Medical Humanitarianism

Medical humanitarianism can be defined “as the field of biomedical, public health, and epidemiological initiatives undertaken to save lives and alleviate suffering in conditions of crises born of conflict, neglect, or disaster.” Medical humanitarianism continues to come to the forefront of the global stage in international development, global health aid, and human rights interventions. All aid provided in medical humanitarianism acts apolitically without any concern for political municipalities.
Medical humanitarianism can often be misconstrued with human rights interventions. The shift from human rights to humanitarianism has occurred in the past decade as a different form of intervention. While human rights activism and work is centered much in the law, humanitarian action focuses on three main principles: neutrality, impartiality and independence. In other words, human rights acts in accordance with political activity where humanitarian activists make a concerted effort to view humanity as separate from any part of the political sphere. Humanitarian activities have often become the work of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that work to become an “alternative source of services that compensates for welfare states’ roll back.” Human rights are often paired with political advocacy, who try to create “health rights claims” that are based on legislation and definitions that exist in political spheres such as the UN.
In the 1960s and 1970s, human rights organizations began to emerge as a way to retaliate against unjust political circumstances; these organizations came about during a time of great turmoil such as the Vietnam War. Though at this time the definition of human rights was aligned with the ideas that humanitarianism later adopted, organizations aimed to challenge the political structure that acted in violation of human rights. The shift in Human Rights that resulted in humanitarianism did not occur until after the 1970s, when an increased number of NGOS created an expansion of rights in a social and collective context.
Though it is difficult to note a separation of human rights and humanitarianism, the illness clause, presented by the French Government in 1988, provides a context where humanitarianism is apparent. The illness clause is an addendum to the French constitution that aims to grant citizenship papers to illegal immigrants who have life threatening illnesses. The clause is distinctly humanitarian in nature because it is an apolitical document. In fact, the reason that the clause was ratified initially was because it was thought to exist outside of political bias; the clause is based on a notion of “biological life” as being the right of the individual to have access to medical care in a time where their illness is lethal.

This shifting view is also indicative of the changing role of doctors and medical professionals. Doctors and medical professionals began to become part of the human rights framework. In the 1960s, doctors and medical professionals were able to sway members of the political sphere. Doctors also play a less political role now than they did prior to the 20th century. They had often taken sides in politics and would have pulls in the government. In France in the 1930s, for example, the Ordre des Médecins were a group of medical professionals who were xenophobic and right leaning and were able to sway the government to support a Vichy government. Through the 1970s, doctors’ jobs became more focused on their jobs and medical professionals and they became less affiliated with politics.
Though the efforts of doctors and humanitarianisms exist globally, they also exist domestically, specifically with the issue of access to care for illegal immigrants. In the United States, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) act to try to mitigate some of the health inequalities between undocumented and migrants workers. One such organization is the ‘Our Lady of Gaudalupe Free Clinic’ that is based in the basement of a Catholic parish in Minnesota. This Clinic, which was founded in 2011, is run by a local grassroots organization that operates on a six weeklong basis. The organization aims to offer free primary healthcare to Latino immigrants and people who are uninsured. This organization acts as an example of how religious motivations can often fuel medical humanitarianism. A lot of the main pillars of medical humanitarianism are included in principles of religious work: the “traditional notions of human compassion and… solidarity and apolitical service work with that of social justice and human rights advocacy.”
In Israel, similarly, access to healthcare is granted to every Israeli resident who is officially recognized by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. That leaves many undocumented immigrants without primary care, secondary care or elective hospitalization. The Open Clinic – later known as the Refugee Clinic — were opened by the Ministry of Health and Israeli Medical Association to bring alternative healthcare options to East Jerusalem for a relatively cheap price. Since there is a lack of universality for public health care services, many people seek help at these organizations. Additionally, it is difficult for Palestinians to have access to these clinics; there are language barriers and a fear of arrest and deportation that make health care access difficult. However, the Open Clinic is an example of the ways that medical humanitarian organizations strive to stay apolitical whilst trying to provide aid in an area wrought with political turmoil.
Though a lot of humanitarianism work is centered within one country, there are many global organizations that bring their efforts to a wide array of countries. For example, Doctors without Borders and Doctors of the World have been crucial organizations in bringing medical humanitarianism to the world stage. Both organizations exist on the platform those humane moral actions lives in tandem with the providing of medical care, service and relief to those who need it. Their goal is to “heal the body politic as well as the human body and to further reconciliation and peace, even between enemies locked in combat.” This vision of medicine with a mutli-faceted aimed to provide healing to the people and to a political structure that is inflicting pain upon the people.
Medical humanitarianism is a key concept in understanding Politics of Health. It informs the ways that care is given and received to populations who are in need of it. It calls into question, which populations are in need of care, and why they are being barred from receiving care, the obstacles that they are facing to have adequate care. The Body Politic is an idea to consider and understand when learning about medical humanitarianism. The confines of the Body Politic have aimed to stretch towards the medical field. Medical humanitarianism seems to be the antithesis of that, the protest to the idea that government and health should relate to each other. The ways that people access healthcare, often in spite of their governments, is indicative of the need for medical humanitarianism globally. Medical humanitarianism exists on the global stage as a rising force that is bringing aid and relief to those who are not being heard by their governments. The need for clinics and intervention exists in every population when the political realm seems to look at the citizens of the world as different based on where they are from and their citizenship status. As the implications of medical humanitarianism continue to expand, it is important to notice the ways that governments, non-governmental organizations and citizens intersect as people continue to fight for their human rights.

Citations:
Abramowitz, S., & Panter- Brick, C. (2015). Medical Humanitarianism: Ethnographies of Practice. Accessed April 6, 2017.

Dumont, Helen. “Medical Humanitarianism.” MBR Bookwatch, Dec. 2015. Academic OneFile Accessed 6 Apr. 2017.

Fox, R. C. (1995). MEDICAL HUMANITARIANISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS: REFLECTIONS ON DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS AND DOCTORS OF THE WORLD. Social Science and Medicine,41(12), 1607-1616. Retrieved April 7, 2017.

Gottlieb, N. (march 2012). Medical humanitarianism, human rights and political advocacy: The case of the Israeli Open Clinic. Social Science and Medicine,74(6), 839-845. Retrieved April 7, 2017.

Herzlich, C. (december 1995). PROFESSIONALS, INTELLECTUALS. VISIBLE PRACTITIONERS? THE CASE OF ‘MEDICAL HUMANITARIANISM’ Social Science and Medicine,41(12), 1617-1619. Retrieved April 7, 2017.

Tickten, M. (2006). Where ethics and politics meet: medical humanitarianism in France. Retrieved April 7, 2017.

Tiedje, K., & Plevak, D. J. (november 2014). Medical humanitarianism in the United States: Alternative healthcare, spirituality and political advocacy in the case of Our Lady Guadalupe Free Clinic. Social Sciences and Medicine,120, 360-367. Retrieved April 7, 2017.