55J9JDq10

55-DQ10-1

Having reviewed the article associated with this week's discussion question, and the subsequent poll results, it reaffirms my dislike for these types of surveys. The latter does not suggest that all studies are bad, yet, it does suggest there's an element of bias when those polled do not fully understand the issue. The article collaborates my position when it states, "on average, Americans say spending on foreign aid makes up 31 percent of the federal budget" (DiJulio, Norton, & Brodie, 2016, para. 11). To that end, a widespread misguided perception about the amount of U.S. federal dollars spent on global health will unquestionably lead to uninformed respondent responses. Thus, I feel, the public's opinion would, in fact, produced different results if they were made aware that only "1 percent or less of the federal budget is spent on foreign aid" (DiJulio, Norton, & Brodie, 2016, para. 11). To that I would argue, there's an element of danger when misguided views give way to policy decisions about Americas investment in global health.

Additionally, as long as Americans (Democrat, Republican, or Independent) continually witness domestic struggles (poverty, homelessness, etc.) within their communities, said concerns trump those of foreign aid. Thus, it's safe to say such matters can result in a biased view when questioned if American is spending too much or too little on global health. Notably, if I were to believe that 31 percent of the federal budget went to foreign aid while poverty and homelessness remain rampant in America, I too would say we are spending too much money abroad. The last point I will make about public opinion is that when we witness tangible results, we then see the value of the investment; however, most Americans are not privy to the many successes resulting from our investment abroad.

With that said, its essential for all Americans to understand that our global investment plays a significant role in protecting America from the proliferation of disease; especially, when considering the ease of international travel. A perfect example is the Ebola scare when in 2014, a man who had traveled to Dallas, Texas from Liberia would become the first laboratory-confirmed case of Ebola in the United States (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, 2014). Safe to say, if not for our interest (a product of investment) to prevent entry of those displaying symptoms, an outbreak could have ensued. In this instance, Americans witnessed tangible results; therefore, understood the value of investing in global health.

Subsequently, it's my view that American must continue its role and commitment in the future of global health when considering, a health issue abroad presents a domestic threat. Aside from that, life is precious; thus, if we can play an influential role in protecting and advancing the health and well-being of those living in low- and middle-income countries, it's my belief, we have a moral obligation to do so. That commitment can take many paths when considering issues of poverty, disease, access to nutrient-rich foods, access to healthcare, treatment, and services, as well as teaching independent community sustainability (growing foods, etc.). To that end, I would like to see America contribute more to global health, yet, such contributions must not weaken efforts to protect and advance the health and well-being of our citizens. While this is a topic, which I have many views about; thus, could go on and on, I will spare you the agony.

In closing, I will say that low- and middle-income countries do not have the financial resources nor a clear leadership structure to play a significant role in shaping global health. However, through our contributions, as well as the contributions from other countries, they will acquire the necessary education, skills, and experience to reshape their approach to bring health and well-being to their citizens. The latter is dependent on their willingness to eradicate elements of corruption, which only serves to suppress their people. I will end by saying these underserved populations are worthy of our investment regardless of our differences (culture, religion, race, etc.). As such, these people should have equitable access to protection from communicable and non-communicable diseases (HIV, malaria, tuberculosis, cancer, heart disease, etc.), as well as access to maternal and child health, family planning, and reproductive health services. Therefore, if as a country, we are in a position to provide aid, we must because an investment abroad is to some degree, the equivalent of national health investing.

Given this is the final discussion, I want to thank each of you for enriching my experience and advancing my knowledge by way of your discussion contributions. I wish each of you, tremendous success on your educational journey.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Ebola (Ebola Virus Disease): Cases of Ebola Diagnosed in the United States. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/united-states-imported-case.html

DiJulio, D., Norton, M., & Brodie, M. (2016). American’s views on the role the U.S. role in global health. Retrieved from https://www.kff.org/global-health-policy/poll-finding/americans-views-on-the-u-s-role-in-global-health/