The parity of esteem signifies the importance of placing equal value on mental and physical health. While the concept employs several purposes, its primary function is to promote equal access to healthcare services for individuals with complex mental health needs that reflect those that are provided for individuals with physical health needs (Sandford, 2021). Research has indicated that not only are symptoms of physical illness common in individuals with mental ill-health and vice versa but they are often connected (East Midlands Clinical Networks, 2016). Additionally, higher rates of sickness and mortality are often observed in individuals with mental health needs (Centre for Mental Health, 2021). While a variety of factors affect this disparity, the parity of esteem addresses an important issue within the world of health care that is prevalent to this day.
To better grasp the extent of the issue and the importance of a concept such as the parity of esteem, it is essential to illustrate ways in which disparity is prominent. Inequalities can be identified in several stages within health care, beginning with the screening process (Morton and O’Reilly, 2019). For instance, medical care in the form of preventative mass screenings proved to be inferior for individuals with psychiatric mental illnesses. In a specific case of mammography services, women with mental illnesses received reduced screenings often concerning the diagnosis of their mental illness (Mitchell, Hardy, and Shiers, 2018). Similarly, individuals with schizophrenia are linked with poorer surgical care, the occurrence of less accurate diagnosis due to the clinician’s opinions on mental health, and poor cardiovascular, oral, and other health in individuals with mental illness often due to other habits such as smoking or alcohol consumption (Byrne, 2019). The connection of all these issues displays the current weaknesses present in healthcare programs and facilities.
The significance of the implementation of the parity of esteem becomes better observable through the analysis of timing and its other components. Timing is of significant importance as the fluctuating mortality, funding, and stigmatization gaps affect the lives of patients with mental health needs daily and sometimes to detrimental results (Coggon and Liang, 2019). On average, individuals with mental illnesses may have a lifespan that is twenty years shorter for men and fifteen for women than an average person (Powis, 2019). Though this is not a direct result of disparities in medical care, mortality and inaccessible services are often linked (Goldman, Spaeth-Rublee, and Pincus, 2018). Additionally, mental health care receives around 11.1 percent of the NHS budget annually (Williams, et al., 2019). Despite growth in funding, years of lives in patients continue to be reduced as an effect of insufficient funding (Quilter-Pinner and Reader, 2018). Lastly, stigma is a prominent component that continues to affect patients with mental health needs adversely (Relly, 2021). The factors are time-sensitive, as changes that occur throughout them over time are likely to deeply affect those with mental illnesses.
The primary functions of the parity of esteem are essential, as they are likely to address the current inequalities which are nationwide and systematic (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, n.d.). The concept is also likely to bridge the working and research relationship between evidence-based medicine and other modes of data collection to address the necessary quality improvement in the care received by those with mental health needs (Oliver, 2017). Because mental illnesses affect individuals irrelevant of gender, age, or background, the promoted actions by the parity of esteem are likely to confront some prevalent issues within health care (Ashcroft and Thomas, 2017). The effects of this are likely to drive better preventative options, physical and mental care, and increased research in often-overlooked topics for all patients.
Reference List
Ashcroft, J., & Thomas, G. (2018) Parity of esteem: evaluating inequalities in older adult healthcare. BJPsych Advances, 24(4), pp.284-285. doi:10.1192/bja.2018.9.
Byrne, P. (2018). ‘Physical health in psychiatric patients’, Medicine, 46(12), pp.725-730. doi:10.1016/j.mpmed.2018.09.002
Centre for Mental Health. (2021) Parity of esteem.
Coggon, J., & Liang, J. (2019) Exploring New Paradigms in Mental Health and Capacity Law: Persons, Populations, and Parity of Esteem. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 70(1). doi10.53386/nilq.v70i1.230.
East Midlands Clinical Networks (2016) Parity of Esteem Overview and Report.
Goldman, M. L., Spaeth-Rublee, B., & Pincus, H. A. (2018) The Case for Severe Mental Illness as a Disparities Category. Psychiatric Services, 69(6), pp.726-728. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.201700138
Mitchell, A. J., Hardy, S., & Shiers, D. (2018) ‘Parity of esteem: Addressing the inequalities between mental and physical healthcare’, BJPsych Advances, 23(3), pp.196-205. doi:10.1192/apt.bp.114.014266
Morton, J., & O’Reilly, M. (2019). ‘Mental health, big data and research ethics: Parity of esteem in mental health research from a UK perspective’, Clinical Ethics, 14(4), pp.165-172. doi:10.1177/1477750919876243
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (no date) Mental Health and the NHS.
Oliver, D. (2017) David Oliver: Should practical quality improvement have parity of esteem with evidence based medicine? BMJ, pp.357. doi:10.1136/bmj.j2582.
Powis, S. H. (2019) Achieving more for people with severe mental illness.
Relly, S. J. (2021) The political rhetoric of parity of esteem. Oxford Review of Education, 47(4), pp.513-528. doi:10.1080/03054985.2020.1866522
Sandford, T. (2021) Parity of esteem. Web.
Quilter-Pinner, H., & Reader, M. (2018) Fair funding for mental health.
Williams, R., et al. (2019) Social Scaffolding: Applying the Lessons of Contemporary Social Science to Health and Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.