Search

Background and Objectives The age-friendly cities and communities (AFCC) agenda has led to a range of policy initiatives aimed at supporting aging in place for older people. While there is case study evidence of how people age across urban contexts, there has been little research exploring cross-national understandings of age-friendly places among older people. The objective of this article is to identify the place experiences of older people living across cities and communities in India, Brazil, and the United Kingdom and to discuss implications for the AFCC agenda. Research Design and Methods A total of 300 semistructured interviews were undertaken with older people across 9 cities and 27 communities in India, Brazil, and the United Kingdom. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis undertaken by each national team and then discussed and revised at collaborative workshops with researchers from each of the 3 country teams. Results The data capture the ways in which place is constructed from the perspective of older people drawing upon social, community, and cultural dimensions of aging across diverse urban environments. We explore how older people negotiate place in the context of their everyday life and identify the relational and interconnected ways in which place attachment, belonging, and identity are constructed. Discussion and Implications Age-friendly interventions need to attend to the changing physical, social and cultural dimensions of aging and place. Integrated place-making practices are required to support older people to age in the right place across rapidly transforming urban contexts globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status have been reported to experience a range of difficulties when accessing public services and supports in the UK. While research has identified health care barriers to equitable access such as language difficulties, it has not considered the broader social contexts of marginalization experienced through the dynamics of 'othering'. The current study explores health and health care experiences of Somali and Iraqi asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status, highlighting 'minoritization' processes and the 'pathologization' of difference as analytical lenses to understand the multiple layers of oppression that contribute to health inequities.Methods: For the study, qualitative methods were used to document the lived experiences of asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status. Thirty-five in-depth interviews and five focus groups were used to explore personal accounts, reveal shared understandings and enable social, cognitive and emotional understandings of on-going health problems and challenges when seeking treatment and care. A participatory framework was undertaken which inspired collaborative workings with local organizations that worked directly with asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status.Results: The analysis revealed four key themes: 1) pre-departure histories and post-arrival challenges; 2) legal status; 3) health knowledges and procedural barriers as well as 4) language and cultural competence. Confidentiality, trust, wait times and short doctor-patient consultations were emphasized as being insufficient for culturally specific communications and often translating into inadequate treatment and care. Barriers to accessing health care was associated with social disadvantage and restrictions of the broader welfare system suggesting that a re-evaluation of the asylum seeking process is required to improve the situation.Discussions: Macro- and micro-level intersections of accustomed societal beliefs, practices and norms, broad-level legislation and policy decisions, and health care and social services delivery methods have affected the health and health care experiences of forced migrants that reside in the UK. Research highlights how 'minoritization processes,' influencing the intersections between social identities, can hinder access to and delivery of health and social services to vulnerable groups. Similar findings were reported here; and the most influential mechanism directly impacting health and access to health and social services was legal status.Conclusions: Equitable health care provision requires systemic change that incorporate understandings of marginalization, 'othering' processes and the intersections between the past histories and everyday realities of asylum seekers, refugees and persons without legal status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Response to COVID-19 has both intentionally and unintentionally progressed the digitization of health and community care, which can be viewed as a human rights issue considering that access to health and community care is a human right. In this article, we reviewed two cases of digitization of health and community care during the pandemic; one in Scotland, United Kingdom and another in British Columbia, Canada. An integrated analysis revealed that digitization of health and community care has intended positive and unintended negative consequences. Based on the analysis, we suggest five areas of improvement for equity in care: building on the momentum of technology advantages; education and digital literacy; information management and security; development of policy and regulatory frameworks; and the future of digital health and community care. This article sheds light on how health practitioners and leaders can work to enhance equity in care experiences amid the changing digital landscape.