I think that the framework outlined in Sieck, et.al, short but detailed article simply provides information regarding the digital divide in healthcare based on economic disparities. Rural areas lack the digital access and other digital products, i.e. tablets, laptops, other than smart phones, however the number of people who lack the access to the internet at home is comparable in the urban areas as well. The common factor is the income groups, which is 38% of households earning less than $20K lack broadband subscription according to Sieck, et.al. and Tomer, et.al. The most important components in Figure 1 of Sieck, et.al are the different areas of digital literacy and access. The main components of digital literacy and access as described in the figure are: skills, connectivity, devices, applications, training and tech support. All these components or the lack thereof changes the trajectory for individuals in all areas of their lives: economic sustainability, neighborhood and physical environment, education, food, community and social context, and health care systems. For example, Sieck, et.al, provides a solution to the divide, “The cost of equipping a person to use the internet are substantially lower then treating health conditions and the benefits are persistent and significant, making the efforts to improve digital literacy skills and access valuable tools to reduce disparities”. During the pandemic, there was a great need for the internet access from home and during that time literacy was still an issue. Prior to the pandemic, I think that the need was there, however it was an issue once we were secluded and encouraged to stay home during that time. The lack of funds to have a continuous subscription is more detrimental then we ever really thought about until the pandemic. Being able to have a telehealth appointment for individuals who were not sick, however still needed to be seen, access to food deliveries, ability to learn and go to school remotely, and also to work remotely.

I think that Sieck, et.al provided an excellent framework to describe the impact of the digital divide, especially using Figure 1 as a visual example. The digital divide explained in Figure 1 describes all areas of life and not just in healthcare or income disparities. This is a reflection of how important digital literacy and the access of digital connection is important and necessary. I did not think about it as I had the internet broadband subscription at home, different digital platforms, the skills, and applications needed to stay connected, do my job, schoolwork, and communicate with family and friends. I think that sometimes when we are not directly affected by an issue, in this case, the digital divide, we don’t think about it.

The most impactful discussion in Sanders & Scanlon’s article was the disparities and impact on education for children. “Children who lack access to digital resources miss out on other enhancements as well, with disadvantaged students lacking or holding inferior technological resources at home compared with more privileged students (Ritzhaupt et al, 2013). I was shocked with this information and disappointed. Education is important in determining the future for children, especially for disadvantaged and at-risk children. The lack of technology outside of the classroom, libraries, and other places that offer free internet connection has a great impact on a student’s learning. I remember when we had to go to the library to do research and use the computers at the library. Now I go into the libraries and they’re practically empty due to families having the access at home. 

I do think that Sanders & Scanlon’s arguments were persuasive due to the factual information and statistics provided to confirm the disparities. The problem was defined correctly and I can attest to that in my personal life. My daughters attend two different schools and in both of their schools there is a diverse income ratio amongst the families. The resources and information provided to the students of course is based on the surveys to families and the students’ performances. My oldest daughter’s school provides a chromebook for each student for the entire school year from 3rd grade to 8th grade. This can minimize the issue of lack of access to a digital platform to complete assignments. However, we come back to the issue of internet access or the lack thereof. There was a time that one teacher stopped assigning homework for grades, because there were a lot of students who did not complete the homework. Some of the issues are digital literacy, language and cultural barriers, and also income.

“The human rights approach turns social work’s response to individual human need to a more expansive view that the resources necessary for survival and the development of human potential should be available to all as a right based upon our common humanity.” I think that this was the most promising strategy and unrealistic at the same time. I agree that the humanistic approach is a great strategy and it holds true value. However, it’s not realistic nor economical to provide digital access and literacy to those who are lacking both. Yes, there was a program during the pandemic and shortly after that provided internet access to individuals and families who lacked the resources and funding to sustain the internet subscriptions. However, these programs are often connected to government funding, which we are currently experiencing that the funding can be reduced or completely eliminated at any given time.

In Craig et.al article, the AFFIRM approach seems to be the most effective approach as each element addresses different components. Acknowledging and validating stressors, Engaging in coping with stressors, exploring and strengthening alternative and cognitive behaviors, and developing affirming support networks with peers and allies seems to be the most effective. Like the other two articles, Craig discusses the disparities and the affected marginalized population such as LGBTQ+ youth. Again, all three articles have the connection of marginalization, disproportionate, and disparities amongst populations such as LGBTQ+ youth, African-Americans, Hispanics, Native American, and low-income communities. The problem would be in this example, the importance of advocating and who will advocate other than social workers. Social workers will have a grave duty to support and advocate for literacy and access to the digital platforms and closing the gap of the digital divide. Will it be easy, no, however I believe it can be done, if everyone participates by getting the community, schools, politicians, and religious leaders involved.

References

Craig, S.L., Iacono, G., Pascoe, R. et al. Adapting Clinical Skills to Telehealth: Applications of Affirmative Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy with LGBTQ+ Youth. Clin Soc Work J 49, 471–483 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-021-00796-x

Sanders, C. K., & Scanlon, E. (2021). The digital divide is a human rights issue: Advancing social inclusion through social work advocacy. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 6(2), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-020-00147-9

Sieck, C. J., Sheon, A., Ancker, J. S., Castek, J., Callahan, B., & Siefer, A. (2021). Digital inclusion as a social determinant of health. NPJ Digital Medicine, 4(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00413-8