Vagueness, power and public health: use of ‘vulnerable’ in public health literature

Abstract

Amy S. Katz*a, Billie-Jo Hardyb, Michelle Firestonec, Aisha Loftersde & Melody E. Morton-Ninomiyaf a Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canadab Well Living House, Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canadac Well Living House, Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael’s Hospital; and, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canadae Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canadaf Department of Health Sciences, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada and Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, London, CanadaCONTACT Amy S. Katz katzam@smh.caABSTRACTThe word ‘vulnerable’ is frequently used in public health research and practice. We use critical discourse analysis to explore the use of this term in articles published between January 2015 and January 2018 in the American Journal of Public Health and the Canadian Journal of Public Health. We find that terms such as ‘vulnerable groups’ are often vaguely defined or undefined, requiring the reader to ‘fill in the blanks’ as to who is vulnerable, why they are vulnerable, and what they are vulnerable to. Where terms such as ‘vulnerable groups’ are applied with some specificity, they are used as proxies for a wide range of groups, conditions and situations. Often, groups are constituted as inherently vulnerable, as authors imply that even if policies and processes change, group vulnerability will remai…