ABSTRACT
The paper draws on Rosa's three dimensions of the structured phenomenology of time - daily time, longer time, and historical time - as a conceptual lens to analyse the lived experiences and structural framing of temporary farm work in the UK and to address the question: how is it that short-term precarious work remains the accepted solution for agricultural work even under conditions that challenge the status quo. We draw on qualitative research with farmers and workers conducted prior to and during Brexit and Covid-19. We note that farmers and workers alike have found ways to accept and adjust to seasonal migrant labour as a taken-for-granted solution to the pressures of daily farm life. Further, farmers contend that seasonal migrant work is essential to secure the longer-term viability of their farms, while migrant workers' longer-term view involves delayed gratification in a 'dual frame of reference'. Local workers, alternatively, cannot imagine farm work as providing a long-term future. When looking historically at farm life, farmers and workers alike invoke changing epochs, to explain current conditions as the conditions of our times, and thus to deny their own agency. Structural-economic shifts are thus never addressed and other ways of doing things never imagined.
ABSTRACT
Background Across England, inequalities in health are worsening. They have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and are particularly acute for some ethnic and socioeconomic groups, and some regions. Exploration of the public's understanding of health inequalities has increased, but few studies have looked at the views of young people. Our study seeks to redress this gap by exploring young people's perspectives of inequalities in health. Methods We did a qualitative study consisting of three interlinked focus groups (online and face-to-face) with young people from six youth organisations. Focus groups took place from Feb 10 to June 28, 2021. They were co-delivered with partnering youth organisations and involved participatory concept mapping activities and the discussion of health-related news articles. Working with youth organisations, we recruited young people (aged 13–21 years) from six youth groups in areas of high and mixed deprivation across three geographical locations in England (the North East, South Yorkshire, and London). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. The data management software NVivo 12 was used to facilitate coding. All participants provided written informed consent, following acquisition of verbal informed consent from parents or guardians. Ethical approval for the study was granted by the University of Sheffield, Durham University, and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine ethics committees. Findings We ran 15 focus groups online and three face-to-face with 42 young people (19 male, 18 female, two non-binary, and three trans-male). Numbers ranged from two to ten participants in each group. Young people described a variety of different factors that shaped their health, including individual behaviours, personal or household resources, relationships and community, local services, the physical environment (particularly reputation and safety), psychosocial factors (including sense of belonging), and the socioeconomic context of the area (eg, quality and quantity of local jobs). However, throughout their discussions they foregrounded the importance of interrelationships between factors. Young people's understanding of inequalities in health were often rooted in their own experience and focused on an awareness of advantage and disadvantage. Young people articulated several different pathways through which they perceived health inequalities to be created, and consistently emphasised the importance of poverty as a root cause of inequality. Priorities for change included improving mental health support, access to safe and healthy local spaces, affordability of activities, healthy food availability, and youth group funding. Interpretation Our study highlights that young people have nuanced, experiential understandings of factors influencing their and other people's health within their local areas. Exploring young people's perspectives of inequalities is crucial in designing policies that are relevant to, and informed by, the people and places they affect. Funding UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research (SPHR).
ABSTRACT
Background: Our understanding of the association of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and preterm or early term birth among racially and ethnically diverse populations and those with chronic medical conditions is limited. Methods: We examined the relationship between COVID-19 and preterm (PTB) birth among live births documented by California Vital Statistics birth certificates between July 2020 and January 2021 (n=240,147). We used best obstetric estimate of gestational age to classify births as very preterm (VPTB, <32 weeks), PTB (< 37 weeks), early term (37 and 38 weeks), and term (39-44 weeks), as each confer independent risks to infant health and development. Separately, we calculated the joint effects of COVID-19 diagnosis, hypertension, diabetes, and obesity on preterm and early term birth. Findings: COVID-19 diagnoses on birth certificates increased for all racial/ethnic groups between July 2020 and January 2021, and was highest for American Indian/Alaska Native (12.9%), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (11.4%), and Latinx (10.3%) birthing people. COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with an increased risk of VPTB (aRR 1.6, 95% CI [1.4, 1.9]), PTB (aRR 1.4, 95% CI [1.3, 1.4]), and early term birth (aRR 1.1, 95% CI [1.1, 1.2]). There was no effect modification of the overall association by race/ethnicity or insurance status. COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with elevated risk of PTB in people with comorbidities. Interpretation: In a large population-based study, COVID-19 diagnosis increased the risk of VPTB, PTB, and early term birth, particularly among those with medical comorbidities. Prevention measures, including vaccination, should be prioritized for birthing persons. Funding Information: UCSF-Kaiser Department of Research Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health Program (BIRCWH) National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and the Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) [K12 HD052163] and the California Preterm Birth Initiative, funded by Marc and Lynn Benioff.Declaration of Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.Ethics Approval Statement: The Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS) within the Health and Human Services Agency of the State of California approved study protocols.