It is well known fact that qualitative research is used to be integral part of methodology. This type of scientific research is widely used to show human’s side of certain issue or problem. Frankly speaking, humans’ reactions, attitudes, positions, thoughts, experiences etc.. “Just don’t get sick: Access to health care in the aftermath of welfare reform” is positioned as well done qualitative research recently. Thus, there is the try to analyze its strong and weak points in respect to methodology of qualitative research.
The first point to pay attention to is the general impressions about the text. To begin with, let’s emphasize that “Just don’t get sick: Access to health care in the aftermath of welfare reform is incredible strong in its interconnection between picked up topic and way of methodological research. No secret that problems of health’s care field and health insurance are incredibly relevant, but not widely researched theme in recent science. Authors have done a great job to manifest the common contour throughout defined human’s experiences. In this order, qualitative research type was the best choice to make the work outstanding, relevant and interesting for readers. Moreover, this solution was useful to enlarge audience. Social dimension and qualitative methods made issue understandable for incredibly ranging readers. As for the author’s intentions, the main stated in next way – “Our ultimate goal is to place our data in broader political and social context that more fully illuminates the implication of welfare reform for health and access to health care”( Seccombe, K., Hoffman, K.6). However, being aimed with this point there is one significant miss. There is the assumption that generated intention do not correspond one of inherent qualitative investigation’s tasks – seeking answer to some question. The tittle itself and research concept generally provides answers naturally. Thus, all written text seems the description and explanation to socially-political relevance to picked up investigated problem.
“Just don’t get sick: Access to health care in the aftermath of welfare reform” by Seccombe K., & Hoffman is suitable to trace authors’ perspectives . It is considered that the main is closely related to political ideology. Definitely, readers are not allowed to make absolutely clear conclusions about authors’ approaches. Still, the intention to social justice causes no doubts. This idea became the foundation of the whole research and there is nothing better than qualitative method to line out this. As the proof, reader is able to read next conclusion – “Health insurance is crucial for successful welfare reform…health problems are always present, but the ability to pay for care is illusive ” (Seccombe, K., Hoffman, K. 170). Authors grab reader’s attention with the fact that current welfare reform causes illnesses increasing and deeper poverty even as the “reward” for people’s aspiration to take care about own wellbeing. This textual example is used to kill two birds with one stone. At first, it is absolutely clear that authors advocate against trends of welfare reform. At second, being familiar that political ideology is the set of ideals and principles, readers are encouraged to make the conclusion that social justice is used to be at the head of authors’ approach.
Dealing with text’s methodological analysis, it’s impossible to stay away from material gathering issue. In this order, it is considered that this part seems one of the strongest points of the whole work. According to general principles of qualitative research authors inform readers about carried out job. Appropriate info stated both in introduction and appendix – “Contact information to 6, 819 individuals who stopped TANF receiving was obtained from Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS)… 3, 188 individuals were successfully reached… research was carried out from December 2001 to April 2002 ”( Seccombe, K., Hoffman, K.185). Authors tell us about procedure of info gathering. Thus, readers are able to learn about preliminary letters’ sending, re-interviewing, defined rates etc.. In this regard, readers are encouraged to make the conclusion about outstanding effortful job.
One more point which make analyzed text outstanding is natural description of individuals who were interviewed. Actually, informants describing is used to be one the most relevant task to make qualitative text attractive for readers. Let’s remind the introduction when informant “Molly” appeared. Authors emphasize her resilient nature during first interview and line out her frustrated look during second meet. It is supposed that detailed personal informants’ characteristics were stated to make the story more dramatic and to make the accent to horrible consequences of social injustice, in the face of welfare reform.
Next issue to be touched is context’s sufficiency. No doubt that this point is also can be named qualitative text’s benefit. To get the common sense of social problem under analysis, authors give rather comprehensive background data. It is stated in introduction and “Health status and health care chapter”. These parts are capable to give the general view on historical background and troubling reality. It is interesting that sufficient info finds its direct manifestation in certain individual cases. That’s why readers a allowed to interpret data and to draw analogies between humans’ experiences and to draw analogues between general problem and personal people’s feelings.
Text’s credibility generates no doubts also. However, there is one confusing point. The whole text contains data about welfare reform’s injustice and troubles of people who left welfare for job taking. In this order, there is reasonable questions – What about opposite side? What about welfare reform’s benefits? Obviously, there are people who are ready to support this view. Being doubted in research’s comprehensiveness it is important to take into account aims of qualitative investigation. Let’s remind introduction where authors state that – “the focus of this study is to explain what happened to families which moved from welfare to work” (Seccombe, K., Hoffman, K. 7). In this regard, generated material is the logical manifestation of stated tasks and methodological basic principles of qualitative research. Call to mind, qualitative investigation is restricted with location and living there humans’ experiences.
Participant observation as the method of qualitative research is well-integrated qualitative research’s method. This solution was used to manifest natural behavior of informants what is helpful to interpret obtained from them data. As the proof, remind first character’s second interview – “The previous year Molly had been hopeful and optimistic. Now she had changed notably…Molly was full of passion, anger and frustration” (Seccombe, K., Hoffman, K. 3). This quote is right to claim that observation are well-done on text indeed.
Talking about “Just don’t get sick: Access to health care in the aftermath of welfare reform”, it is mandatory to recognize that themes are generated from obtained materials directly. However, we shouldn’t deny that they are not manipulated by authors perspectives. The point is in absolutely expected final investigation’s results achieving and consequent generated conclusions. As it was said before, the most significant miss of analyzed qualitative research is absence of answer seeking question. Thus, the whole text is just explanation and description of troubles which people used to face because of welfare reform. Therefore, all made interpretations are plausible and it is quite hard not to agree them.
There is no doubt that analyzed text meets the requirement of structural corroboration as authors used two of three qualitative research methods – participants observation and in-depth interviews. There is the view that focus group method wasn’t implemented due to its irrelevance with investigation’s tasks matching. Consensual Validity is also used to be research’s strong side. Reality and truth are integral research’s features. Presented material looks logically, persuasively and do not leave place for doubts at all. To emphasize its consensual validity participants observation became at hand one more time. As in any other well-made research, referencing adequacy is not the point to be discussed in analyzed text. To support this view, let’s call to mind that bibliography contains more than 10 pages list of used sources. All of them became helpful to design sufficient data and needful background.
To conclude, analyzed text matches methodological requirements of qualitative researches. Its value is in the successful inspiration to light out human’s side of health care relevant problems. Actually, this work is the first to show troubling issue from social point of view. As really well-made qualitative investigation, this book grabs attention of widest range of readers as the first aim to make topic clear for public, notwithstanding people’s specialties or education. Regarding this fact, its contribution is well-seen in its inside look to the problem that was never done before.
1. Seccombe, K., & Hoffman, K., (2007). Just don’t get sick: Access to health care in the aftermath of welfare reform. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.