Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen has a stake in healthcare policy decisions. Hence, it is little wonder why healthcare items become such high-profile components of presidential agendas. It is also little wonder why they become such hotly debated agenda items. Consider a topic (mental health, HIV, opioid epidemic, pandemics, obesity, prescription drug prices, or many others) that rises to the presidential level. How did the current and previous presidents handle the problem? What would you do differently? Reference: New York State Department of Health. (n.d.). Making New York the healthiest state: Achieving the triple aim. Retrieved June 21, 2021 from https://www.health.ny.gov/events/population_health_summit/docs/what_is_population_health.pdf
Presidential Agendas – Opioid Epidemic
The social determinant that most affects the opioid epidemic is socioeconomic status. Numerous studies have shown that individuals with lower socioeconomic status are at a higher risk of opioid misuse and addiction (CDC, 2020). Poverty, unemployment, lack of education, and limited access to healthcare contribute to this disparity. Socioeconomic status influences the availability of resources for prevention, treatment, and support, exacerbating the opioid crisis among vulnerable populations (CDC, 2020). Subsequently, the approach to addressing the opioid epidemic has varied in recent years
Current and former presidents have acknowledged the need to address the opioid epidemic. For instance, in 2011, President Obama, through the Obama Administration, implemented a Prescription Drug Abuse Prevention Plan, focusing on prescription drug monitoring programs and increasing access to naloxone, an opioid overdose reversal medication (Alexander & Ballreich, 2020). Consistently in 2017, President Trump declared the opioid epidemic a public health emergency, allowing additional resources to be allocated. His administration prioritized efforts to enhance law enforcement, border control, and interagency coordination (Milstead & Short, 2019). They also sought to promote non-opioid pain management alternatives and encouraged research and development of innovative pain medications (Alexander & Ballreich, 2020). However, some critics argued that the Trump administration did not allocate sufficient funding to expand treatment and prevention programs.
Are you interested in an unpublished edition of the assignment ? Get in touch with us. Our team of experts is ready to help.
Following this, the Biden administration has also taken a multi-faceted approach to address the opioid epidemic. The American Rescue Plan Act, passed in 2021, allocated $4 billion to support substance abuse treatment and mental health services (The White House, 2021). The administration aims to expand access to evidence-based treatment, support harm reduction strategies, and promote the use of telehealth services for substance abuse treatment. They also plan to increase funding for research on pain and addiction and support local prevention efforts (The White House, 2021).
If I were to approach the opioid epidemic differently, I would focus on enhancing comprehensive prevention strategies, expanding access to treatment for all individuals regardless of socioeconomic status, and addressing the root causes of addiction through social and economic interventions. Furthermore, I would emphasize long-term support and rehabilitation programs to prevent relapse and provide ongoing care (Milstead & Short, 2019). It is crucial to allocate sufficient funding to implement these initiatives effectively while reducing the stigma associated with substance abuse disorders to encourage individuals to seek help without fear of judgment.
References
Alexander, G. C., & Ballreich, J. (2020). Prescription opioids: Time for the pendulum to swing back. JAMA, 324(21), 2161-2162.
CDC. (2020). Social determinants of health among adults with diagnosed opioid use disorder. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr148-508.pdf