Community care workers (CCWs) perform a vital service in the health
care system. The work that they do provides substantial cost savings to the health
care system (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH],
2010: 1) and governments rely on their work, which can be unpaid, to sustain
public health services (Community Care Workers Forum, 2010: 1). Despite the
important role that community health care has within the primary health care
(PHC) system, the occupation is not well recognised and seldom has fringe
benefits. Salaries remain low and CCWs experience poor working conditions with
numerous hazards to their health and safety. This essay investigates two main
issues: how socially useful the work is
that CCWs do and whether CCWs have to
struggle to do their work, given that
their workplace is the community. To answer these questions, we begin by
analysing CCWs’ contribution to the health sector, then describe the work that
they do and examine the difficulties that they face in their employment
conditions, including an analysis of how social determinants of health affect
their work, and we conclude by considering what future scenarios lie ahead.
CCWs, also known as ‘home-based carers’, provide health care services
in households, and play an increasingly important role in the trend towards a
PHC-dominated health care system (World Health Organization [WHO], 2007: 1). In
1978, an international conference at Alma-Ata affirmed that PHC is key to
achieving developmental goals (WHO, 1978: 1). Since the late 20th
century this affirmation has resulted in a restructuring of health care
systems, such as ‘task-shifting’ responsibilities downwards to less qualified
occupations in order to improve service delivery (Lund & Budlender, 2009:
23). In particular, this translates into extra responsibilities being placed on
CCWs. In South Africa, the National Health Insurance scheme provides a fresh
opportunity to campaign for a strengthened PHC system supported by
community-level workers (ibid.). On the one hand, research shows rapid health
improvements where CCWs visit households regularly (Sanders & Reynolds, 2011).
However, on the other hand, this needs to be well-resourced and appropriate
training given, in order to prevent extra risks being placed on CCWs, or care
responsibilities being placed on unskilled health care volunteers or unpaid
care-givers (Lund, 2010: 505).
With this understanding of the role that CCWs play in the health care
system, let us now look closer at the nature of the occupation itself. CCWs
offer services in people’s homes other than their own, such as helping with
activities in daily living (bathing, eating and getting out of bed); delivering
medical services, such as administering medication; changing dressings; or
giving massages and palliative care (NIOSH, 2010: 1). As we have seen, their
work is necessary and beneficial for health outcomes, yet, in South Africa, their
salaries remain disproportionately small and unregulated, and they have minimal
access to health insurance or pension schemes (Lund, 2010: 500). Furthermore,
CCWs are exposed to many health and safety risks due to the nature of their job
and the environment that they work in. For example, they are often assigned to
HIV/AIDS or TB programmes (Sanders & Reynolds, 2011), so are at greater
risk of contracting these diseases (a biological hazard). Many CCWs work in
communities where there is violence, or in households with domestic violence,
which can lead to stress (a psycho-social hazard) or injury. Other hazards
include ergonomic hazards (such as lifting people and bending over), physical
hazards (such as negotiating street traffic or aggressive animals) and
environmental hazards (such as pollution, in low-income communities). With a
“precarious” employment status (Lund, 2010: 503) and an income between R500 and
R1 500 per month (Samson, 2008, as cited in Lund, 2010: 501), it is
perhaps surprising that CCWs are numerous. Research has shown that CCWs’
motivation work comes from the desire to care for others (The Industrial Health
Resource Group [IHRG], 2012: 5), and also the hope that it will lead to better
employment prospects (Lund, 2010: 504).
Another set of factors that impact the work of CCWs is the social
determinants of health. The social determinants of health directly impact the
work that CCWs do because they are at the front line of PHC, leading them to
deal with unhealthy socio-economic, cultural and environmental conditions,
living and working conditions, social and community influences and individual
lifestyle factors (Bradshaw, 2008: 53-60). For example, inequality in society,
or having a low socio-economic position, is associated will poor health
(Bradshaw, 2008: 53). The material wellbeing of clients can also make it
difficult to provide care, such as when there is no electricity to cook food
(Orner, 2006: 237). Traditional environmental concerns are sanitation and clean
water. Modern environmental concerns include industrial pollutants and climate
change (Bradshaw, 2008: 54). Food security is a constraint on living
conditions, while nutrition and feeding programmes support care work (Lund,
2010: 507). Housing subsidies also determine the living conditions of clients
(ibid.). Individual lifestyle factors that impact on health include unsafe sex,
alcohol use, tobacco use, lack of physical exercise and unhealthy diets
(Bradshaw, 2008: 60). In South Africa, these social determinants of health are
exacerbated by a so-called ‘quadruple burden of disease’ due to high rates of
poverty, non-communicable disease, violence-related injuries and HIV/AIDS.
To summarize, we have seen that CCWs struggle to do the work they do
because of their terms of employment and because of their working conditions.
To explore this directly from the CCWs’ point of view, let us analyse a
statement made by an anonymous group of care workers, working for an NGO in
Cape Town:
“Some
people think that we are lucky to have work. The truth is that we are
subsidising the government. We are doing the work the government is supposed to
do, doing it for wages which are too low. The unemployed are doing it for free.
Yes, we are all there, doing that important work. We are giving care. Of course
this makes us proud. But still we say: it is not easy to go and face this every
day.”
(IHRG, 2012: 5)
This statement shows us that this group feels exploited, that they are
unfairly given a burden that the government is meant to shoulder. They say that
the work they do is difficult to “face … every day” (ibid.). This feeling is
reflected in a study on unpaid caregivers of people living with AIDS, which
found that the caregivers struggled emotionally (Orner, 2006: 238). For
example, the carers dealt with stigmatization, poverty, poor infrastructure, a
lack of affordable transport and an overburden of duties – simultaneously
caring for many different clients and still fulfilling the role of a carer in
their own households. The precarious terms of employment and a lack of freedom
to unionize is reflected in the first group’s decision to remain anonymous (IHRG,
2012: 4).
Although the first group feels exploited, their comment shows us, as
with other examples, that CCWs feel that their work is important. CCWs care for
others even when the work is unpaid, out of a sense of responsibility and love
towards their clients (Orner, 2006: 239). They are motivated to do their job,
although they do not feel as if it is enough to solve all the social and
health-related problems that they see (IHRG, 2012: 4-5).
In conclusion, we have seen that CCWs work is vitally important, yet
their terms of employment are exploitative and employment conditions are
unhealthy. The work that they do strengthens the PHC system and reduces the
financial and physical burden on the health care sector. Health and safety
hazards are a key concern, and CCWs are exposed to social determinants of ill
health more than the average person. CCWs struggle against resource scarcity
and with emotional burdens, but they continue to do their work out of a sense
of pride in helping those who are in need.
[1 302 words]
October 2014
References
Bradshaw, D. 2008.
Determinants of health and their trends. In South
African health review 2008. P. Barron. Ed. South Africa: Health Systems
Trust. 51-70.
Industrial Health
Resource Group [IHRG]. 2012. Struggling for health, struggling to give care. Health and Safety Networker. 8: 4-5.
Lund, F. &
Budlender, D. 2009. Paid care providers
in South Africa: nurses, domestic workers and home-based care workers.
(UNRISD Research report no. 4). Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for
Social Development.
Lund, F. 2010. Hierarchies
of care work in South Africa: nurses, social workers and home-based care
workers. International Labour Review. 149(4):
495-509.
National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH]. 2010. Introduction. In Occupational hazards in home healthcare.
(NIOSH hazard review, DHHS publication no. 2010-125). United States: Centres
for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services.
1-2.
Orner, P. 2006.
Psychological impacts on caregivers of people living with AIDS. AIDS Care. 18(3): 236-40.
Sanders, D. &
Reynolds, T. 2011. Community care givers hold the key. Cape Times (Cape Town). 20 September.
World Health Organization
[WHO]. 1978. Declaration of Alma-Ata. Proceedings
of the International Conference on Primary Health Care. 6-12 September 1978.
Alma-Ata, USSR: World Health
Organization.
WHO. 2007. Community health workers: what do we know
about them? The state of the evidence on programmes, activities, costs and
impact on health outcomes of using community health workers. Geneva:
Department of Human Resources for Health, World Health Organisation. Available:
http://www.who.int/hrh/documents/community_health_workers_brief.pdf [2014, 17
October].