

Director of Public Health Annual Report 2012 [pdf] - Stoke-on-Trent ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 16 shows that a child born with a low cognitive score into an affluent family has, by<br />

the age <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> six, a score that will be higher than some<strong>on</strong>e born with a high score into a family<br />

with a low socioec<strong>on</strong>omic status 1 . This suggests the need to invest in children from deprived<br />

backgrounds. It makes sense <strong>on</strong> productivity grounds since the evidence shows they are<br />

more likely to commit crime, become single teenage parents, and drop out <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> school 33 . Early<br />

interventi<strong>on</strong>s that partially remediate the effects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> adverse envir<strong>on</strong>ments can reverse some<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the harm <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> disadvantage and have a high ec<strong>on</strong>omic return. This is particularly relevant<br />

for the Local Authority as it takes <strong>on</strong> the resp<strong>on</strong>sibility for many public health services, and in<br />

particular those relating to school nursing and health visiting.<br />

Figure 16 Inequality in early cognitive development <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> children in the 1970 British<br />

Cohort Study, at ages 22 m<strong>on</strong>ths to 10 years<br />

Source: Marmot M (2010). Fair society, healthy lives: the Marmot review. Final <str<strong>on</strong>g>Report</str<strong>on</strong>g>.<br />

The remaining two items <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> lifestyle (5) and major causes <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> death (6) are highlighted in the<br />

first chapter <strong>on</strong> health status, and are an integral feature <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the sec<strong>on</strong>d chapter <strong>on</strong> l<strong>on</strong>g-term<br />

c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s. As expected, this report c<strong>on</strong>tinues to str<strong>on</strong>gly endorse these six priorities.<br />

Vulnerable Groups<br />

The inclusi<strong>on</strong> this year <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> surveillance indicators for vulnerable groups makes for interesting<br />

reading. In all 10 <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the indicators, <str<strong>on</strong>g>Stoke</str<strong>on</strong>g>-<strong>on</strong>-<strong>Trent</strong> is performing worse than the England<br />

average. However, comparing 2009 and 2010, we have improved in six: low birthweight<br />

births; teenage pregnancy; children excluded from sec<strong>on</strong>dary school; older people receiving<br />

pensi<strong>on</strong> credit; drug misuse; and violent crime (and generally better than England average<br />

57 | P a g e

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!