Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Abbott, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Abbott, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Health Medicine 24:307-312 (2002)
© 2002 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

Prescribing welfare benefits advice in primary care: is it a health intervention, and if so, what sort?


Stephen Abbott

Public Health and Primary Care Unit, Barts School of Nursing and Midwifery, City University, Philpot Street, London E1 2EA. s.j.abbott{at}city.ac.uk

There is increasing provision of welfare benefits advice in primary care (WBAPC). This reflects the present government's recognition of the association between socio-economic and health inequalities. However, the assumption that increasing an individual's income will improve their health is not based on clear evidence. This paper reviews the relevant evidence, using four categories of pathways from poverty to ill-health: individual material; environmental material; individual psychological; environmental psychological. A description is offered of the scope and limits of WBAPC as a health intervention: one that primarily offers relief from psychological stress for service users, who tend to be middle-aged or older and suffering from chronic disease or disability. WBAPC may also make a small contribution to the physical health of individuals and to the social capital of communities. Thus to define the scope of WBAPC does not diminish its value to its beneficiaries, who carry a significant burden of both poverty and illness, nor does it in any way weaken the ethical argument for public policy to seek to reduce inequalities, and for primary care to play its part in that.

Keywords: welfare benefits, primary care, poverty, health promotion


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
J. Popay, U. Kowarzik, S. Mallinson, S. Mackian, and J. Barker
Social problems, primary care and pathways to help and support: addressing health inequalities at the individual level. Part I: the GP perspective
J Epidemiol Community Health, November 1, 2007; 61(11): 966 - 971.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Education JournalHome page
S. Abbott and L. Hobby
Poverty and health: Primary care patients living at the interface
Health Education Journal, January 1, 2005; 64(4): 363 - 371.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.