3.8 Article

Ethnic minority and migrant women's struggles in accessing healthcare during COVID-19: an intersectional analysis

期刊

JOURNAL FOR CULTURAL RESEARCH
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 65-82

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14797585.2021.2012090

关键词

COVID-19; access to healthcare; intersectionality; ethnic minority; migrant; women

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper argues that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing barriers to healthcare for ethnic minority and migrant women in England. By adopting an intersectional lens, it uncovers what has previously been hidden by 'intersectional invisibility', now exacerbated by the pandemic. The paper adds to the literature by specifically considering the intersection of race and gender, and immigration status and gender, in the context of healthcare inequalities.
This paper aims to show that the COVID-19 pandemic has amplified existing barriers to healthcare in England for ethnic minority and migrant women. These barriers include those embedded within the institution, stemming from community perceptions and relating to socio-economic factors. Though barriers to accessing healthcare have existed long before the pandemic, more attention must be devoted now because of the inequalities that COVID-19 has laid bare in England for ethnic minority and migrant women. By adopting an intersectional lens, this paper uncovers what has previously been hidden by 'intersectional invisibility', now exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst the pandemic has seen an increase in focus on inequalities related to race, gender and immigration status, this paper adds to the literature by specifically considering the intersection of race and gender, and immigration status and gender, in the context of inequalities relating to healthcare. We argue that ethnic minority and migrant women experience inequalities in healthcare related to access uniquely because of their intersectional identities and the context of a public health crisis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据