The Pros And Cons Of Poverty In Peru

1511 Words4 Pages

While practically every health indicator has improved in Peru in the past thirty years, these improvements have not been distrusted equally across the population. Most of the progress has occurred in urban areas, especially in the capital city of Lima, with the rural population lagging behind. It is easy to assume that all of the disparity results from the poverty that exists in the region According to the Population Reference Bureau (2015), the amount of people living below the poverty line is 36% higher in rural areas than in urban areas. While poverty is definitely a causative factor in the disparities that exist, in this paper I will examine some of these inequalities and show that the geographical isolation of many rural communities is …show more content…

The private sector consists of private insurance companies and hospitals that are not contributed to by the government. These facilities usually offer the best care, but are only accessible to a small portion of the population due to cost and they are heavily concentrated in larger cities, especially Lima. The public sector consists of several branches, which serve the rest of the population. The largest is SIS, which similar to Medicaid in the US and supports the poorest portion of the population. Another branch, EsSalud is similar to employee benefits in the US, but the Peruvian government supplements it, as well as employers. Only people who have formal employment are eligible for EsSalud, which means that much of the rural population, who are self-employed farmers, are not qualified to receive this care. Other branches serve the military, police, and other groups. These sectors are not just insurance plans, but also determine which health care facilities a person can visit to receive treatment. Despite all of these different programs, as of 2012 38% of Peruvians still did not have insurance (Peru INEI, 2013) and without insurance it is very difficult to pay for health …show more content…

In rural areas, 16% of people are illiterate compared to only 3% in urban areas. Only 57% of rural people complete secondary school, while 85% do in urban areas (PRB, 2015). These educational disparities contribute to many other inequalities. Women who are less educated are more likely to begin childbearing at younger ages and are less likely to use contraception. This is reflected in that 12% more women in rural areas begin childbearing before age 19 compared to their urban counterparts and only 45% of rural women use modern contraception compared to 55% in urban areas (PRB, 2015). These elements contribute to many health indicators including infant mortality and total fertility. The TFR is 3.5 in rural areas compared to 2.3 in urban areas and the differences in infant mortality were discussed previously. Education also contributes to active health seeking behaviors and higher economic status, which both support better

Open Document