18.01.2015 Views

stigma and barriers to care - Uniformed Services University of the ...

stigma and barriers to care - Uniformed Services University of the ...

stigma and barriers to care - Uniformed Services University of the ...

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.

32<br />

Stigma <strong>and</strong> Barriers <strong>to</strong> Care — Caring for Those Exposed <strong>to</strong> War, Disaster <strong>and</strong> Terrorism<br />

In <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>stigma</strong>, <strong>the</strong>re are<br />

things we can learn<br />

from disasters that<br />

can assist us in<br />

thinking about <strong>the</strong><br />

military context <strong>and</strong><br />

culture.<br />

in <strong>the</strong> past 100 years: <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> disasters is increasing. Everybody asks, “Why<br />

is <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> disasters increasing” Meteorological <strong>and</strong> hydrological disasters<br />

are probably linked <strong>to</strong> changing global <strong>and</strong> environmental conditions. Ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />

reason is probably due <strong>to</strong> urbanization, concentrating more people in smaller areas.<br />

The same natural events that were happening 200 years ago perhaps resulted in trees<br />

falling in<strong>to</strong> forests with no human injury <strong>to</strong>ll. Now, when trees fall in <strong>the</strong> forest <strong>the</strong>re<br />

are a thous<strong>and</strong> people underneath it so disasters are increasing. We are packing more<br />

people in<strong>to</strong> areas where <strong>the</strong>se large scale traumatic events are happening. The good<br />

news is that more people are surviving disasters. One more piece <strong>of</strong> bad news is that<br />

many more people are being affected.<br />

An interesting phenomenon from an epidemiologic point <strong>of</strong> view is that every<br />

time a disaster passes we have an unerring ability <strong>to</strong> forget all about <strong>the</strong> disaster <strong>and</strong><br />

think ano<strong>the</strong>r one will not happen. We see this time <strong>and</strong> time again including recently<br />

with Haiti. Of course, <strong>the</strong>se events attract a great deal <strong>of</strong> attention <strong>and</strong> breathless<br />

reporting in <strong>the</strong> news like, “Wow, this is shocking <strong>and</strong> surprising <strong>and</strong> we don’t know<br />

anything about it.” Then two months later you forget all about it. In fact, Haiti was<br />

not predictable but it is entirely predictable that some o<strong>the</strong>r big event was going <strong>to</strong><br />

happen <strong>and</strong> something else will happen again.<br />

Having said that, it is well worth <strong>the</strong> effort <strong>to</strong> make epidemiologic inquiry in<strong>to</strong><br />

disasters. In <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong> <strong>stigma</strong>, <strong>the</strong>re are things we can learn from disasters that<br />

can assist us in thinking about <strong>the</strong> military context <strong>and</strong> culture. When thinking about<br />

<strong>barriers</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>stigma</strong> <strong>to</strong> mental health <strong>care</strong> after disaster, three central domains are<br />

pertinent: predisposing characteristics, enabling fac<strong>to</strong>rs, <strong>and</strong> need. I am going <strong>to</strong><br />

focus my comments around <strong>the</strong> health behavior model. I am going <strong>to</strong> show you some<br />

data related <strong>to</strong> predisposing characteristics, enabling fac<strong>to</strong>rs, <strong>and</strong> need as associated<br />

with <strong>barriers</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>care</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>stigma</strong> after one particular event.<br />

I want <strong>to</strong> talk about Hurricane Ike in <strong>the</strong> Galves<strong>to</strong>n Bay recovery study. Hurricane<br />

Ike is one <strong>of</strong> those neglected events. On September 13, 2008, it essentially<br />

wiped out Galves<strong>to</strong>n on <strong>the</strong> Texas gulf coast. The interesting thing about Hurricane<br />

Ike is that much <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> impact on <strong>the</strong> population was a combination <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> winds<br />

as well as <strong>the</strong> flood. This was an event that we studied as part <strong>of</strong> a consortium. It is<br />

a National Center grant funded by NIMH that is co-directed by Dean Kilpatrick,<br />

myself, <strong>and</strong> Fran Norris at Dartmouth who works as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> National Center<br />

for PTSD. We were able <strong>to</strong> launch a study soon after Hurricane Ike <strong>to</strong> look at <strong>the</strong><br />

consequences. The study is called <strong>the</strong> Galves<strong>to</strong>n Bay Recovery Study.<br />

It was a fairly large event with substantial impact. Then it faded from public<br />

awareness soon afterwards because it occurred just before <strong>the</strong> national election <strong>and</strong><br />

our attention span is short.<br />

We made a big effort <strong>to</strong> recruit a population representative sample <strong>of</strong> people<br />

who were living in <strong>the</strong> area before <strong>the</strong> disaster. This is no easy task when you think<br />

about <strong>the</strong> population displacement. We reconstructed sampling frames <strong>and</strong> found<br />

people all over <strong>the</strong> country. We ended up talking <strong>to</strong> 658 people, 80% by phone,<br />

20% in person. Of particular interest is that we asked about mental health service<br />

need, utilization, <strong>and</strong> reasons for not using services. We used a fairly structured<br />

instrument, <strong>the</strong> primary <strong>care</strong> needs questionnaire, which allowed us <strong>to</strong> study some<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>barriers</strong> that were discussed in <strong>the</strong> previous discussions. We looked at concerns<br />

around <strong>stigma</strong>, preferences for <strong>care</strong>, expectations, <strong>and</strong> resource <strong>barriers</strong>. About 40%<br />

reported mental health service need, which is fairly consistent with <strong>the</strong> previous<br />

presentations. It is as<strong>to</strong>nishingly consistent in <strong>the</strong>se samples that we have a little

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!