Department of Sociology, Tufts University, 116 Eaton Hall, 5 The Green, Medford, MA 02155, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Mar;74(6):846-54. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.08.001. Epub 2011 Aug 23.
In the "decidedly hostile" federal context toward unauthorized immigrants in American healthcare (Newton & Adams, 2009, p. 422), a few subnational governments have implemented strategies seeking to expand their access to and utilization of care. In this article, I draw on interviews conducted with 36 primary care providers working in San Francisco's public safety net between May and September 2009 to examine how such inclusive local policies work. On one hand, San Francisco's inclusive local policy climate both encourages and reinforces public safety-net providers' views of unauthorized immigrants as patients morally deserving of equal care, and helps them to translate their inclusive views into actual behaviors by providing them with increased financial resources. On the other hand, both hidden and formal barriers to care remain in place, which limits public safety-net providers' abilities to extend equal care to unauthorized immigrants even within this purportedly inclusive local policy context. I discuss the implications of the San Francisco case for policymakers, providers, and immigrants elsewhere.
在美医疗体系中,针对无证移民的联邦政策环境可谓“剑拔弩张”(Newton & Adams,2009,第 422 页)。在这样的背景下,一些州以下政府已采取措施,试图扩大无证移民获取和使用医疗服务的机会。本文通过对 2009 年 5 月至 9 月间,36 名在旧金山公立医疗服务体系中工作的初级保健医生进行访谈,探讨了此类包容性地方政策的实施情况。一方面,旧金山的包容性地方政策环境鼓励并强化了公立医疗服务提供者的观念,即无证移民作为患者,道德上值得得到平等的医疗服务,并通过提供更多的财政资源,帮助他们将包容性观点转化为实际行动。另一方面,隐蔽和正式的障碍依然存在,这限制了公立医疗服务提供者向无证移民提供平等医疗服务的能力,即使在这种据称具有包容性的地方政策环境下也是如此。我将讨论旧金山案例对政策制定者、医疗服务提供者和其他地区移民的影响。