Introduction
A healthy public policy aims to promote the general public’s wellness by meeting healthcare objectives. The general healthcare objective is to reduce diseases in the population. This means that population-based laws, rules, and strategies are put in place to reduce the risk of disease. Before forming them, members of public health organizations examine the common health issues in society and the behaviors that contribute to them.
Currently, smoking is one of the leading health complications (Krist et al., 2021). This is because it leads to diseases such as cancer and heart disease. Therefore, this paper proposes a policy to reduce smoking prevalence and improve health outcomes.
Behavior Description
Harmful Effects
As previously mentioned, smoking is the conduct that necessitates attention by public policy. Smoking is an essential health-modifying behavior that requires policy attention due to its significant role as a leading cause of numerous diseases. Cigarettes, composed primarily of tobacco, contain various harmful chemicals, with nicotine being a prominent component.
Upon entering the body, nicotine interferes with the normal physiological processes of several organs, leading to increased blood pressure, fluctuating heart rate, and arterial obstruction, ultimately impeding proper blood circulation (Afolalu et al., 2021). One may then develop chronic illnesses such as cancer, stroke, heart disease, lung disease, and diabetes, which may also be attributed to tar and carbon monoxide from smoking. Consequently, the various adverse consequences of smoking pose significant concerns to public health.
Social Determinants
Specific social determinants predict smoking in a population. These include culture, social norms, media advertising, and income. Primarily, a person’s cultural background can signify their desire to smoke. This is because individuals who grew up witnessing people in their environment smoke may also be more likely to become smokers (Mahdaviazad et al., 2022).
The second social determinant, social norms, refers to how a person’s social circle can influence their decision to smoke. For example, if one is always in the company of people who see smoking as a normal behavior, then the person is also likely to smoke. In media advertising, people watch ads and become interested in smoking. They may find themselves smoking to fulfill their curiosity (Mahdaviazad et al., 2022).
Income also determines smoking behavior because one may be earning a low income that cannot sustain all their needs; hence, they resort to smoking as a coping mechanism. Furthermore, numerous studies have reported that for every 100 Americans, at least ten are cigarette smokers(Mahdaviazad et al., 2022). Therefore, there is a dire need for a policy to address smoking.
Population of Concern
The population of concern in this context is U.S. adult smokers, particularly those in West Virginia. The state has a significantly high number of adult smokers, with statistics showing that at least 23.4% of adults were smokers (Leffler, 2021). These are relatively high figures by any standards, considering the costs involved. Moreover, most individuals are known for smoking at least one cigarette daily (Leffler, 2021). This is a cause for concern because such daily exposure can lead to detrimental health effects, increasing vulnerability to multiple conditions (Leffler, 2021). In this regard, this population needs such a policy to ensure they live healthier lives.
Proposed Policy Aim and Objectives
Aim
Having established that smoking is a public health concern, developing a policy with a specific aim and formulated objectives is necessary. The goals adhere to the Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART) criteria to assess the policy’s effectiveness (Thrul et al., 2021). First, the proposed primary aim of the policy is to reduce smoking prevalence in the West Virginia population by 50%. This is a significant aim as it will ensure most people completely stop smoking. Achieving this would require a multifaceted approach, including public education, stricter tobacco control measures, and smoking cessation programs.
Objectives
Health Improvement
Moving on, three main objectives are proposed for the policy. The primary objective is to enhance the health of the target population. Following the SMART formula, this is a specific and measurable goal as it specifies what the policy will accomplish (Thrul et al., 2021).
Prevention of Related Problems
The second objective is to prevent smoking-related social problems. These problems include smoking among families, peers, and social groups. This is an appropriate objective to help prevent social determinants that cause smoking. This also means the community’s social outcomes will improve.
Cesation of Smoking Dependence
The third objective is to stop the population’s psychological and physical dependence on smoking within five years. This is a timely objective because it should be achieved within five years. The West Virginia population will have stopped smoking dependence within five years. In other words, it will take five years to ensure the population stops being dependent on smoking, and once they stop, they should not return to it. From the proposed aim and objectives, it is evident that the policy will have a substantial impact on the population (Thrul et al., 2021). Besides improving health, the social determinants that predict smoking will be prevented, and their dependency will end.
Health Promotion Approach with Rationale for Selection
Approach Components
The health promotion approach is combined since the policy aims to reduce smoking prevalence. First, existing smoking prevention campaigns will be expanded. Second, taxes on tobacco products will be increased. Third, the accessibility of nicotine substitutes will be improved. Lastly, mass education on the health effects of smoking will be conducted.
Rationales
Taxes
The rationale behind increasing taxes on tobacco products is that not many people can afford them, thus reducing the number of smokers. Expanding smoking-prevention campaigns will entail utilizing various channels to promote anti-smoking initiatives, including social media, mainstream media, and school and church programs (Simoneau et al., 2021). As such, cigarette advertisements will be replaced with smoking cessation campaigns to drive the desired change.
Nicotine Substitutes
The rationale behind improving the accessibility of nicotine substitutes is to help those addicted to smoking find other means of taking nicotine aside from tobacco. These substitutes often contain minimal amounts of nicotine that are harmless.
Awareness
For mass education, the population will be thoroughly informed and taught about the adverse effects of smoking on their health (Simoneau et al., 2021). Public education is a significant policy in the effort to encourage smoking cessation.
Categories
According to Beattie’s typology of health promotion, the selected approach above falls into three categories. The first approach, increasing tobacco product taxes, is a legislative action. This is because it is a traditional top-down approach that the government promotes (Woods, 2022). The approaches of mass education and smoking prevention campaigns fall within the community development bracket, as they aim to empower and enhance knowledge within the population. Lastly, the approach of making nicotine substitutes widely accessible is a health persuasion strategy. This is because it is the top-down approach that authorities, like healthcare professionals, recommend.
Strengths
The strengths and limitations of the health promotion approach are essential aspects of the policy. The four combined techniques have two main potential strengths. The first strength is that increased taxes highly reduce the affordability of cigarettes. This ensures that people do not have easy access to smoking even if they want to. The success of a similar policy is evident from the high excise tax rates implemented in Chicago since 2002 (Leffler, 2021). The approach increased cigarette prices by twice the previous level, helping the Chicago State population achieve better health outcomes over the years.
The second strength is that, because there is legislative action, everyone will enforce the policy, promoting community coordination and collaboration (Woods, 2022). Additionally, the success of health persuasion and community development approaches is seen in various states where smoking cessation efforts have been made. For example, in the U.S., some government organizations and public groups have established campaigns to promote smoking cessation (Woods, 2022). These efforts have been coordinated throughout the anti-smoking organizations as they aim to keep adults and teenagers from smoking.
Drawbacks
Regarding limitations, one of the selected health promotion approaches has a significant burden. The approach of expanding channels for anti-smoking campaigns and mass education may not reach the entire population. Not everybody may have access to the available channels, and not everybody may be able to access the education offered (Thrul et al., 2021). This is because some parts of the population may be unreachable due to unavoidable circumstances.
Moreover, some people may be unwilling to learn about the harmful effects of smoking and may be adamant about stopping. This limitation can be seen in the federal state, where many people would still smoke after conducting mass campaigns on smoking cessation (Thrulet al., 2021). It is thus evident that the health promotion strategy specified has both strengths and weaknesses.
Potential Ethical Issues
Threat to Pleasure
Ethical issues are bound to arise with the implementation of such a policy. Notably, people view smoking as a means of pleasure or leisure. This is because nicotine is known for evoking positive emotions. Besides bringing relaxation, smokers believe that smoking reduces stress and anxiety at the time of smoking. Although this may not be scientifically true, smokers generally feel better when they smoke.
Therefore, implementing the above policy means that people will be prevented from having personal pleasures. This is an ethical issue because human beings should be free to enjoy whatever they want, however they please (LaFollette, 2020). The nature of human beings draws them toward pleasure, leading them to naturally seek happiness. It is, therefore, unethical to prevent them from enjoying this state.
Violation of Constitutional Rights
Additionally, Americans have a constitutional right to several liberties (LaFollette, 2020). Therefore, making cigarettes unaffordable and campaigning against smoking may mean denying them their rights and liberties to pleasure or happiness. Reconciling public health concerns with individual freedoms becomes a complex challenge.
Economic and Business Consequences
Additionally, there is an ethical implication for people who sell cigarettes. This is because selling cigarettes is a business that brings food to many people’s tables. Increasing taxes and replacing cigarette advertising with anti-smoking campaigns reduce family income (LaFollette, 2020). The policy not only affects consumers but also manufacturers and sellers.
As such, cigarette businesses may argue that the policy infringes on their rights to earn a living. In other words, it may not be fair for the government to deprive people of the opportunity to earn more money and enjoy the fruits of their labor (LaFollette, 2020). Hence, the ethical implications for the selected policy include denying people the right to pleasure and depriving cigarette businesses of the opportunity to make money and earn a living.
Evaluation Plan
Overview
An evaluation plan is crucial as it seeks to ascertain the effectiveness of the policy. Several questions will be answered in the evaluation plan of this policy. These answers will provide a robust framework for assessing the procedure’s effectiveness (Maragos et al., 2021). Therefore, six vital evaluative questions have been provided in the plan.
Questions
Effectiveness
The first evaluative question is, how will one know if the policy was effective? This is the most crucial question aimed at determining the policy’s effectiveness. It will ascertain whether the policy successfully achieved its intended objectives. The objectives will be reviewed, and then the assessed outcomes (Maragos et al., 2021) will be evaluated. If all the goals are completed, the policy is proven effective.
Awareness
The second question is, was the population oblivious to the policy? This question aims to gauge public awareness of the issue. The information is typically disseminated through specific channels, and the question determines which channels are used.
Perception
The third question is, how did the population perceive the implementation of the policy? This question establishes public participation by finding people’s personal experiences and satisfaction. If the policy is well delivered, people will be aware and, most importantly, satisfied.
Challenges
The fourth question on the evaluation plan is: What problems did the people face? This question mainly helps determine the policy’s ethical implications and the coping mechanism. It will also help make necessary future changes (Maragos et al., 2021).
Duration
The next question involves time allocation. After how long did the policy start accomplishing its identified objectives? This question aims to assess the time at which the procedure became effective. Given the allocated time of five years, the SMART formula’s timeliness will be determined.
Effects
Lastly, the evaluation will ask which group among the population did the policy help the most? This will help determine how the public’s health was affected within each group.
Data Collection for Giving Answers
Data from the population will be necessary to address the aforementioned evaluative questions. This is done using a data collection method. Many data collection methods exist, but quantitative methods are most appropriate for this policy. Not only is it helpful for comparing experiences, but it is also helpful for comparing outcomes among the population (Ibodulloyevna et al., 2022).
Quantitative data is also suitable as it is objective, fast, and provides reliable numerical insights (Ibodulloyevna et al., 2022). In this case, measurable indicators and questionnaires with the evaluative questions above will be utilized. For indicators, the number of smoking-related health problems among the population will be measured by analyzing medical records. The population’s mortality rate will also be calculated to assess the policy’s effectiveness. The policy’s success in lowering smoking-related health conditions and increasing public health may be gauged by comparing the death rate before and after its adoption.
A specific period will be allocated for participants to complete the questionnaires. After, they will hand in the questionnaires to the public health organization. Many people will be expected to provide the necessary information, as the entire population may be unable to answer the evaluative questions.
Notably, the policy’s effectiveness can also be assessed by examining the population’s overall health outcomes. The policy is expected to improve and strengthen the population’s health. As such, achieving more positive health outcomes will demonstrate the policy’s effectiveness. It will also confirm the accomplishment of the formulated objectives.
Additionally, some questions will be categorized to help the population better comprehend and provide accurate answers. Thus, this assessment strategy demonstrates that quantitative data-gathering approaches, such as quantifiable indicators and surveys, will enable the public health organization to obtain precise, accurate policy input.
Evaluation Results Dissemination
Overview
Evaluation results must be disseminated. This will not only promote good healthcare practice but also expand knowledge. The public health organization will therefore share the evaluation results with the population. For wide dissemination, mainstream media is quite suitable, as the information is intended to reach a large audience.
Public
Television is a modern medium widely used in most households. There are mainstream programs, such as news and advertisements, found on television. Judging from the content found on television, advertisements are the most frequent. This means that televised advertisements are a suitable means of disseminating results. The advertisements will be shown on television, amidst each program during commercial breaks. Hence, most people get to see the data.
The ad will include the numerical values of participants’ responses to the questionnaires. The data will also include measurable indicators displayed as numerical values, as well as the total number of participants who experienced improved health outcomes and those who did not. Such a display ensures easy dissemination and comprehension of the results. Furthermore, the advertisement will be aired for a reasonable period. Given the potential duration of at least a month, it will be crucial to ensure the results are disseminated effectively.
Organizations
Sharing the results with stakeholders is also a vital part of the process. For this policy, other health organizations would best utilize the evaluation results. This is because they will learn the policy’s importance and encourage future implementations. As such, public health will continue to improve.
Therefore, the results will be shared with the state’s health organizations. Healthcare professionals are expected to advocate for this policy and help more people have better health outcomes. Hence, sharing policy assessment data with them will enable coordinated efforts to combat the negative impacts of smoking on public health, thereby boosting the policy’s community impact.
Conclusion
In conclusion, smoking is among the many public health issues. It is, therefore, essential to have a policy to help reduce smoking. The formulated policy involves the increase of taxes on tobacco, improving accessibility of nicotine substitutes, expanding the channels for smoking cessation campaigns, and conducting mass education on the adverse effects of smoking. The policy has been developed considering the aims and objectives, the health promotion approach, ethical issues, an evaluation plan, and a dissemination plan for the results. Hence, positive health outcomes are expected upon the implementation of this policy.
Reference List
Afolalu, E.F. et al. (2021). ‘Impact of tobacco and/or nicotine products on health and functioning: a scoping review and findings from the preparatory phase of the development of a new self-report measure’, Harm Reduction Journal, 18(79).
Ibodulloyevna, I.M., Abbos qizi, S.N., and Saydmurot o’g’li, A.M. (2022). ‘The importance of quantitative analysis in the study of the topic of solutions‘, Eurasian Medical Research Periodical, 5, pp. 5–10.
Krist, A.H. et al. (2021). ‘Interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in adults, including pregnant persons‘, JAMA, 325(3), p. 265.
LaFollette, H. (2020). Ethics in practice: an anthology. 5th edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Leffler, J. (2021). Report: W.Va. has highest rate of smoking, West Virginia Public Broadcasting.
Mahdaviazad, H., Foroutan, R., and Masoompour, S.M. (2022). ‘Prevalence of tobacco smoking and its socioeconomic determinants‘, The Clinical Respiratory Journal, 16(3), pp. 208–215.
Maragos, E.K., Maravelakis, P.E., and Linardis, A.I. (2021). ‘A DEA evaluation of the successful implementation of HEALTH2020 policies‘, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 76, p. 100968.
Simoneau, T. et al. (2021). ‘Smoking cessation and counseling: A mixed methods study of pediatricians and parents‘, PLOS ONE, 16(2).
Thrul, J. et al. (2021). ‘Tobacco control policies and smoking cessation treatment utilisation: a moderated mediation analysis’, PLOS ONE, 16(8).
Woods, A. (2022). ‘Applying the principles of health promotion in nursing practice‘, Nursing Standard, 37(4), pp. 40–45.